Skip to content


Emperor Vs. Dhanji Govindji Bhate - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal;Labour and Industrial
CourtMumbai
Decided On
Case NumberCriminal Application for Revision No. 324 of 1912
Judge
Reported in(1913)15BOMLR328
AppellantEmperor
RespondentDhanji Govindji Bhate
DispositionApplication dismissed
Excerpt:
indian factories act (xv of 1881), sections 17, 15 (q)-occupier of factory-owner is occupier.;the term ' occupier ' as used in section 17 of the indian factories act, 1881, means a person who controls the factory or workshop and the work that is done there, and includes the owner of the factory. - .....the occupier of the factory within the meaning of section 17 of the act. it appears to us that the word 'occupier' there must bear the same meaning as it bears in similar enactments in and for its meaning there we have the authority of the earl of halsbury's laws of england, vol. xiv, section 1033. we there read that 'occupier' is a person who controls the factory or workshop and the work that is done there; and reference is made to the scotch case of ramsay v. mackie (1904) 7 f. (ct. of (sic)) where lord m'larensays that' occupier ' plainly means the person who regulates a factory and controls the work that is done there. if that be the meaning of the word in the indian statute there is nothing on the findings to suggest that the learned magistrate's decision was wrong. we must,.....
Judgment:

Batchelor, J.

1. The only point urged in this application for revision is that the Magistrate was wrong in holding that the petitioner was the occupier of the factory within the meaning of Section 17 of the Act. It appears to us that the word 'occupier' there must bear the same meaning as it bears in similar enactments in and for its meaning there we have the authority of the Earl of Halsbury's Laws of England, Vol. XIV, Section 1033. We there read that 'occupier' is a person who controls the factory or workshop and the work that is done there; and reference is made to the Scotch case of Ramsay v. Mackie (1904) 7 F. (Ct. of (sic)) where Lord M'Larensays that' occupier ' plainly means the person who regulates a factory and controls the work that is done there. If that be the meaning of the word in the Indian Statute there is nothing on the findings to suggest that the learned Magistrate's decision was wrong. We must, therefore, discharge the Rule.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //