{"id":112519,"date":"1960-03-24T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1960-03-23T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bharat-barrel-and-drum-mfg-vs-govind-gopal-waghmare-and-another-on-24-march-1960"},"modified":"2017-04-10T06:56:52","modified_gmt":"2017-04-10T01:26:52","slug":"bharat-barrel-and-drum-mfg-vs-govind-gopal-waghmare-and-another-on-24-march-1960","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bharat-barrel-and-drum-mfg-vs-govind-gopal-waghmare-and-another-on-24-march-1960","title":{"rendered":"Bharat Barrel And Drum Mfg. &#8230; vs Govind Gopal Waghmare And Another on 24 March, 1960"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Bharat Barrel And Drum Mfg. &#8230; vs Govind Gopal Waghmare And Another on 24 March, 1960<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_citations\">Equivalent citations: 1960 AIR  873, \t\t  1960 SCR  (3) 378<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: K Wanchoo<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: Wanchoo, K.N.<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nBHARAT BARREL AND DRUM MFG.  CO.PRIVATE LTD.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nGOVIND GOPAL WAGHMARE AND ANOTHER\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\n24\/03\/1960\n\nBENCH:\nWANCHOO, K.N.\nBENCH:\nWANCHOO, K.N.\nGAJENDRAGADKAR, P.B.\nGUPTA, K.C. DAS\n\nCITATION:\n 1960 AIR  873\t\t  1960 SCR  (3) 378\n CITATOR INFO :\n R\t    1961 SC1191\t (3)\n R\t    1963 SC1007\t (13)\n\n\nACT:\nIndustrial    Dispute--Full    Bench\t formula--Income-tax\nPayable--Test.\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\nThe  workmen of the appellant company claimed  four  months,\nwages  including  dearness allowance as bonus for  the\tyear\n1952,  and  retrospective operation of\tthe  increased\twage\nscale  to be fixed by the Industrial Tribunal from March  1,\n1952.\tThe  appellant agreed to the  increased\t wage  scale\nsuggested  by  the  Tribunal but wanted that  it  should  be\nlinked\tto  some  guaranteed  production,  and\topposed\t its\noperation retrospectively on the ground that there had\tbeen\neliberate  slowing down of production by the workmen in\t the\nprevious  years.   The Tribunal found that  there  was\tsome\njustification  in the appellant's contention that there\t was\nconsiderable  go-slow  which  had  affected  production\t and\nordered\t that  retrospective effect should be given  to\t its\norder relating to increase in wages which was passed on\t May\n13,  1957,  from  June 1, 1956, and not March  1,  1952,  as\nclaimed by the workmen, The increased wages were not  linked\nto any guaranteed production but it was made clear that\t the\nworkers\t would give certain reasonable production  to  which\nthe workmen agreed.  The Tribunal granted five months  basic\nwages by way of bonus on the basis of the Full Bench formula\nwhich  is generally applied to these matters.  On appeal  by\nthe Appellant-company by special leave :\nHeld,  that  there was no reason for interference  with\t the\norder of the Tribunal fixing the date as June 1, 1956,\tfrom\nwhich  the increased wages should come into force  and\tthat\nthe  Tribunal had jurisdiction to award five  months'  basic\nwages by way of bonus.\nFor  the  purpose of the Full Bench formula,  the  incometax\npayable\t has  to  be  deducted on  the\tfigures\t worked\t out\naccording  to  the  formula and it is  immaterial  what\t the\nactual income-tax paid is-whether more or less.\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 93 of 1959.<br \/>\nAppeal\tby special leave from the Award dated May 13,  1957,<br \/>\nof the Industrial Tribunal, Bombay, in Reference (I.T.)\t No.<br \/>\n166 of 1955.\n<\/p>\n<p>R.   J. Kolah, S. N. Andley, J. B. Dadachanji, Rameshwar  Nath<br \/>\nand P. L. Vohra, for the appellants.\n<\/p>\n<p>K.   B.\t Chaudhury and Janardan Sharma, for the\t respondents<br \/>\nNos. 1 and 2.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">379<\/span><\/p>\n<p>1960.  March 24.  The Judgment of the Court was delivered by<br \/>\nWANCHOO,   J.-This  appeal  by\tspecial\t leave\traises\t two<br \/>\nquestions,  namely,  (i) bonus for the year  1952  and\t(ii)<br \/>\nretrospective  operation  of  the order\t of  the  Industrial<br \/>\nTribunal relating to increase in wages.\t The appellant is  a<br \/>\ncompany\t manufacturing barrels and drums at  Bombay.   There<br \/>\nwas a dispute between the appellant and its workmen about  a<br \/>\nnumber of matters, which was referred to the tribunal by the<br \/>\nGovernment  of Bombay on November 17, 1955.  In\t respect  of<br \/>\nthe  two matters which are now raised in appeal the  workmen<br \/>\nclaimed\t (i) four months wages including dearness  allowance<br \/>\nas bonus for the year 1952 and (ii) retrospective  operation<br \/>\nof the wage-scale to be fixed by the tribunal from March  1,<br \/>\n1952.\n<\/p>\n<p>So far as the increase in wages, is concerned, the appellant<br \/>\nagreed to the scale suggested by the tribunal but it opposed<br \/>\nthe  grant of the increased scale retrospectively  and\talso<br \/>\nwanted\tthat  the increased wages should be linked  to\tsome<br \/>\nguaranteed  production.\t  The reason for this was  that\t the<br \/>\nappellant  felt that there had been deliberate slowing\tdown<br \/>\nof  production\tby the workmen in the previous\tyears.\t The<br \/>\ntribunal was of opinion that there was some justification in<br \/>\nthe appellant&#8217;s contention that there had been\tconsiderable<br \/>\ngo-slow\t which\thad affected production.  Taking  that\tinto<br \/>\naccount it ordered that retrospective effect should be given<br \/>\nto  its order which was passed on May 13, 1957 from June  1,<br \/>\n1956.  As to the linking of the increased wages to a certain<br \/>\nguaranteed production it found it difficult to lay down\t any<br \/>\nnorm itself; but it made it clear that the increase in wages<br \/>\nwas  made by it on the basis that the workers would  give  a<br \/>\ncertain\t reasonable  production and noted that\tthe  workers<br \/>\nwere  agreeable to do that.  It, however,  recommended\tthat<br \/>\nimmediately  after  the.  award had been  given,  an  expert<br \/>\nshould\tbe appointed by agreement, if possible, to  go\tinto<br \/>\nthis  question.\t  It  also  said that in  case\tit  was\t not<br \/>\npossible to appoint an expert by agreement it would be\topen<br \/>\nto the appellant to appoint one.\n<\/p>\n<p><span class=\"hidden_text\">380<\/span><\/p>\n<p>The  appellant&#8217;s contention before us is that  the  tribunal<br \/>\nhaving found some justification in its contention that there<br \/>\nhad   been  considerable  go-slow  should  not\thave   given<br \/>\nretrospective  effect  at all to the order relating  to\t the<br \/>\nincrease in wages.  This matter has been considered fully by<br \/>\nthe tribunal and it came to the conclusion that increase  in<br \/>\nwages  should  be  granted from June 1,\t 1956.\t This  could<br \/>\nhardly\t be  called  retrospective  considering\t  that\t the<br \/>\nreference  was\tmade  in November 1955 ;  in  any  case\t the<br \/>\ntribunal rejected the claim of the workmen for retrospective<br \/>\noperation for the period of over four years from March\t1952<br \/>\nto May 1956 and a good deal of go-slow was practised  during<br \/>\nthis  period.\tIn the circumstances we see  no\t reason\t for<br \/>\ninterference with the order of the tribunal fixing the\tdate<br \/>\nas June 1, 1956, from which the increased wages should\tcome<br \/>\ninto force.\n<\/p>\n<p>This brings us to the next question relating to bonus.\t The<br \/>\ntribunal  has  awarded five months&#8217; basic wages\t by  way  of<br \/>\nbonus.\tThe first contention in this connection is that\t the<br \/>\nworkmen\t had only claimed four months&#8217; basic wages  and\t the<br \/>\ntribunal could not have awarded anything more than what\t the<br \/>\nworkmen\t claimed.   This in our opinion is  incorrect.\t The<br \/>\nworkmen\t had claimed four months&#8217; wages\t including  dearness<br \/>\nallowance  as  bonus.  Five months&#8217; basic  wages  which\t the<br \/>\ntribunal has allowed are admittedly less than the claim\t put<br \/>\nforward\t (namely,  four\t months&#8217;  wages\t including  dearness<br \/>\nallowance).  In the circumstances the tribunal certainly had<br \/>\njurisdiction to award what it has awarded to the workmen.<br \/>\nThe  next question is whether the tribunal was justified  in<br \/>\nawarding as much as five months&#8217; basic wages on the basis of<br \/>\nthe Full Bench formula, which is generally applied to  these<br \/>\nmatters.   The\tgross profit found by the  tribunal  is\t not<br \/>\nchallenged,  namely, Rs. 5.05 lacs.  The tribunal  has\tthen<br \/>\nallowed Rs. 1.36 lacs as depreciation, leaving a balance  of<br \/>\nRs.  3.69,  lacs.  Deducting income-tax from this  at  seven<br \/>\nannas  in a rupee (i.e. Rs. 1.61 lacs), we are left  with  a<br \/>\nbalance of Rs. 2.08 lacs.  Six per cent. per annum  interest<br \/>\non the paid-up capital along with four per cent. interest on<br \/>\nthe  working  capital  comes  to  Rs.  16,000,\tleaving\t  an<br \/>\navailable<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">381<\/span><br \/>\nsurplus\t of  Rs. 1.92 lacs.  Out of this, the  tribunal\t has<br \/>\nallowed five months&#8217; basic wages as bonus which according to<br \/>\nits calculations comes to Rs. 91,000, leaving Rs. 1.01 lacs.<br \/>\nThere will be a rebate of Rs. 40,000 on this sum, leaving  a<br \/>\ntotal  of  Rs.\t1.41  lacs with\t the  appellant.   On  these<br \/>\nfigures,  the  bonus  awarded  by  the\ttribunal  cannot  be<br \/>\ninterfered with.\n<\/p>\n<p>The   appellant,  however,  draws  our\tattention   to\t two<br \/>\ncircumstances  in  this connection.  In the first  place  it<br \/>\nurges that the tribunal has not taken into account  anything<br \/>\nfor  rehabilitation.   But  it may  be\tmentioned  that\t the<br \/>\nappellant had proved no rehabilitation amount as such.\tWhat<br \/>\nit  had\t done  was  to appropriate  Rs.\t 3.16  lacs  towards<br \/>\ndepreciation,  which of course was not the proper amount  of<br \/>\nnotional  normal depreciation, which is allowable under\t the<br \/>\nformula.   Our attention is drawn, however, to\tthe  figures<br \/>\nfiled  by  the workmen in Ex.  U-4 in which Rs.\t 40,000\t has<br \/>\nbeen  allowed towards rehabilitation.  Even  accepting\tthis<br \/>\nconcession by the workmen and deducting it from the  figures<br \/>\ngiven  by us above, the appellant would still be  left\twith<br \/>\nRs.  1.01  lacs\t after paying five months&#8217;  basic  wages  as<br \/>\nbonus.\tThere is thus no reason to interfere with the  award<br \/>\nof bonus on this ground.\n<\/p>\n<p>Lastly\tit  is\turged  that  according\tto  the\t  income-tax<br \/>\nassessment  which  was actually made in this  case  sometime<br \/>\nafter  the  order of the tribunal, the\tappellant  has\tbeen<br \/>\nassessed  to  income-tax amounting to Rs.  2.35\t lacs.\t The<br \/>\nappellant  claims  that\t it should be  allowed\tthis  entire<br \/>\namount and not the notional figure calculated by us, namely,<br \/>\nRs. 1.61 lacs as income-tax.  We are of opinion that for the<br \/>\npurpose\t of the Full Bench formula, the\t income-tax  payable<br \/>\nhas  to be deducted on the figures worked out  according  to<br \/>\nthe formula and it is immaterial what the actual income -tax<br \/>\npaid is-whether more or less.  In this particular case,\t the<br \/>\nincome-tax  appears to be more because certain\titems  which<br \/>\nwere  challenged by the workmen but were allowed  as  proper<br \/>\nexpense by the tribunal have apparently not been allowed  as<br \/>\nproper expense by the income-tax department.  The industrial<br \/>\ntribunal,  however, is not concerned directly with what\t the<br \/>\nincome<br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">49<\/span><br \/>\n<span class=\"hidden_text\">382<\/span><br \/>\ntax authorities assess as actual income-tax in a  particular<br \/>\nyear;  it  is  concerned with working  out  the\t Full  Bench<br \/>\nformula\t in  accordance with its notional  calculations\t and<br \/>\nthis is what has been done in this case.  There is no ground<br \/>\ntherefore for interference-with the award of bonus for\tthis<br \/>\nreason either.\n<\/p>\n<p>We  therefore dismiss the appeal, but in  the  circumstances<br \/>\npass no order as to costs.\n<\/p>\n<p>Appeal dismissed.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Bharat Barrel And Drum Mfg. &#8230; vs Govind Gopal Waghmare And Another on 24 March, 1960 Equivalent citations: 1960 AIR 873, 1960 SCR (3) 378 Author: K Wanchoo Bench: Wanchoo, K.N. PETITIONER: BHARAT BARREL AND DRUM MFG. CO.PRIVATE LTD. Vs. RESPONDENT: GOVIND GOPAL WAGHMARE AND ANOTHER DATE OF JUDGMENT: 24\/03\/1960 BENCH: [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-112519","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Bharat Barrel And Drum Mfg. ... vs Govind Gopal Waghmare And Another on 24 March, 1960 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bharat-barrel-and-drum-mfg-vs-govind-gopal-waghmare-and-another-on-24-march-1960\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Bharat Barrel And Drum Mfg. ... vs Govind Gopal Waghmare And Another on 24 March, 1960 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bharat-barrel-and-drum-mfg-vs-govind-gopal-waghmare-and-another-on-24-march-1960\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1960-03-23T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-04-10T01:26:52+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"8 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bharat-barrel-and-drum-mfg-vs-govind-gopal-waghmare-and-another-on-24-march-1960#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bharat-barrel-and-drum-mfg-vs-govind-gopal-waghmare-and-another-on-24-march-1960\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Bharat Barrel And Drum Mfg. &#8230; vs Govind Gopal Waghmare And Another on 24 March, 1960\",\"datePublished\":\"1960-03-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-04-10T01:26:52+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bharat-barrel-and-drum-mfg-vs-govind-gopal-waghmare-and-another-on-24-march-1960\"},\"wordCount\":1236,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bharat-barrel-and-drum-mfg-vs-govind-gopal-waghmare-and-another-on-24-march-1960#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bharat-barrel-and-drum-mfg-vs-govind-gopal-waghmare-and-another-on-24-march-1960\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bharat-barrel-and-drum-mfg-vs-govind-gopal-waghmare-and-another-on-24-march-1960\",\"name\":\"Bharat Barrel And Drum Mfg. ... vs Govind Gopal Waghmare And Another on 24 March, 1960 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1960-03-23T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-04-10T01:26:52+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bharat-barrel-and-drum-mfg-vs-govind-gopal-waghmare-and-another-on-24-march-1960#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bharat-barrel-and-drum-mfg-vs-govind-gopal-waghmare-and-another-on-24-march-1960\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bharat-barrel-and-drum-mfg-vs-govind-gopal-waghmare-and-another-on-24-march-1960#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Bharat Barrel And Drum Mfg. &#8230; vs Govind Gopal Waghmare And Another on 24 March, 1960\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Bharat Barrel And Drum Mfg. ... vs Govind Gopal Waghmare And Another on 24 March, 1960 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bharat-barrel-and-drum-mfg-vs-govind-gopal-waghmare-and-another-on-24-march-1960","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Bharat Barrel And Drum Mfg. ... vs Govind Gopal Waghmare And Another on 24 March, 1960 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bharat-barrel-and-drum-mfg-vs-govind-gopal-waghmare-and-another-on-24-march-1960","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1960-03-23T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-04-10T01:26:52+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bharat-barrel-and-drum-mfg-vs-govind-gopal-waghmare-and-another-on-24-march-1960#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bharat-barrel-and-drum-mfg-vs-govind-gopal-waghmare-and-another-on-24-march-1960"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Bharat Barrel And Drum Mfg. &#8230; vs Govind Gopal Waghmare And Another on 24 March, 1960","datePublished":"1960-03-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-04-10T01:26:52+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bharat-barrel-and-drum-mfg-vs-govind-gopal-waghmare-and-another-on-24-march-1960"},"wordCount":1236,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bharat-barrel-and-drum-mfg-vs-govind-gopal-waghmare-and-another-on-24-march-1960#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bharat-barrel-and-drum-mfg-vs-govind-gopal-waghmare-and-another-on-24-march-1960","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bharat-barrel-and-drum-mfg-vs-govind-gopal-waghmare-and-another-on-24-march-1960","name":"Bharat Barrel And Drum Mfg. ... vs Govind Gopal Waghmare And Another on 24 March, 1960 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1960-03-23T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-04-10T01:26:52+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bharat-barrel-and-drum-mfg-vs-govind-gopal-waghmare-and-another-on-24-march-1960#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bharat-barrel-and-drum-mfg-vs-govind-gopal-waghmare-and-another-on-24-march-1960"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bharat-barrel-and-drum-mfg-vs-govind-gopal-waghmare-and-another-on-24-march-1960#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Bharat Barrel And Drum Mfg. &#8230; vs Govind Gopal Waghmare And Another on 24 March, 1960"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/112519","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=112519"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/112519\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=112519"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=112519"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=112519"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}