Mumbai Court September 1883 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
The Collector of Broach Vs. Desai Raghunath and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-13-1883
Reported in: (1883)ILR7Bom546
Pinhey, J.1. This case is on all fours with Second Appeals 432, 437 and 438 Ante, p. 542 in which Mr. Nagindas Marphatya appeared the defendants, and in which judgment was delivered on the 23rd of August last.2. To that judgment we have only to add the following remarks with reference to the arguments advanced by Mr. Shantaram Narayan Bondse:1. We hold that the words in Section 1 of Bombay Act V of 1862--' no portion of a bhag, &c.;, shall be liable to seizure, sequestration, attachment, or sale, by the process of any Civil Court'--mean that no portion of a bhag shall be seized, sequestered, attached, or sold by the process of any Civil Court, and that any such seizure, sequestration, attachment or sale would be absolutely illegal, and, therefore, void.2. Then Mr. Shantaram argued that after a portion of a bhag has been actually sold by a Civil Court, the Collector should not proceed under Section 2, but under Section 3 of the Act; but we think this argument cannot be allowed for a mom...
Radhakisan Hakumji Vs. Balvant Ramji
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-06-1883
Reported in: (1883)ILR7Bom530
West, J.1. We are of opinion that the proviso in Clause (c) of Section 266 of the Code of Civil Procedure is to be construed by the terms of the positive enactment to which it is annexed. An exception is meaningless unless it, is an exception of something otherwise included in the rule. The rule makes houses and buildings subject to attachment in execution: the exception excludes 'the materials of houses and other buildings belonging to, and occupied by, agriculturists.' The expression made use of in the latter clause is plainly meant to exempt a particular class of houses and buildings from attachment,--not merely loose materials of buildings, and those only. In some instances the sites of houses may be held on sufferance, or there may be other means of forcing a tenant to remove or pull down his hut: the clause saves a decree-holder from the temptation he might, be under of putting undue pressure, or getting it put, on the tenant thus situated. If ho cannot attach even the materials,...
Ladu Chimaji Vs. Babaji Khanduji
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-06-1883
Reported in: (1883)ILR7Bom532
West, J.1. The applicant in this case, being the mortgagor of property of the defendant, sued to enforce redemption on the terms provided by the Dekkhan Agriculturists' Relief Act. The account was made up as that Act directs, and the mortgagor was directed to pay the sum found to be due within six months, or to be foreclosed for ever against redemption. He failed to satisfy the condition; and the property thus, according to the ordinary practice of the Mofussil, vested in the mortgagee. The second order--which, according to the practice of the English Equity Courts, is applied for after the expiration of the time prescribed for redemption--is made as of course on such application Fisher on Mortgages (1876), . 1771. It appears to be contemplated by the Form No. 129 appended to the Code of Civil Procedure, but it is not prescribed in the Act itself. In this Presidency it has not been used. The mortgage called lahan-gahan, stipulates for transfer of the ownership to the mortgagee on non-p...
Nurbibi Vs. Husen Lal
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-06-1883
Reported in: (1883)ILR7Bom537
West, J.1. The obligation of a father to support his child is one imposed on him by the law of the family in some form or other, either of civil or criminal liability see Bazeley v. Forder L.R. 3. Q.B. 564 under every civilized system. If the father fails to support a child, it is the mother's duty to nurture it if she can. Whether she can recover the amount necessary for this purpose from the father according to the Mahomedan law is a question that the court will have to try. But the father's obligation to recoup the mother and to provide money for the future maintenance of his child by a wife whom he has divorced during her pregnancy, is one which, if it subsists, does not arise from contract, but is imposed on the father by the law, without any bargain or assent on his part. The suit, therefore, in this case is not one cognizable by a small Cause Court, but by the ordinary Civil Court, and the order for returning the plaint made by the Subordinate Judge should be set aside, and the ...
Erakshah Dhanjiseth Vs. Adarji Dorabji and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-06-1883
Reported in: (1883)ILR7Bom535
West, J.1. We are of opinion that, whether the relief sought under Section 265 of Act IX of 1872 be sought by an application called a plaint, or by one called a petition, the nature of the remedy is not affected. Nor is the nature of the inquiry requisite for an adjudication affected by the title of the demand made for it. This demand is essentially a plaint, and must be paid for in fees at the same rate as any other plaint for, an account extend| ins to a like amount of valuation....
Ramlinga Khanapure Vs. Viru Pakshi Khanapuri
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-06-1883
Reported in: (1883)ILR7Bom538
West, J.1. The agreement between the brothers Ramlinga and Virupakshi, to the effect that two houses were for ever to be held undivided, was one inconsistent with the Hindu law to which they were subject--Rajender Dutt v. Sham Chund Mitter I.L.R. 6 cal. 106; Anantha Tirtha Chariar v. Nagamuthu Ambalagaren I.L.R. 4 Mad. 200; Ashutosh Dutt v. Doorga Churn Chatterjee L. R. 6 I A. 182. That law gives to a member of a united family a right to demand partition from his co-members The division of sacra takes place when it is lawfully claimed, and of this division of the sacra a division of the property, or of the interests in the property, is a necessary accompaniment to have been ruled more than once that, by an agreement not to divide, a Hindu family could not tie up their family estate so as to deprive a purchaser of one of the shares ot a right to enforce partition--Anand Chandra Ghose v. Prankisto dutt 3 B L.R. 14 O.C.J.; Rajendur Dutt v. Sham Chunder Mitter I.L.R. 6 Cal. 106. But the pu...
James Bevis and ors. Vs. C.A. Turner and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-04-1883
Reported in: (1883)ILR7Bom484
Scott, J.1. I am asked in this case to make a final order as to costs. When I gave judgment, I allowed the Official Assignee time to recover the costs from the creditors of the insolvent's estate, who, he supposed, had guaranteed the costs of the suit: It appears now that he was mistaken as to the existence of that guarantee, I am not surprised at his mistake after reading the correspondence that passed between him and his attorneys. But the question I have now to decide is whether the Official Assignee must still be held liable. I do not think the current of decisions leaves me any discretion in the matter. Pitts v. La Fontaine L.R. 6 Ca. (P. C) 482 is the last reported case on the subject. Ex p. Angerstein L.R. 9 Ch. 479 is there adopted by the Privy Council as the law on this point. The rule there laid down is that a trustee in bankruptcy (who is equivalent to the Official Assignee) is liable in the same way as any other party to costs. If success is doubtful, he must obtain an inde...
In Re: the Fleming Spinning and Weaving Company (Limited) in Liquidati ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-04-1883
Reported in: (1883)ILR7Bom494
West, J.1. We have considered the points in this case in the interval since it was first argued, and we think that no object would be gained by our reserving our judgment.2. There are two general considerations which it is necessary to bear in mind in dealing with a question of this sort. The first is that in the construction of such an Act as this--an Act concerned with the creation and carrying on of joint shock companies, an institution which has an English origin, and takes its shape from English business ways and habits--we must be guided, as far as possible, by the current of English decisions. The second consideration is that, while adhering generally to the principles of construction laid down from time to time by English Courts of law on the various parts of these Acts, we should not forget that such enactments when introduced into this country have to be applied to a people for the most part unfamiliar with our business ways and experience, as well as with our language,--a co...
Narayan Venkoba Vs. Pandurang Kamat
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-04-1883
Reported in: (1883)ILR7Bom526
West, J.1. For the appellant is this case the objection has been taken that the tacking of a later to an earlier mortgage was improperly allowed as against one of intermediate date. For the respondent it is urged that the suit having been brought for ejectment of the mortgagee in possession under the first and third mortgages, the decree now sought to enforce redemption or foreclosure cannot properly be made in such a case. We will deal with the latter question first.2. The plaintiff, having succeeded in a suit against the original Mortgagor, found he could not obtain possession under his decree by reason of the defendant's occupying the mortgaged house under two other mortgages. He sued him for possession until his mortgage money should be paid with damages for his exclusion and mesne profits during the pendency of the suit. The plaintiff denied both the mortgages of the defendant. The defendant denied the plaintiff's mortgage, and insisted that he must, at any rate, be paid the amoun...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›