Mumbai Court March 1907 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.
In Re: Sehamber Ram Tehal
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-07-1907
Reported in: (1907)9BOMLR362
Chandavarkar, J.1. The terms of the contract in this case resemble in their main features those of the contract in Koonjobeharry Lall v. Raja Domney (1870) 14 W.B. 29, where a labourer had contracted with the manager of a silk factory for a money consideration, to work at the factory for four months in a year for a period of three years. The only difference between that case and the present is that here the contract is not intermittent and the accused agreed to work continuously for three years. But that is not material. The learned Magistrate who has dismissed the complaint has held that the contract here was not for work to be done but was ' in order to bind ' the accused 'down to work for a period of three years.' The terms of the contract are, in our opinion, clear and bring it within the provisions of Section 1 of the Act. We must, therefore, set aside the order of the Magistrate and direct him to proceed with the trial and dispose of the complaint according to law....
Trikumdas Damodhar and ors. Vs. Haridas Morarji and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-05-1907
Reported in: (1907)ILR31Bom583
1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought for the administration of the estate of Bai Nana, deceased, and, in the memorandum, the appeal is expressed to be from a Judge's order dated the 1st September 1906. This order was made on the hearing of certain preliminary issuer framed for the purpose of determining the question of construction arising under the will of Nana.2. We have for the present purposes assumed that an appeal would lie, but I desire not to be taken as deciding that in the affirmative. There are, however, other grounds on which, I think, we must determine this case adversely to the appellants.3. The result of the hearing on the preliminary issues was that the learned Judge held the gift contained in the fifth clause of the will was invalid. That clause runs in these terms translated:- As to whatever immoveable (and) moveable (property) and property in cash belonging to me may be in excess or may remain over as surplus after a disposition shall have been made in accorda...
Emperor Vs. Savalya Atma Pastya
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-04-1907
Reported in: (1907)9BOMLR356
Chandavarkar, J.1. It is to be regretted that the learned Sessions Judge before whom, assisted by assessors, the appellants were tried, omitted to follow the procedure prescribed in imperative terms by the provisions of Section 342 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as to the examination of the accused persons by the Court during their trial. According to those provisions the Court 'shall' question the accused generally on the case after the witnesses for the prosecution have been examined and before he is called for his defence. The term 'shall' makes the duty imposed on the Court mandatory, not discretionary and when we have regard to the object of such examination, specified in the section itself, viz, that the Legislature intended it to enable the accused to explain any circumstances in the evidence against him, it becomes clear that the omission by the Court to perform such duty in a criminal trial must be presumed to have seriously prejudiced the accused. In all criminal matters, ...
Shivlal Nanakram Vs. Shrikisson Balkissondass and Mitchell and Co. (Th ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-04-1907
Reported in: (1907)9BOMLR374
Davar, J.1. The plaintiffs are merchants and as such carry on business at Khandwa in the Central Provinces. The defendants are merchants and commission agents and have a firm in Bombay. The plaintiffs sue to recover from the defendants Bombay firm a sum of Rs. 11738-12-6 alleging that the defendants' Bombay firm acted as their commission agents for, amongst other things, selling (sic) consigned by them from Khandwa and stating that the sum claimed in the suit is due by the defendants to the plaintiffs respect of the agency account subsisting between the parties, the defendants dispute the plaintiffs' claim and they contend that they are entitled to credit in the account of two sums of Rs. 5000 each - these being the amounts paid by them against two Hundies for its. 5000, each of which purported to be drawn by the plaintiffs and paid by the defendants on their account, under their orders and directions. One of such Hundies purported to be drawn by the plaintiffs on the defendants. That ...
Saundanappa Andanappa Vs. Shivbasawa Amingowda
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-04-1907
Reported in: (1907)9BOMLR439
Chandavarkar, J.1. The appellant, Saunadanappa bin Andanappa Chinwar, was sued by the respondent, Shivbasawa, for the recovery of Rs. 2,415-1-11 in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Second Class, at Bagalkot. The respondent alleged in her plaint that she had deposited Rs. 10,843, in May 1894, with the appellant under an agreement that he should repay the amount in such sums as she might direct ; that he had re-paid part of the amount ; that the balance, Rs. 2,040-13-9, having been due from him on the 23rd of November 1900, she had demanded that sum but that the respondent had refused to pay. The appellant claimed in her plaint interest on the balance from the date of demand to the date of payment.2. The Subordinate Judge found her claim proved except as to interest, as to which he held that since ''there was no agreement to pay interest,' she was not entitled to it.3. The appellant appealed to the District Court and the respondent filed cross-objections to the decree of the Subordina...
Mir Akbar Ali Vs. Mir Abdool Ali
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-01-1907
Reported in: (1907)9BOMLR295
Russell, J.1. This was an enquiry under Section 244 of the Civil Procedure Code and raises an interesting question under Maho-medan law, namely, how far the Shia law recognises what is known in English law as a vested remainder.2. The parties to the suit were Shias : the father and mother of the defendants, being plaintiffs and the defendants were as follows:-Defendants 1, 2 and 3 were the children of the 1st plaintiff by a deceased wife and defendants 4 to 7 his children by the 2nd plaintiff and in their plaint the plaintiffs sought to hare it declared that a certain deed, dated the 2nd March 1890, mentioned in the plaint, was void and inoperative as against them; and that the same might be ordered to be delivered up by the 1st defendant to be cancelled; and that the 1st defendant might be ordered to deliver up to them all the properties which he has taken possession under cover of the said deed and specially a certain property specified in Ex. C to the plaint, situate at Bhendi Bazar...
Satu Vithuji Vs. Dagdu Bhagu
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-01-1907
Reported in: (1907)9BOMLR462
Chandavarkar, J.1. The facts found by both the Courts below are those:-The plaintiff (respondent No. 1 before us) mortgaged the property in dispute to the first and the second defendant. The first defendant, who held money bonds executed in his favour by the plaintiff, assigned them to the fifth defendant (appellant in this second appeal). The fifth defendant sued the plaintiff on those money bonds and obtained a decree, in execution of which the property in dispute, mortgaged to the first and the second defendant, was attached. The fifth defendant, with the leave of the Court, purchased the property at the execution sale.2. The plaintiff brought the present suit to redeem. Both the lower Courts have found upon the evidence that the assignment of the money bonds by the first defendant was a sham and colourable transaction, entered into by him for the purpose of defeating the provisions of Section 99 of the Transfer of Property Act and purchasing the property mortgaged, in the name of t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›