Mumbai Court September 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.
Banoo Begum Vs. Mir Abed Ali
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-27-1907
Reported in: (1907)9BOMLR1152
Lawrence Jenkins, C.J.1. These appeals arise out of proceedings in execution of a decree, passed by consent on the 22nd December 1891, whereby it was directed (amongst other things) as follows :- And this Court doth further order that the land and dwelling house situate at Bhindi Bazar or Parel Road in Bombay bearing ward No. 8099, Street Nos. 558, 60, 62, 64 and 123 and Collector of Land Revenue old No. 720, new No. 7892 and old survey No. 1174 and new survey No. 7539 be held and enjoyed by the second plaintiff for her life and from and after her death that the same be sold by public auction and the net proceeds thereof be divided among the six sons of the first plaintiff', Khan Bahadur Mir Akbar Ali and their heirs in equal shares after setting aside a sum of Rupees three thousand oat of the said sale proceeds for the death ceremonies of the plaintiffs and also for the Mohrum ceremonies and that this sum shall be dealt with in accordance with any direciions in that behalf that may be...
Emperor Vs. Aditram Miratram and Hussan Latif
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-25-1907
Reported in: (1907)9BOMLR1160
ORDER1. The Court thinks that under Section 476, Criminal Procedure Code, the Presidency Magistrate does not fall within the definition of a Magistrate of the First class and that the only-course which the Presidency Magistrate can adopt under the Criminal Procedure Code in such a case is either to commit the case to the Sessions or have the complaint filed under Section 190 read with the provisions of Section 195.2. The Court discharges the rule leaving the Presidency Magistrate to deal with the case with reference to this decision....
Ranchod Naran Vs. Ajoobai
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-24-1907
Reported in: (1907)9BOMLR1149
Russell, J.1. In this case there are only three issues :-1. Whether the plaintiff is the nearer heir to the deceased Mawa Paga than the defendant.2. Whether the plaintiff is not disqualified by reason of his suffering from leprosy of a virulent and incurable type as in the written statement alleged.3. Whether the plaintiff is not disqualified by his being a helpless cripple by the loss of his toes and fingers.2. As to the first issue, the plaintiff is the grand-son of Mawa's paternal uncle. Mawa is the propositus. The defendant is the widow of a son of a younger paternal uncle of Mawa. On this issue I find it impossible to distinguish the present case from that of Rachava v. Kalingapa ILR (1892) 16 Bom. 716. That was a decision of two Judges, one of whom was Mr. Justice Telang. In my opinion it is not open to me, if I wished to do so, to dissent from that case; but I would mention that the learned Judges there followed a judgment of Sir Charles Sargent and Mr. Justice Telang in Ramchan...
Nathaji Anandrav Patil Vs. Nana Sarjerao Patil
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-20-1907
Reported in: (1907)9BOMLR1173
Russell, J.1. This case raises an interesting question as to the effect of lis pendens.2. The facts require to be stated in some detail.3. The plaintiff herein is a Marwari Hajarimal Multanchand. There are three defendants (1) Nana, (2) Nathaji Anandrao and (3) Balubai. Defendant 1 is the son-in-law of defendant 3. Defendant 2 is the adopted son of one Anandrav deceased, the husband of Gangabai also deceased who was the mother of Balubai.4. The plaintiff sues to recover possession of Survey No. 161 at Ranjangaon upon the ground that he purchased the said survey number from Balubai by virtue of a sale-deed dated the 14th April 1886, Exhibit 19.5. It appears that in 1885 Nathaji the adopted son of Gangabai sued to recover possession of his adoptive father's estate which included inter alia the Survey No. 161. He claimed this both as adopted son and by virtue of a lease executed in his favour by Balubai herself. It will be seen then that the plaintiff herein purchased Survey No. 161 durin...
Gokal Kastur Vs. Amarchand Jasraj
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-20-1907
Reported in: (1907)9BOMLR1289
Chandavarkar, J.1. The lower appellate Court has found that the debts in dispute were contracted by Kastur as the manager of a joint Hindu family of which he and the defendants were coparceners for the purposes of a partnership business of that family. The necessary sequence of that finding is that the debts are legally binding upon the defendants. It is, however, contended that the debts would be barred by limitation but for an acknowledgment by Kastur which is relied upon by the respondent to save the bar. The lower appellate Court has held upon the strength of that acknowledgment that the debts are not barred by limitation. It is argued by the appellants' pleader Mr. Desai that the acknowledgment is not binding upon the defendants, because, it is urged, it was an acknowledgment made by Kastur at a time when the partnership business had come to an end. Assuming that the business had come to an end at the time that this acknowledgment was made by Kastur, still we must have regard to t...
In Re: Hormasji Framji Warden and in Re: Hirjibhai Bomanji Warden
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-1907
Reported in: (1907)9BOMLR1203
Davar, J.1. Hormusji Framji Warden-a Parsi merchant of Bombay-died on the 25th of July 1885 having previous to his death executed his will on the 11th of November 1880. By his will the testator after giving certain legacies &c.; provides as follows:-'My executors and trustees for the time being of this my will shall, if I have not done so myself in my lifetime, purchase an eligible and commodious site either at Girgaum or Grant Road without the Port of Bombay and shall erect a building and found thereon a large commodious and comfortable Hall or apartment for the purposes and uses of Parsis professing Zoroastrian Faith and shall name and style the same (after the name of my venerable deceased father Framji Bomanji Warden) 'The Framji Warden Hall.' For the purpose of building the hall and providing for it suitable furniture and utensils the testator sets apart a sum of Rs. 55,000. He provides a further sum of Rs. 10,000 for the upkeep and maintenance of the Hall. After the executors and...
Ganesh Narayan Vs. Vishnu Ramchandra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-05-1907
Reported in: (1907)9BOMLR1164
Chandavarkar, J.1. The facts found by the District Judge, so far as they are material for the purposes of the point of law urged in support of this second appeal, are briefly these. The promissory note (Exhibit 27) on which this suit was brought is a renewal of the khata (Exhibit 25) executed by the defendant in September, 1895. At that time the defendant was a Karkun on a monthly salary of Rs. 25 in the Revenue Department and was heavily indebted. Being very much harassed by his creditors, he turned to the plaintiff for a loan on a mortgage. The plaintiff agreed to lend, provided the defendant executed a kehata for the payment of Rs. 307-4-0 which the latter's father had owed, but which, in 1894, had been held to be time-barred in a suit brought by the plaintiff. The plaintiff also insisted that the khata should include Rs. 25 for the costs he had incurred in the said suit. To this the defendant agreed, because he was then, as the District Judge observes, 'obliged to raise money immed...
Chatring Moolchand Vs. Lieut. R.H. Whitchurch
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-05-1907
Reported in: (1907)9BOMLR1296
Macleod, J.1. The plaintiffs, a firm, of money-lenders at Poona, have filed this suit as a summary suit against the defendant, a Lieutenant in the Indian army, to recover the sum of Rs. 6409-12 alleged to be due for principal and interest on a demand promissory note for Rs. 6000 given to them by the defendant on the 14th September 1906. By an order of the 5th May 1907 the defendant was given liberty to defend the suit and his affidavit of the 1st May was taken as his written statement. The execution of the note is admitted and the questions I have to decide are (1) what were the true facts relating to the transactions between the parties and (2) whether the defendant is entitled to relief under Sections 16 and 19 of the Contract Act or otherwise. 2. It appears that on the 30th July the defendant, who was then stationed at Aurangabad, wrote to the plaintiffs asking them to come to him to arrange a loan. On the 1st August the plaintiffs replied asking for Rs. 10 to pay their travelling e...
Vrijbhukandas Dwarkadas Vs. Bai Parvati
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-02-1907
Reported in: (1907)9BOMLR1187
Chandavarkar, J.1. Mr. Gokuldas has endeavoured to argue, that, under the Hindu law, a mother succeeding as heir to her son takes an absolute, not a limited, estate. That point is, however, concluded by authority: bee Narsappa v. Sakharam (1869) 6Bom. H. C. 215. which has been since followed in this Presidency. As was said by the learned Chief Justice in Bhau v. Raghunath ILR (1906) 30 Bom. 229 : 7 Bom. L.R. 937 it has now come to be recognized as the rule in Bombay that female heirs, except those who come into the family of the proporties by marriage, take absolute interests'. On the ground of stare decision we must adhere to that rule.2. The duty of performing the funeral ceremonies of a mother, that is, pinda dana or offering the funeral oblations, is laid down as a religious injunction binding on her son in absolute' terms by the Hindu law-(See Vijnaneshwara's Mitakshara,. Prayaschittadhyaya, Moghe's Edition, page 280)-, so much so that, even though the son is a minor and as such i...
Vijbhukandas Dwarkadas Vs. Dayaram Jadav
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-02-1907
Reported in: (1907)9BOMLR1181
Chandavarkar, J.1. The only question of law argued in support of this second appeal is whether the Courts below have rightly held appellant liable to pay the amount spent by respondents for 'repairs' as a condition precedent to his right to recover possession of the property as the reversionary heir of the son of the deceased widow, Bai Mancha. It being found as a fact that the mortgage taken by the respondents from Bai Mancha was not for any legal necessity, justified by Hindu law, they cannot claim the amount spent by them for repairs, which must be, upon the facts found, treated as having been spent by them under the authority of the mortgage from Bai Mancha. That mortgage falling to the ground as not binding the plaintiff, there is no legal foundation for the amount spent for repairs by the respondents unless they are able successfully to invoke some principle of equity which makes it obligatory on the appellant to pay that amount to the respondent as a condition precedent to the r...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›