Mumbai Court October 1910 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: Pandurang Shidrao
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-14-1910
Reported in: (1910)12BOMLR1029
Batchelor, J.1. This is an application in revision under Section 435 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The applicants are, either wholly or mainly, Brahman residents of the town of Athni, and their prayer is that this Court will set aside an order made by the District Magistrate permitting the Lingayats of the town to go in procession carrying the emblem known as Vyasantol. The applicants aver that this emblem is highly offensive to their religious feelings.2. The rule which was granted has been fully argued, and we have heard Counsel on both sides. The case raises at once the preliminary question whether this Court has any jurisdiction to review the order under Section 435, Criminal Procedure Code. In order to determine that question, it is necessary to state shortly what the order is, and how it came to be passed.3. On the nth July last certain members of the Lingayat immunity at Athni petitioned the District Magistrate that they might be allowed to carry out this Vyasantol procession,...
Radhabai Vs. Ramchandra Vishnu Paranjpe
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-11-1910
Reported in: (1911)13BOMLR30
Batchelor, J.1. The plaintiff sued as an agriculturist to redeem a mortgage and to recover possession of the mortgaged property on payment of any sum which the Court might find to be still owing to the defendants, the representatives of the original mortgagee. The mortgage was executed in 1863, and the sum secured was Rs. 300. It was admitted that the mortgagee went into possession in 1867 under the decree of the Court, and has since remained in possession.2. The defendants denied that the plaintiff was an agriculturist within the meaning of the Dekkhan Agriculturists' Relief Act, and claimed that Rs. 1,038-4-11 were due on the mortgage, including a sum of Rs. 380 which the mortgagee had to pay to prior mortgagees before he could go into possession under the decree of 1867.3. The Court of first instance found that the plaintiff was not an agriculturist, and that, on accounts taken, the mortgagee had already received Rs. 2,549-4-3 from the rents and profits of the mortgaged property it ...
Dwarkaprasad Raghubir and anr. Vs. Jamnadas Gordhandas
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-10-1910
Reported in: 9Ind.Cas.948
Beaman, J.1. This is a suit by the plaintiffs, the nephews of the deceased Raghunandan, against the defendant No. 1, who is the executor of his Will.2. The plaintiffs seek to recover their share of Raghunandan's property on the ground that it is joint ancestral property and that, therefore, Raghunandan had no power to dispose of it by Will.3. The case has been strenuously contested on behalf of the plaintiffs by Mr. Sethna, who has laid before the Court the fullest materials at his disposal and urged every argument which ingenuity could suggest. Still I cannot help feeling at the close of the case, as I felt at a very early stage of its progress, that the plaintiffs had really no case at all.4. Mohanlal died many years ago, leasing two sons; the testator Raghunandan and his brother Raghubir. It is alleged by the defendant, and the plaintiff is not in a position to contradict it, that Raghunandan left his native place Unao more than forty years ago, somewhere about the year 1866, and ca...
Emperor Vs. Vinayak Damodar Savarkar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-06-1910
Reported in: (1911)13BOMLR296
Basil Scott, C.J.1. The accused Vinayak Damodar Savarkar was committed to this Court by Mr. Montgomerie, First Class Magistrate of Nasik, for trial upon charges framed under Sections 121, 122 and 123 of the Indian Penal Code. At the commencement of the trial here the accused said that he would take no part in the trial but asked for an adjournment and for facilities to make to the British and to the French Governments representations regarding what he contended was his illegal arrest in Marseilles after he had escaped from the custody of police officers charged with the duty of bringing him from England to Bombay. His application was refused on the ground that it was beyond the province of this Court to do anything more than try him for the offences in respect of which he had been committed for trial. The trial then proceeded against him and other accused pointy charged with him. After certain witnesses had been (sic) mined Mr. Baptista, appearing for certain of the accused (sic) to pu...
Kisandas Shivram Marwadi Vs. Nama Rama Vir
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-05-1910
Reported in: (1910)12BOMLR1024
Batchelor, J.1. We are obliged to the learned pleaders who have assisted the Court with their arguments.2. This is a reference by the Subordinate Judge of Talegaon and arises in a suit brought by the assignee of a mortgage for the recovery of the mortgage-money due on a simple bond dated the 18th June 1897.3. The defendant admitted the mortgage bond and the receipt of the consideration.4. The plaintiff and the defendant entered into a compromise which is Exhibit 15, and which provides that the defendant should pay Rs. 100 as claimed and costs namely, Rs. 10 in Falgun of Shake 1831 and yearly Rs. 10 in each future Falgun and so on until the whole sum was paid off; if defendant should make default in payment of any two instalments, then it was provided that the plaintiff should realize the whole sum by sale of the entire mortgaged property through the Court.5. The defendant admitted the assignment deed produced by the plaintiff. The parties prayed for a decree to be passed in terms of th...
Dassa Ramchandra Prabhu Vs. Narsimha Damodar Bhatt
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-04-1910
Reported in: (1911)13BOMLR101
Batchelor, J. 1. This was a suit in which the plaintiff prayed for a declaration that the property in question was not liable to attachment and sale in execution of a decree obtained by the first defendant against the second defendant inasmuch as it was property reserved for the performance of a certain religious trust.2. The learned Subordinate Judge in the Court of first instance dismissed the suit holding that the document relied upon as constituting the trust did not constitute a trust but showed that there was here only a gift burdened with an obligation.3. In the Court of appeal, however, the learned District Judge took another view, and was of opinion that there was a good complete trust of the property which in consequence was not liable to attachment and sale.4. Against the District Judge's decree an appeal was presented to this Court; it was heard and decided by the Chief Justice who accepted the Subordinate Judge's view of the case as correct and restored his decree reversin...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›