Mumbai Court December 1911 Judgments
Muhammad Umar Khan Vs. Muhammad Niaz-ud-dIn Khan
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-14-1911
Reported in: (1912)14BOMLR182
John Edge, J.1. This is an appeal from the decree of the Chief Court of the Punjab, dated the 18th of April 1906, reversing the decree of the District Judge of Jullundur, dated the 13th of January 1902, which had decreed the plaintiffs' claim.2. The plaintiffs brought this suit on the nth of May 1900 to obtain possession of certain immovable property, lands and homes in Basti Danishmandan in the Punjab, which they claimed' as their ancestral property. In their plaint they alleged that the property in question had been held for her life by Mussammat Zainab, by virtue of a gift made to her by her father Sarfraz Khan, an uncle of the plaintiffs, and that on her death on the 4th of May 1899 the right of inheritance in the property devolved upon them as reversionary heirs. They also alleged in their plaint that Mussammat Zainab had not, in fact, transferred the property to the defendant, and that if she had transferred the property to him such transfer was, by law, according to the custom o...
Tag this Judgment!Emperor Vs. Balwant Kondo Patole
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-13-1911
Reported in: (1912)14BOMLR41
Russell, J.1. Notwithstanding the very ingenious arguments of Mr. Coyaji in this case, we are of opinion that we must uphold the conviction and sentence.2. On the first point with regard to misjoinder of charges, Section 233 of the Code of Criminal Procedure says : ' For every distinct offence of which any person is accused there shall be a separate charge, and every such charge shall be tried separately, except in the cases mentioned in Sections 234, 235, 236 and 239.' And Section 235 says : 'If, in one series of acts so connected together as to form the same transaction, more offences than one are committed by the same person, he may be charged with, and tried at one trial for, every such offence.' And I would refer to illustration (i) to Section 235 which I read. It seems to us that we must have regard to the words of the section itself, ' One series of acts so connected together as to form the same transaction. ' In the present case the accused is charged with voluntarily causing g...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›