Mumbai Court December 1912 Judgments
Emperor Vs. Rama Lala
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-05-1912
Reported in: (1912)15BOMLR103; 19Ind.Cas.177
Batchelor, J.1. In this case the accused has been convicted of wrongful restraint under Section 339, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to a fine. On appeal to the Additional District Magistrate, Mr. Sedgwick, the conviction was upheld. The learned District Magistrate, however, finds as a fact that the person said to have been obstructed was still able to proceed across the passage in question. That being so, we do not think that he can be said to have been wrongfully restrained, seeing that the definition under Section 339 requires that the obstruction should be so complete and successful as to prevent the person obstructed from proceeding in any direction in which he has a right to proceed. The wrong here defined is a wrong against the person, and is not completed where the person is at liberty to go in any direction he pleases. That is the case here (sic) facts found by the Magistrate, and it appears to the (sic) material that the person, though himself unobstructed, (sic) hindered fr...
Tag this Judgment!Emperor Vs. Rama Sudama Mahar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-05-1912
Reported in: (1913)15BOMLR306; 19Ind.Cas.512
1. This is a reference by the District Magistrate of Poona in regard to an order passed by a First Class trate with regard to one Rama Sudatna Mahar of Lonavla, who is found to have committed theft. The learned Magistrate finds that the accused lad is thirteen years old. Instead, therefore, of suffering the rigorous imprisonment for two months which was imposed, the accused was by the convicting Magistrate directed to be detained in a Reformatory School for five years ' or until he attains the age of eighteen years.' The District Magistrate objects to the alternative period of time expressed in the words 'or until he attains the age of eighteen years '; and we think that the decision in Queen Empress v. Ramai I.L.R. (1900) Mad. 13 is good authority for the objection. We must, therefore, delete from the Magistrate's order the words 'or until he attains the age of eighteen years,' leaving the period of five years as the exact period for which the boy is to be detained in the Reformatory....
Tag this Judgment!Emperor Vs. Vishnu Krishna Puranik
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-05-1912
Reported in: (1913)15BOMLR307; 19Ind.Cas.504
Batchelor, J.1. In this case one Vishnu Krishna Puranik has been convicted by the Magistrate under Section 292, Indian Penal Code, in that he sold or printed for sale or hire an obscene book. On the matter coming before the learned Sessions Judge of Thana, Mr. Dixit, he was of opinion that the conviction was bad, inasmuch as the impugned passages in the book were not of an obscene character. He has therefore made a reference to us asking that we should set aside the conviction.2. We have heard the learned Government Pleader in support of the conviction, and he has read to us translations, which satisfied him, of the particular passages on which this charge was framed. The book was published in connection with a large pharmacy of native medicines situated at Panvel. The book bears the title ' Vyavahar Vaidyak ' which may be roughly Englished as meaning 'Medicine in practice' or ' Practical Medicine,' and the general object of it appears to be to advertise various medicines which can be ...
Tag this Judgment!Dharani Kanta Lahiri Chowdhuri Vs. Gabar Ali Khan
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-05-1912
Reported in: (1913)15BOMLR445
John Edge, J.1. This is an appeal from two decrees of the High Court of Judicature at Fort William in Bengal, dated the 3rd July 1908, which were made in an appeal and cross-appeal from the decree of the Second Subordinate Judge of Mymensingh, dated the 19th March 1906.2. The appellants are the zamindars of Mauzah Sahildeo in Pergunnah Mymensingh. The respondents are in possession of seven puras or 592 big has of land within Mauzah Sahildeo from the possession of which the zamindars sought in the suit in which this appeal has arisen to eject them. The dispute as to the right to the possession of the seven puras of land arose out of an application which was made in 1891 under Section 103 of the Bengal Tenancy Act, 1885, by the then zamindars of Mauzah Sahildeo to have lands in Mauzah Sahildeo measured and a Record of Rights prepared. The zamindars of 1891 are represented in this appeal by the appellants. Upon that application the Collector of Mymensingh deputed an Amin to make the neces...
Tag this Judgment!Lallu Sahi Vs. Mahant Rajbans Bharthi
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-05-1912
Reported in: (1913)15BOMLR452
John Edge, J.1. The suit in which these two consolidated appeals have arisen was brought by Babu Lallu Sahi, the appellant here, in the Court of the Additional Subordinate Judge of Gorakhpur, against Mahant Rajbans Bharthi and Babu Thakur Singh, who are the respondents to these appeals. The suit was brought upon two hypothecation bonds, dated espectively the 23rd March 1900 and the 27th April which were made by the defendant Mahant Rajbans Bharthi. The first bond was made in favour of Babu Rajdeo Singh, deceased, who, in fact, was in that transaction be namidar for 1 the plaintiff, and was the father of the defendant Babu Thakur Singh, a pro forma defendant against whom no relief was sought. The second bond was made in favour of the plaintiff. The suit was a suit for sale under Section 88 of the Transfer of Property Act, of the immovable property mentioned in the bonds. The consideration for the bonds was alleged in the plaint to have been old and present debts. In his written statemen...
Tag this Judgment!Emperor Vs. Ebrahimji Mulla Jeevanji
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-04-1912
Reported in: (1913)15BOMLR297; 19Ind.Cas.328
Batchelor, J.1. The appellants before us have been convicted by the learned Third Presidency Magistrate of the offence of cheating and have been sentenced to one day's simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 750. The appellants are the agents and directors of a Steamship Company called the Bombay Hajaz Steam Navigation Company which is occupied in the conveyance of pilgrims between Bombay and Jeddah. Another Company which engages in similar business is known as the Persian Steam Navigation Company and is the trade rival of the appellants' Company. The appellants have a steamer named the ' Shah Jahan,' which on the 24th of August 1911 left Bombay for the outward voyage to Jeddah. On the 5th of September it appears that she arrived at Aden and was there boarded by the witness Green, the Master of a steamship belonging to the Persian Company. Green inspected the ' Shah Jahan ' and saw that she had suffered some damage owing to high seas on her voyage from Bombay. The repairs, however, which...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Subrati Jan Mahomed
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-04-1912
Reported in: (1913)15BOMLR748; 20Ind.Cas.859
Macleod, J.1. This is an application on behalf of an adjudicated insolvent that he should be allowed to withdraw his petition on the ground that he has settled with his creditors.2. Counsel referred to Section 15, Sub-section (2) of the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act (III of 1909) but that sub-section as well as Sub-section (8) of Section 13 only apply to petitions which are pending before any order has been made.3. Once an order of adjudication has been made, the debtor who presents his own petition, or the respondent in the case of a creditor's petition, becomes an insolvent, and remains so until the order of adjudication is annulled or he obtains his discharge.4. The Court has no jurisdiction to annul the order of adjudication except in the manner provided for by the Act. Under Section 21(1) the order can be annulled if the Court is of opinion that the debtor ought not to have been adjudged insolvent, or if it is proved to the satisfaction of the Court that the debts of the insolve...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›