Mumbai Court March 1912 Judgments
Abhesang Tirabhai Vs. Raisang Fatesang
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-29-1912
Reported in: (1912)14BOMLR602
Batchelor, J.1. This was a suit by a reversioner to recover property setting aside a grant or disposition made by the widow of a previous holder.2. The circumstances underlying the litigation are these. The original plaintiff Abhesang was the son of one Tirabhi who was the great-grand-son of Tiratsang. Tiratsang had another son Ajabsang and Ajabsang's great-grand-son was Bapji Jasabhai whose property is the subject of this litigation. Bapji Jasabhai on dying left two widows, Bajiba and Jijiba. By Bajiba Bapji had a daughter Laduba and by Jijiba he had another daughter Ratanba. Ratanba married Bapujee Abhesing, who by another wife was the father of Fatesing, who was the father of the defendants 1 and 2. The third defendant on the record is the Talukdari Settlement Officer.3. On the occasion of Ratanba's marriage with Bapuji Abhesing in 1857 the widow Jijiba executed in favour of her son-in-law Bapuji the deed Exhibit 89, the material portions of which run as follows:-' To Rana Shri Bapu...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Vazirsaheb Allisaheb Jhagirdar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-28-1912
Reported in: (1912)14BOMLR377
Batchelor, J.1. This is a reference by the learned Sessions Judge of Bijapur who submits for the orders of this Court the petition of one Vazirsaheb valad Allisaheb, who prays that he may be tried by the First Class Magistrate of Bijapur for the offence imputed to him under Sections 395 and 109, Indian Penal Code, and may not be sent for trial to the authorities of the Jath State. It appears that in September 1911, the authorities of that State made a requision to the Political Agent, who is also the District Magistrate of Bijapur, for the surrender of Vazirsaheb in reference to this charge. On the 21st September the Political Agent issued a warrant under Section 7 of the Extradition Act (Act XV of 1903.) The accused, however, surrendered of his' own accord and. the warrant was returned unexecuted.2. Then upon the application of Vazirsaheb the Political Agent issued in his favour a certificate under Section 188 of the Criminal Procedure Code, to the effect that Vazirsaheb should be tri...
Tag this Judgment!Mervanji Mancherji Cama Vs. the Secretary of State for India in Counci ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-25-1912
Reported in: (1912)14BOMLR654
Basil Scott, Kt., C.J.1. The plaintiffs sue for a declaration that land of which they are mortgagees is as between them and their mortgagor on the one hand and the Secretary of State on the other quit and ground rent tenure.2. The land, it is now conceded, is held under a sanad under which the predecessor-in-title of the plaintiffs' mortgagor was given permission by Government to occupy the land upon payment annually at the rate of eleven reas the square yard subject to the right of Government to resume the land for public purposes on six months' notice. The sanad is dated 1824.3. Quit and ground rent is rent payable annually for land at the rate of eleven reas the square yard. It was formerly regarded as doubtful whether quit and ground rent land was resumable by Government. After the fire in Bombay in 1803 various quit and ground rent plots were resumed and their occupants compensated by other plots in New Town of Kamatipura as to which Government issued sanads stipulating for the an...
Tag this Judgment!Emperor Vs. Tukaram Malhari
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-22-1912
Reported in: (1912)14BOMLR373
Batchelor, J.1. The 21 appellants before the Court were charged before the Sessions Judge together with one other accused person, who was No. 15, under Section 401 of the Indian Penal Code, with the offence of belonging to a gang of persons associated for the purpose of habitually committing theft or robbery. The 21 appellants were all convicted by the Sessions Judge of that offence, and hence their present appeal. The accused who was No. 15 before the Sessions Judge was acquitted by him. The assessors were for acquitting accused Nos. 5, 12 and 20 out of the 22 persons indicted. But as the learned Sessions Judge has pointed out they were unable to give any reasons why these three accused persons, Nos. 5, 12 and 20, should be held to stand on any different footing from that occupied by the other accused excepting No. 15. It may be added that no attempt has been made by the learned Counsel here to suggest that the case of accused Nos. 5, 12 and 20 is in any way different from the case of...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Khanderao Yeshwant
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-21-1912
Reported in: (1912)14BOMLR362
Batchelor, J.1. The petitioner here is a Policeman who, on the 20th February 1911, was at a village named Dhanchi occupied in work about the census. On that day in that village a panchnama was made in regard to an offence said to have been committed by a certain Talukdar under the Arms Act. The investigation into this alleged offence was not made by the petitioner but by the village constable Shamserkhan, who sent up the case to the Sub-Inspector by whom in turn it was committed to a Magistrate. 2. In the course of trying this alleged offence of the Talukdar's the learned Magistrate found that certain recitals in the panchnama were false. The Talukdar was discharged, the Magistrate being of opinion that the charge imputed to him was false. In that view he issued notice to the village constable , Shamserkhan to show cause why sanction for his prosecution should not be granted under Section 195 of the Criminal Procedure Code. After hearing Shamserkhan the Magistrate issued notice also ag...
Tag this Judgment!Emperor Vs. Nandbasappa Basappa
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-20-1912
Reported in: (1912)14BOMLR360
Batchelor, J.1. The petitioners here have been convicted of the offence of rioting under Section 147, Indian Penal Code, and have been sentenced each to a small fine. They apply in revision on the ground that a serious illegality was committed by the learned Second Class Magistrate, before whom this trial was heard. Fortunately-there is no dispute as to the facts under, lying this contention. These facts are: that after the petitioners had been called upon to open their defence several witnesses were called by them. Eight of those witnesses' depositions were recorded by the learned Magistrate, though in regard to six of them, it is clear, that their story has been seriously abbreviated, possibly mutilated. However that may be, when the Magistrate had exhausted these witnesses, it would seem that he had also exhausted his own patience. For, concerning five other witnesses, who remained to be examined, he writes only: ' all these people repeat the defence story; I shall dispense with the...
Tag this Judgment!Jadu Lal Sahu Vs. Maharani Janki Koer
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-20-1912
Reported in: (1912)14BOMLR436
Ameer Ali, J.1. The suit out of which this appeal arises was brought by the plaintiff-respondent to establish her right of pre-emption in respect of certain undivided shares in a number of villages comprised in Mahal Motihari, situated in the district of Champaran.2. The shares in question belonged to a Mahommedan lady named Barkatunnissa, the first defendant to this action, who sold the same to the Sahu defendants by a deed of sale dated the 28th of July 1904. Barkatunnissa owned an interest in twenty-four out of the thirty-one villages comprised in the Mahal, whilst the plaintiff possesses shares in eighteen. The vendors had admittedly no proprietary interest in Mahal Motihari prior to their purchase from Barkatunnissa.3. The plaintiff claims that as a co-sharer in the Mahal she is entitled to the right of pre-emption in respect of the shares sold to the Sahus by the first defendant.4. Champaran appears to have been part of the Civil Division of Saran until sometime after the institu...
Tag this Judgment!Dosabhai Bezanji Motivala Vs. the Special Officer
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-20-1912
Reported in: (1912)14BOMLR592
Batchelor, J.1. This is an appeal under the Land Acquisition Act, and the question really to be decided is whether after the Collector under the Act has made the enquiry prescribed by the Act, and has reached his own conclusion as to the amount of compensation to be awarded to the claimant, that conclusion can be set aside by the Government, and Government can direct the Collector to substitute a smaller amount than that which, as the result of his enquiry, he had determined to offer. In my opinion the question must be answered in the negative.2. It arises in the following state of facts. Some 1798 acres of Khajan land were decided to be acquired under the Act. The present appellant before us is concerned with 131805 those acres, the balance belonging to another claimant, who has preferred a similar appeal.3. The Resolution of Government directing the publication of the Notification for the acquisition of this land is numbered 12104, and is dated the 22nd December 1906. By that Resolut...
Tag this Judgment!The Ahmedabad United Printing and C. Co. Vs. Ardeshir Kavasji
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-20-1912
Reported in: (1912)14BOMLR644
Basil Scott, Kt., C.J.1. This is a suit upon a mortgage executed on the the of April 1899 purporting to be between Ardeshir Kavasji, Manager of the firm Kavasji Mancherji and Sons, at Ahmedabad, and Ranchodlal Gangaram, Manager of the United Printing and General Agency Co. Ltd., who are the plaintiffs in this case.2. The document is attested amongst other attesting witnesses by Eruchsha Kavasji, brother of Ardeshir, the executing party. Kavasji Mancherji, whose name is mentioned as that of the family firm, had three sons, Ardeshir, Phirozsha, and Eruchsha; and it is not disputed that the money was raised from the mortgagee for the purpose of paying off a judgment-creditor who had attached one of the family properties.3. The learned Subordinate Judge holds that at the time of the mortgage it is satisfactorily proved, upon the admissions of Eruchsha, that Ardeshir was in the vahivat of the estate of Kavasji Muncherji on behalf of Eruchsha and Phirozsha and with, their consent, and that t...
Tag this Judgment!Motilal Chunilal Vs. Thakorlal Chimanlal
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-20-1912
Reported in: (1912)14BOMLR648
Russell, J.1. This suit was brought by the Liquidator of the Narmada Cotton Seed Crushing Co., Ltd., against the defendant Motilal Chunilal to recover calls upon ten shares in that Company of Rs. 100 each. The first question that arises is: Is the defendant a member of the Company By Section 45 of the Indian Companies Act members are (a) subscribers of the Memorandum of Association ; (b) every other person who has agreed with a Company under this Act to become a member of such Company, and whose name is entered on the register of members. The defendant's name was entered on the register of members, so this condition precedent has been complied with : see Tufnell & Ponsonby's case (1885) 29 Ch. D. 421. Did he agree to become a member That is a question of fact (Fry J. in Winstone's case) (1879) 12 Ch. D. 239. The evidence of the defendant is to this effect. He knew Girdharlal pleader who was the agent of the Company and who asked defendant to take ten shares in it, and the defendant sig...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »