Mumbai Court October 1914 Judgments
Jhandhu Vs. Tariff
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-23-1914
Reported in: (1915)17BOMLR44
Dunedin, J.1. One Sukhram was an owner of property and died. He left behind him a lady named Musammat Imirti, who was supposed to be his legal widow, having been married in the Karao form of marriage. If she was his legal widow she was entitled to the life enjoyment of the property which Sukhram left2. In 1904 four persons called Kehri, Kallu, Nihal, and Mir Singh raised an action against this lady alleging that they were the representatives of Sukhram. They further alleged that she was not a legal widow at all, and that accordingly they were entitled to possession of Sukhram's property. They were cast in that action because they failed to produce a proper pedigree which showed that they were in the degree of relationship which would entitle them to succeed even if their allegations against the lady were true.3. The present plaintiff is a person of the name of Jhandu who, admittedly, in the pedigree is one degree further off from Sukhram than Mir Singh, who is still alive. He raised th...
Tag this Judgment!Seth Ramlal Vs. Narsingdas
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-22-1914
Reported in: (1915)17BOMLR404
Dunedin, J.1. The claim in the present suit arises out of the following circumstances :-Two parties were interested in property which they held in partnership, and one of them, called Lakhmichand, brought a partition suit against his partner, Bhajanlal, following on a dissolution of the partnership in which the Court gave effect to a compromise which the two parties themselves had effected. The judgment which was pronounced by the Court in that case is to be found at page 29 of the Record. There had been a mortgage granted by Bhajanlal in favour of a person called Narsingdas, and that mortgage purported to convey, as security for the debt which was thereby constituted, the whole of the partnership property.2. It was a moot point, however, between the partners as to whether the partner, who executed that mortgage, had, in truth, any right to subject the whole of the partnership property to the debt, or whether he was not in fact only able to burden his own share. This being so, one of t...
Tag this Judgment!The Secretary of State for India in Council Vs. Sri Raja Kirtibas Bhup ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-21-1914
Reported in: (1915)17BOMLR32
Ameer Ali, J.1. The plaintiffs in the two actions which have given rise to the present appeals are respectively the Zemindars of Sukinda and Madhupur in the Province of Orissa, and the question for determination relates to certain lands included in their estates in respect of which the defendant, the Secretary of State for India in Council, claims to exercise the right of resumption and assessment by virtue of the provisions of Act VI of 1870 of the Bengal Council.2. The facts of the two cases are set out with great clearness in the judgments of the High Court of Bengal, and do not, therefore, require a detailed statement. Their Lordships propose to give only a brief sketch of the circumstances which have culminated in the present litigation.3. It appears that the predecessors of the two plaintiffs had been in possession of their estates from a time long anterior to the establishment of British power in that part of the country. The origin of their title under British rule is intimatel...
Tag this Judgment!Chanmalswami Rudraswami Vs. Gangadharappa Baslingappa
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-15-1914
Reported in: AIR1914Bom149; (1914)16BOMLR954
Beaman, J.1. We think that in the present state of the authorities, the general question, what is and what is not a preliminary decree, needs to be considered by a Full Bench. We are sensible of the difficulty of stating the question in a sufficiently clear cut and definite form. But this Court appears to have held that decisions on various points are preliminary decrees, and we feel grave doubts not only whether the particular decisions are right, but much more, whether the reason under pin? them is not capable of extension so as to cover trial Court's ruling; upon every dispute 1 point arising a ruling the trial. I find for example that was myse1fa Party to a ruling of this Court in Sidhannth v. Ganesk (1) which certainly seems to have held that the finding of an original Court upon Seaman points : (1912)14BOMLR916 Misjoinder, Civil Application No. 21 of Limitation (1913) decided on the 9th April 1914 Jurisdiction was in each case a preliminary decree. Upon further reflection, a care...
Tag this Judgment!Blanche Somerset Taylor Vs. Charles George Bleach
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-07-1914
Reported in: AIR1915Bom50; (1915)17BOMLR56
Basil Scott, C.J.1. These are cross appeals from an order of the District Judge of Poona awarding a lump sum of Rs. 5,000 to be paid to the petitioner for permanent maintenance under Section 37 of the Indian Divorce Act IV of 1869. The petitioner appeals on the ground that the sum awarded is not sufficient and that the Court should have secured to her a sum the interest of which would secure her at least Rs. 150 per mensem. The respondent appeals on the ground that the Court has no power to award payment of a lump sum and that if it had the power the sum awarded is excessive.2. First, as to the power of the Court to award payment of a lump sum.3. The material clause of Section 37 of the Divorce Act is the third. It gives the Court power to 'order that the husband shall, to the satisfaction of the Court, secure to the wife such gross sum of money, or such annual sum of money for any term not exceeding her own life, as having regard' etc.4. As the sentence is punctuated in the State publ...
Tag this Judgment!Miss Blanche Somerset Taylor Vs. Charles George Bleach
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-07-1914
Reported in: (1915)ILR39Bom182
Basil Scott, Kt., C.J.1. Those are cross appeals from an order of the District Judge of Poona awarding a lump sum of Rs. 5,000 to be paid to the petitioner for permanent maintenance under Section 37 of the Indian Divorce Act IV of 1809. The petitioner appeals on the ground that the sum awarded is not sufficient and that, the Court should Lave secured to her a sum the interest of which would secure her at least Rs. 150 per mensem. The respondent appeals on the ground that the Court has no power to award payment of a lump sum and that if it had the power the sum awarded is excessive.2. First, as to the power of the Court to award payment of a lump sum.3. The material clause of Section 37 of the Divorce Act is the third. It gives the Court power to 'order that the husband shall, to the satisfaction of the Court, secure to the wife such gross sum of money, or such annual sum of money for any term not exceeding her own life, as having regard' etc.4. As the sentence is punctuated in the stat...
Tag this Judgment!Balaram Vithalchand Gujar Vs. Maruti Devji Dubal
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-05-1914
Reported in: AIR1915Bom40; (1915)17BOMLR178
Basil Scott, Kt., C.J.1. On the 29th of July 1884, a decree was passed in favour of one Naro upon a compromise, and according to its terms, certain instalments were payable, and upon default, as provided in the decree, the judgment-creditor was entitled to claim possession of a share or shares in certain property. Default having been made in 1892, the judgment-creditor became entitled to apply for possession and he, therefore, made an application for execution of the decree. In 1898 he died, and the execution proceedings were carried on thereafter by his brother as his representative. In March 1902, that brother died leaving the present appellants, his minor sons. On the 27th of June 1902, by their guardian or next friend, they applied to be brought on the record as representing their father for the purpose of continuing the execution proceedings, and in September 1902, their application was rejected, and the original application for execution which had been instituted by Naro was stru...
Tag this Judgment!Kashinath Parashram Gadgil Vs. Gourabai Mallappa Warad
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-03-1914
Reported in: AIR1915Bom18; (1915)17BOMLR169
Beaman, J.1. Owing to the position taken up by Banks and Limited liability Companies difficulties were experienced in cases in which joint Hindu families had invested part of their joint funds in the shares of such Banks and Companies. Shares had to stand in the name of one member of the family. He might or might not be the general manager. But, on his death, these portions of the joint family wealth could not be realized by the survivors without either getting probate of a will or letters of administration to the deceased member in whose name they stood. This has led in practice to a great deal of theoretical absurdity. Wills admittedly made by members of a joint Hindu family purporting to dispose, as of self-acquired property, of joint family property in favour of the survivors, have been solemnly propounded. Probate has seemingly been given as a matter of course. In this way the funds of the joint family invested in the shares of Companies have been obtained by the survivors. But th...
Tag this Judgment!Emperor Vs. Gana Krishna Walunj
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-02-1914
Reported in: AIR1914Bom258; (1914)16BOMLR939
Heaton, J.1. In this case, as disposed of by the Magistrate, three persons were convicted of the offence of hurt under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code. One was sentenced to a fine of Rs. 100, the other two to a fine of Rs. 50 each. The one on whom the appealable sentence was imposed appealed, and the conviction was reversed on the ground that the offence had been compounded. We hold that the Sessions Judge very properly sent the case to us, submitting that the con victions of the accused of the two non-appealable sentences may also be set aside.2. We have not of course it is not usual to have the explanation of the Magistrate for his proceedings, and in the absence of any expiation I confess I do not understand them and find difficulty in dealing with them. There no doubt whatever that the complainant and the accused put in before Z Magistrate a writing signed by them in which the complainant states that she does not wish to proceed and that the case has been compounded. There is ...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Visa Samta
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-01-1914
Reported in: AIR1914Bom225(1); (1914)16BOMLR951
Heaton, J.1. In this case the Talati of a certain village on behalf of the Talukdar brought a complaint of theft against one of the tenants of the Talukdar in respect of some fallen trees which the tenant had cut down and taken. The trying In re Magistrate disposed of the matter in favour of the accused so far as the matter of the offence went. But he ordered the property (the wood) to be restored to the complainant. The matter came before the District Magistrate with reference to this order about the property. The District Magistrate at first said :-'In these circumstances I think it would have a salutary effect if I directed that the wood be sold and the proceeds credited in the Treasury as a criminal deposit to be paid to such one of the parties who shall bring either a decree of a competent Court or a consent of all the other parties.' However, he did not give effect to this intention. He had the matter argued before him, and then he decided, as appears from this part of his judgme...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›