Mumbai Court November 1916 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.
Narotam Morarji Gokuldas Vs. the Indian Specie Bank
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-17-1916
Reported in: AIR1916Bom132; (1917)19BOMLR186
Macleod, J.1. The first plaintiff was the owner of 161 shares in the Indian Specie Bank which were held for him in the names of the 2nd, 3rd and 4th plaintiffs. In April 1913, as he was leaving for Europe he directed the 2nd plaintiff', his Secretary, to sell the shares. He had only receipts for the certificates which had remained with the Bank ever since the shares had been bought in 1910. On the 17th May, the 2nd plaintiff took these receipts with blank transfers duly signed to Chunilal, the Managing Director of the Bank and asked him to sell the shares. It was part of the Bank's business to sell shares for their customers and a Register was kept of securities handed to the Bank for sale. Chunilal said the Bank would sell the shares and asked 2nd plaintiff to come back in a few days. On the 22nd May, he went to the Bank and was told the shares had been sold at Rs. 66 and was paid Rs. 6000 on account for which he passed a receipt. He was asked to come back in a few days when the accou...
Maharaja Ram Narayan Singh Vs. Adhindra Nath Mukerji
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-16-1916
Reported in: (1917)19BOMLR194
Parker, J.1. This is the rehearing of an appeal from the High Court at Calcutta, dated the 30th August, 1911 which set aside a preliminary decree of the Subordinate Judge and remitted the case to the Court of the Subordinate Judge to be dealt with in accordance with certain directions contained in the judgment of the High Court. At the original hearing the present respondents did not appear and the appellant obtained an order setting aside the decree of the High Court at Calcutta and dismissing the action in which the appeal arose. Subsequently the repondents obtained an order of His Majesty discharging the order thus made, on the ground that it was by the fraud of his agent that he was not represented by counsel at the hearing and directing the appeal to be reheard, the costs thrown away to be dealt with upon such rehearing. The appeal has accordingly been reheard before their Lordships, who have had the advantage of hearing counsel on both sides.2. The facts out of which this action ...
The Phoenix Mills Ltd. Vs. Madhavdas Rupchand
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-16-1916
Reported in: (1922)24BOMLR142
Macleod, J.1. On the 18th of September 1913, the Phoenix Mills, Limited, the plaintiffs in this suit, entered into a contract with Madhavdas Rupchand & Co., for the purchase and sale of certain bales of yarn. Madhavdas Rupchand & Co., the defendants in the suit, signed a memorandum of sale which contains a number of printed terms, while the number of bales, the price, the method and time of delivery are entered in manuscript. The memorandum of sale was confirmed on behalf of the plaintiffs by a letter of the same date signed by the agents No. 1 of the printed terms is as follows :-We (i.e. the defendants) agree to pay for the bales in advance at the time of taking delivery order for the bales, and to take delivery of them from time to time as they are ready (the date of the bales that are ready to be ascertained by us by inquiring at the Company's office), but if we fan to take delivery of the bales as stipulated, we agree to pay interest at the rate of 12 annas percent per mensem, on ...
D.T. Keymer Vs. P. Viswanatham Reddi
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-14-1916
Reported in: (1917)19BOMLR206
Buckmaster, Chancellor1. This case raises only a short question, but admittedly it is one of wide and general importance. It is for that reason that the Board departed from their usual course and permitted Sir Rbert Finlay to resume his argument after it had been concluded and his junior had addressed the Board. After having given full consideration to the arguments urged both by him and by his junior, the Board find themselves unable to accede to his contention.2. The history of the case is this : The appellant was originally plaintiff in a suit brought by him in this country against the respondent. In that suit he claimed a sum of 425 17s. 2d., which he said was due to him from the respondent in these circumstances: The plaintiff is an Indian merchant carrying on business in London. The defendant, he alleged, was a member of a certain firm of traders who traded in Madras. The plaintiff asserted that he had entered into an arrangement with the firm, of which the defendant was a member...
Maung Tun Tha Vs. Ma Thit
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-13-1916
Reported in: (1917)19BOMLR294
Buckmaster, Chancellor1. The appellant in this case is the plaintiff in certain proceedings which were instituted in the District Court at That on, by which he claimed to have one-' fourth share of the estate of his father determined and allotted to him. The claim is stated quite clearly and with commendable brevity, in the plaint, which sets out allegations which are no longer in dispute, namely, that the plaintiff was the eldest son of his father; that his father died on the 19th December, 1906, intestate and left a widow and certain other sons and daughters him surviving.2. The ground upon which that claim was resisted depended in the main upon an allegation that the plaintiff had behaved in an unfilial and illegal way, and, consequently, had forfeited his rights. That defence was disposed of by the learned Judge who heard the cause, who, although he appears to have been greatly embarrassed by the untrustworthiness of the evidence before him, decided that the defendant had not estab...
Abdul Latiff and Shaik HossaIn Vs. Pauling and Co. Ld.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-09-1916
Reported in: AIR1916Bom140; (1917)19BOMLR167
Kemp, J.1. Plaintiff's suit is for damages sustained by his motor oar which on or about midnight on 3rd June 1915 was being driven from Panvel to Mumbra on the Poona-Bombay road and at he railway crossing near Mumbra, shown on the plan mark Ex. No. 1, was forced by the sudden appearance of an engine and trucks crossing the road to swerve into a heap of stones on the left of the road. The locality as well as the spot of the accident is clearly indicated on the plan which, therefore, renders it unnecessary to give any further description of the place. The defendants are contractors who were at this time carrying out the work for the G.I.P. Railway of removing the spoil from the tunnel shown on the left of the Poona-Bombay road and dumping it down on the bank at the down side of the Mumbra creek bridge. For this purpose, two lines marked on the plan in blue ink had been laid down by the Railway Company, the line on the Bombay side of this railway line being known as the main line and the ...
Emperor Vs. Bal Gangadhar Tilak
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-09-1916
Reported in: (1917)19BOMLR211
Batchelor, J.1. This is an application by Mr. Bal Gangadhar Tilak praying this Court to revise an order made by the District Magistrate of Poona under Section 108 and the following sections of the Criminal Procedure Code.2. The order complained of directs that the applicant do enter into a bond in a sum of Rs. 20,000 with two sureties each in a sum of Rs. 10,000 to he of good behaviour for a period of one year. The ground of the order was that in the learned District Magistrate's opinion the applicant disseminated seditious matter in the three speeches which are now upon the record.3. These speeches were admittedly made by Mr. Tilak. They were made in the Marathi language, but the translations be-fore us are, it is admitted, substantially correct and in my view nothing turns upon certain small niceties of expression in which the defence suggest that the official translation contains slightly harsher words than the Marathi warrants. Thus the only question is, whether in the three speech...
Birdichand Jivraj Vs. the Standard Bank Limited
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-09-1916
Reported in: (1918)ILR42Bom159
Basil Scott, C.J.1. The question in this appeal is as to the liability of the defendant in respect of certain loans granted by the respondents on a security of shares of the Indian Specie Bank which were not fully paid and upon which on liquidation of that Bank a large liability in respect of the calls has resulted. It is conceded on behalf of the appellant that no question was raised in the lower Court either in the issues or the argument disputing the liability of the first defendant to indemnify the plaintiffs against the liability incurred by them as contributories in respect of the said shares in the winding up. And it is stated that it was not realized in the lower Court that the liability of the first defendant can be successfully disputed upon legal grounds.2. The question is one of great importance as may be seen from the decree which provides for a sum aggregating Rs. 1,72,200 in respect of calls already paid in the liquidation and there is a further decree against the first ...
Bal Gangadhar Tilak Vs. Emperor
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-09-1916
Reported in: AIR1916Bom9; 39Ind.Cas.807
Batchlor, J.1. This is an application by Mr. Bal Gangadhar Tilak, praying this Court to revise an order made by the District Magistrate of Poona under Section 108 and the following setions of the Criminal Procedure Code.2. The under complained of directs that the applicant do enter into a bond in a sum of Rs. 20,000 with two sureties each in haviour for a period of one year. The ground of the order was that in the learned District Magistrate's opinion the applicant disseminated seditious matter in the three speeches which are now upon the record.3. These speeches were admittedly made by Mr. Tilak. They were made in the Marathi language, but the translations before us are, it is admitted, substantially correct, and in my view nothing turns upon certain small niceties of expression in which the defence suggest that the official translation contains slightly harsher words than the Marathi warrants. Thus the only question is, whether in the three speeches the applicant is proved to have ex...
Lakhamsey Ladha and Co. Vs. Lakshmichand Padamsey
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-05-1916
Reported in: AIR1917Bom152; (1918)ILR42Bom205
Basil Scott, C.J.1. The plaintiffs are up-country cotton merchants who consign cotton to Bombay for sale. Damji Hirji & Co. were, until the 29th of September 1913, their usual consignees and agents for sale in Bombay.2. The plaintiffs, as the correspondence shows, frequently called upon Damji Hirji & Co. to remit money to them in large sums the security being the plaintiffs' cotton in their hands.3. Damji Hirji & Co. used to raise money by pledge of this cotton to the 3rd defendants' firm.4. On the 29th of September 1913, the 3rd defendants or persons claiming under them held 757 bales of the plaintiffs' cotton against which advances had been made to Damji Hirji & Co.5. The accounts between the plaintiffs and Damji Hirji & Co. at that time showed a balance of Rs. 50,000 owing to Damji Hirji & Co. but on the other hand Damji Hirji & Co. had to account to the plaintiffs for the 757 bales.6. The 3rd defendants' advances against these bales amount to Rs. 83,000 or thereabouts.7. The contes...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »