Mumbai Court February 1916 Judgments
The Municipality of Belgaum Vs. Rudrappa Subrao Sutar and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-29-1916
Reported in: AIR1916Bom196(1); (1916)ILR40Bom509
Batchelor, J.1. In the case of Chunilal Virchand v. Ahmedabad Municipality (1911) 36 Bom 47 it has been decided by a Bench of this Court that no appeal lies from the decision of a District Court under Clause (3) of Section 160 of the Bombay District Municipalities Act. The object of this application is to obtain from the Court a decision that although no appeal would lie, yet an application in revision does lie. Such a decision would, in our opinion, be seriously anomalous, and we do not think that the words of the Statute require us to make such a pronouncement. The only decision which seems to us fairly consistent with that already recorded in Chunilal Virchand's case, (1911) 36 Bom. 47 is the decision that no application for revision is competent. In Balaji Sakharam v. Merwanji Nowroji (1895) 21 Bom. 279 this Court has held that it has no jurisdiction to revise the order of a District Judge acting under Section 23 of the Bombay District Municipalities Act of 1884. And although the w...
Tag this Judgment!The Municipality of Belgaum Vs. Rudrappa Subrao Sutar and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-29-1916
Reported in: 34Ind.Cas.21
1. In the case of Chunilal Virchand v. Ahmedabad Municipality 12 Ind. Cas. 540 : 13 Bom. L.R. 958 : 36 B. 47 it has been decided by a Bench of this Court that no appeal lies from the decision of a District Court under Clause (3) of Section 160 of the Bombay District Municipalities Act. The object of this application is to obtain from the Court a decision that although no appeal would lie, yet an application in revision does lie. Such a decision would, in our opinion, be, seriously anomalous, and we do not think that the words of the Statute require us to make such a pronouncement. The only decision which seems to us fairly consistent with that already recorded in Chunilal Virchand's case 12 Ind. Cas. 540 : 13 Bom. L.R. 958 : 36 B. 47 is the decision that no application for revision is competent. In Balaji Sahharam v. Menvanji Nowroji 21 B. 279 this Court has held that it has no jurisdiction to revise the order of a District Judge acting under Section 23 of the Bombay District Municipal...
Tag this Judgment!Kashinath Vinayak Barve Vs. Rama Daji Kale
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-28-1916
Reported in: AIR1916Bom99; (1916)ILR40Bom492
Batchelor, J.1. We are obliged to the learned pleaders who, as amici curice, have assisted us with their arguments in this case.2. This is a reference under Order XLVI, Rule 1, from the learned District Judge of Ahmednagar, and the question, which is propounded to this Court, is in the learned Judge's words this, whether a decree holder for sale upon a mortgage, in default of payment of instalments ordered under Section 15B (1) of the Dekkhan Agriculturists' Relief Act, must apply under Order XXXIV, Rule 5(2) of the Civil Procedure Code to make the decree final before he can apply for sale of the necessary portion of the property under Section 15B (2) of the 'Dekkhan Agriculturists' Relief Act.3. In my opinion the answer should be in the negative.4. It is true that by Section 74 of the Dekkhan Agriculturists' Relief Act it' is provided that, except in so far as the Civil Procedure Code is inconsistent with that Act, the Code shall apply in all suits and proceedings before Subordinate J...
Tag this Judgment!Sayad Amir Saheb Valad Sayad Saidumia Kadri and ors. Vs. Shekh Masleud ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-28-1916
Reported in: (1916)ILR40Bom541
Basil Scott, C.J.1. The plaintiffs who are the present appellants instituted a suit under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure for the administration and management of certain religious wakf property. The learned District Judge after an investigation found certain of the trustees liable for certain sums. The fourth trustee way found liable only in respect of certain costs, but he was not found to be a defaulting trustee. In providing for the appointment of new trustees, the learned District Judge has included the fourth defendant as one of the trustees. That is substantially the ground of the plaintiffs' appeal to this Court, but it does not appear to us that there is any such blame attaching to the fourth defendant upon the finding of the lower Court as should induce us to hold that he is not a fit and proper person to be a trustee under the new scheme. The appeal, therefore, must be dismissed.2. That, however, is not the only question which we have to determine now for it appear...
Tag this Judgment!Sayad AmIn Saheb and ors. Vs. Sheikh MasleudIn and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-28-1916
Reported in: AIR1916Bom150; 37Ind.Cas.186
1. The plaintiffs, who are the present appellants, instituted a suit under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure for the administration and management of certain religious wakf property. The learned District Judge after an investigation found certain of the trustees liable for certain sums. The 4th trustee was found liable only in respect of certain costs, but he was not found to be a defaulting trustee. In providing for the appointment of new trustees, the learned District Judge has included the 4th defendant as one of the trustees. That is substantially the ground of the plaintiffs' appeal to this Court, but it does not appear to us that there is any such blame attaching to the 4th defendant upon the finding of the lower Court as should induce us to bold that he is not a fit and proper person to be a trustee under the new scheme. The appeal, therefore, must be dismissed.2. That, however, is not the only question which we have to determine now, for it appears upon certain informat...
Tag this Judgment!Kashinath Vinayak Bhave Vs. Rama Daji Kale
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-28-1916
Reported in: 37Ind.Cas.255
1. We are obliged to the learned Pleaders who, as amici curiae, have assisted us with their arguments in this case.2. This is a reference under Order XLVI, Rule 1, from the learned District Judge of Ahmednagar, and the question, which is propounded to this Court, is in the learned Judge's words this: whether a holder of a decree for sale upon a mortgage, in default of payment of instalments ordered under Section 15(b)(1) of the Dekkhan Agriculturists' Relief Act, must apply under Order XXXIV, Rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Code, to make the decree final before he can apply for sale of the necessary portion of the property under Section 15(b)(2) of the Dekkhan Agriculturists' Relief Act.3. In my opinion the answer should be in the negative.4. It is true that by Section 74 of the Dekkhan Agriculturists' Relief Act it is provided that, except in so far as the Civil Procedure Code is inconsistent with that Act, the Code shall apply in all suits and proceedings before Subordinate Judges unde...
Tag this Judgment!Dundappa Mallappa Sigandhi and ors. Vs. Secretary of State for India a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-23-1916
Reported in: AIR1916Bom188; 37Ind.Cas.363
Batchelor, J.1. This appeal is brought by the plaintiffs in the suit. They sued as representatives of the Lingayat community of the town of Athni, and the object of their suit was to obtain a declaration of their right to exhibit in public their religious emblem known as the Vyasantol.2. The learned District Judge has decided against them because he has upheld the validity of a certain contested order of Government, viz. Government Resolution, Judicial Department, No. 2568 of the 6th May 1911.Resolution The Lingayats of Athni in the Belgaum District pray for permission, under Section 44 (1) of the District Police Act (Bombay Act IV of 1890), to parade the Vyasantol procession through, certain streets of the town of Athni on the occasion of the visit of their High Priest, the Swami of Chitaldurg. The procession is intended to do honour to him and to show the respect and reverence with which his followers regard him.2. The main points requiring consideration under Section 44 (1) of the D...
Tag this Judgment!Abdullabhai Lalji and anr. Vs. the Executive Committee
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-23-1916
Reported in: AIR1916Bom298; 34Ind.Cas.141
Basil Scott, C.J.1. This is a reference under Section 8 of the Aden Act II of 1864 for the decision by this Court of the following questions:1. Whether the lower Court (i.e., of the Assistant Resident) did not act irregularly and illegally in declining to hear the plaintiffs' case as a whole and raising a certain preliminary issue and deciding the same without taking any evidence as to the merits of the case.2. Whether the decision of the lower Court on the said issue was not erroneous. And3. Whether the lower Court was not wrong in dismissing the plaintiffs' suit.2. The nature of the plaintiffs' suit and the circumstances under which the preliminary issue, the subject of the reference, was raised are stated in the judgment of the Assistant Resident as follows:The plaintiffs, in 1909, obtained a lease from Government of certain lands in the Sheikh Othman District of Aden for the purpose of constructing salt works thereon and the manufacture of salt therein. The plaintiffs pay a rent of...
Tag this Judgment!Aba Waku Gondhali Vs. Emperor
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-21-1916
Reported in: AIR1916Bom260; 33Ind.Cas.642
Batchelor, J.1. The applicant has been convicted under Section 65 of the Bombay District Police Act IV of 1890 and the offence imputed to him was a breach of Rule No. 35 framed under Section 39A of the Act of 1890. That rule provides in substance that subject to the provisions of Rule 33 no person shall without a license hold any public performance of a stage play. What the accused is found to have done is this. He paid a sum of Rs. 10 to certain strolling actors in consideration of a performance to be given by them, the accused having the privilege of selling all the tickets and making such profit as he could out of the transaction. It is not alleged that the accused took any personal part in the performance itself. The question is, whether his acts fall under the prohibition of Section 65. The learned first class Magistrate held in the affirmative, because he says that the penultimate clause of Rule 33 clearly shows that persons assisting in the performance are equally responsible, t...
Tag this Judgment!Wilfred R. Padgett Vs. Jamshetji Hormusji Chothia
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-20-1916
Reported in: AIR1916Bom193; (1917)ILR41Bom390
Macleod, J.1. Between the 2nd April 1913 and the 14th August 1913 the defendant signed five promissory notes for various amounts payable on demand with interest at 6 per cent in favour of Messrs. Bume and Reif. Deducting various payments made from time to time there remained due for principal and interest, when the suit was filed, Rs. 15,017-8-11.2. When war broke out between Great Britain and Austria the firm of Bume and Reif became a hostile firm.3. On the 9th February 1915, a license was granted to the firm of Bume and Reif on the application of W.R. Padgett, Assistant Manager of the firm, under the Hostile Foreigners' Trading Order to carry on business under certain conditions. The license was to remain in force until the 14th August 1915.4. On the 15th August 1915, a fresh license was granted to the firm for the purpose of winding up their business which expired on the 14th November, and, on the 17th January 1916, it was notified in the Gazette that an extension after that date ha...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »