Mumbai Court December 1917 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.
Apuji Ramchandra Kulkarni Vs. Guja Mhadu Dhangar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-04-1917
Reported in: (1918)20BOMLR164
Shah, J.1. The facts, which have given rise to this second appeal are briefly these : one Dhondibai on behalf of her minor sons sued in 1897 to redeem a mortgage of the year 1859 in respect of the land in dispute. In that litigation a decree was passed by the Special Judge under the Dekkhan Agriculturists' Relief Act on the 8th April 1899 the material portion of which is as follows:-'I set aside the decree of the lower Court and order that plaintiff do pay to the defendant Rs. 99 in payment of the mortgage-debt in respect of the land referred to in the plaint. Defendant do forthwith give possession of the land in dispute to the plaintiff. Plaintiff do pay Rs. 99 to the defendant by annual instalments of Rs. 25 each... Plaintiff should pay the assessment of the land and take the profit. If any threo instalments remain unpaid, defendant should recover the amount remaining due by sale (after obtaining the Court's permission for sale) of the mortgaged property or a sufficient portion there...
Bapuji Ramchandra Kulkarni Vs. Guja Malu Dhangar and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-04-1917
Reported in: (1918)ILR42Bom246
Shah, J.1. The facts, which have given rise to this second appeal are briefly these: one Dhondibai on behalf of her minor sons sued in 1897 to redeem a mortgage of the year 1859 in respect of the land in dispute, in that litigation a decree was passed by the Special Judge under the Dekkhan Agriculturists' Relief Act on the 8th April 1899 the material portion of which is as follows: 'I set aside the decree of the lower Court and order that plaintiff do pay to the defendant Rs. 99 in payment of the mortgage-debt in respect of the land referred to in the plaint. Defendant do forthwith give possession of the land in dispute to the plaintiff. Plaintiff do pay Rs. 99 to the defendant by annual instalments of Rs. 25 each....Plaintiff should pay the assessment of the land and take the profit. If any three instalments remain unpaid, defendant should recover the amount remaining due by sale (after obtaining the Court's permission for sale) of the mortgaged property or a sufficient portion thereo...
Bapuji Ramchandra Kulkarni Vs. Guja Mhadu Dhangar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-04-1917
Reported in: 44Ind.Cas.908
Shah, J.1. The facts, which have given rise to this second appeal, are briefly these: One Dhondibai on behalf of her minor sons sued in 1897 to redeem a mortgage of the year 1859 in respect of the land in dispute. In that litigation a decree was passed by the Special Judge under the Dekkhan Agriculturists Relief Act on the 8th April 1899, the material portion of which is as follows: 'I set aside the decree of the lower Court and order that plaintiff do pay to the defendant Rs. 99 in payment of the mortgage debt in respect of the land referred to in the plaint. Defendant do forthwith give possession of the land in dispute to the plaintiff. Plaintiff do pay Rs. 99 to the defendant by annual instalments of Rs. 25 each...Plaintiff should pay the assessment of the land and take the profit. II any three instalments remain unpaid, defendant should recover the amount remaining due by sale (after obtaining the Court's permission for sale) of the mortgagee property or a sufficient portion thereo...
Laxmibai Vs. Radhabai
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-03-1917
Reported in: AIR1917Bom18; (1918)20BOMLR905; 47Ind.Cas.762
Basil Scott, Kt., C.J.1. This suit was filed by the widow of Dhaku Sakharara against the defendant claiming to be entitled to sole possession and enjoyment of the estate of the deceased during her life-time, subject only to a right of maintenance of the defendant. It was alleged by the plaintiff that the defendant was a woman living with the deceased who was not entitled to the rights of a Hindu wife, and that on the death of the deceased she was only entitled to maintenance out of the property until she formed some other connection. The prayer was that it might be declared that according to the custom of the community the defendant was only entitled to provision being made for her maintenance out of the estate of the deceased; that the plaintiff was solely entitled as a Hindu widow; that the defendant might be ordered to discover and hand over to the plaintiff the property now in her possession or power belonging to the estate of the deceased including the title deeds of the Panvel pr...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›