Mumbai Court January 1918 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.
Emperor Vs. Ambirsaheb Balamiya Patil
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-24-1918
Reported in: (1918)20BOMLR384
Shah, J.1. The accused in this case has been convicted under Section 25, Clause (i), of the Indian Forest Act (VII of 1878). He is found to have successfully tracked and shot a tiger without a license in a reserved forest to which the rules made by the Local Government under Section 25(i) and Section 31, Clause (j) have been duly applied.2. The case for the accused was that some of his cattle were killed by a tiger and that with a view to prevent further injury to his property he wanted to trace the tiger in the forest. Both the lower Courts have proceeded on the assumption that the accused's cattle were killed by a tiger ; and from the arguments before us, it is clear that the accused's cattle were killed by a tiger and that his object in going to the forest and shooting the tiger was to prevent further injury to his property.3. In dealing with the question of self-defence, the learned Magistrate in appeal seems to me to have taken a somewhat narrow view of its scope. It may be, as th...
Bhausing Walad Ragho Vs. Chaganiram Hurchand
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-24-1918
Reported in: (1918)ILR42Bom363
Beaman, J.1. I think it necessary to express my own emphatic opinion that an application of this kind is not within the scope or intention of Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code. Nor does that section confer upon us jurisdiction to deal with errors of this kind. I think it is very clear that that section is intended to empower Courts to deal with their own decrees and orders and was not intended to give authority to superior Courts by way of conferring supplemental jurisdiction to that conferred by Section 115. But I think that this is a good case under Section 115. What has happened is very clear. The trial Court held that the present applicant was not an agriculturist on the ground that the question was res judicata. On appeal, the learned Judge held that the question was not res judicata and remanded the case under Order XLI, Rule 23. Of that there can be no doubt whatever. Where that happens Section 13 of the Court-Fees Act makes it compulsory upon the Court to grant the certif...
Ambirsaheb Balamiya Patil Vs. Emperor
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-24-1918
Reported in: AIR1918Bom150; 45Ind.Cas.514
Shah, J.1. The accused in this case has been convicted under Section 25, Clause (i), of the Indian Forest Act (VII of 1878). He is found to have successfully tracked and shot a tiger without a license in a reserved forest to which the rules made by the Local Government under Section 25 (i) and Section 31, Clause (j), have been duly applied.2. The case for the accused was that some of his cattle were killed by a tiger and that with a view to prevent further injury to his property he wanted to trace the tiger in the forest. Both the lower Courts have proceeded on the assumption that the accused's cattle were killed by a tiger; and from the arguments before us, it is clear that the accused's cattle were killed by a tiger and that his object in going to the forest and shooting the tiger was to prevent further injury to his property.3. In dealing with the question of self-defence, the learned Magistrate in appeal seems to me to have taken a somewhat narrow view of its scope. It may be, as t...
Venkatesh Appashet Vs. Abdul Kadir
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-23-1918
Reported in: AIR1918Bom162; (1918)20BOMLR667
Beaman, J.1. In my opinion the decree of the lower appellate Court is right and should be affirmed. The plaintiffs, trustees of a Hindu temple, have brought this suit for a declaration under Section 42 of the Specific Relief Act that they are entitled to go in procession playing music past a Mahomedan mosque. The Mahomedan defendants have never, as far as I can see, disputed their right to go in procession; but they very naturally resented the terrible noise which must have been caused by some 50 to 100 musicians playing all sorts of instruments close against their sacred edifice while they were offering their prayers. They had recourse, very properly I think, to the Police and they obtained protection under the Bombay District Police Act. The final order made by the District Magistrate under that Act, we are now told by Mr. Jinnah (counsel for the respondents), has been accepted by the majority of the Hindu inhabitants. This is evidently satisfactory. It is a great pity, I think, that...
Narso Bamaji Kulkarni Vs. Nagava Ishvarappa
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-22-1918
Reported in: (1918)20BOMLR358; 45Ind.Cas.493
Beaman, J.1. In this case one Venkaji mortgaged four survey numbers in four lots, that is to say, a quarter of each to each of four mortgagees. The learned Judge of first appeal, it is true, doubts whether these facts are proved, but it is on that footing that the appellant has argued the case and it seems to be the view most favourable to him. I shall, therefore, assume that the facts were as I am now setting them forth, and that after these four mortgages, the mortgagor executed a Rajinama in respect of each of the four survey numbers to each one of the four mortgagees, the said mortgagees in turn executing complementary Kabulayts. The effect of these as Kajinamas and Kabulayats has frequently been discussed and to more than one judgment on the subject I have been a party. The latest case, Imam v. Bhau (1917) 19 Bom. L.R 329 was decided by Scott C.J. and myself. The learned Chief Justice gave a very exhaustive analysis of the legal content of the matter then in dispute. But I am agai...
Narso Ramaji Kulkarni Vs. Nagava Kom Ishvarappa and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-22-1918
Reported in: AIR1918Bom222; (1918)ILR42Bom359
Beaman, J.1. In this case one Venkaji mortgaged four survey numbers in four lots, that is to say, a quarter of each to each of four mortgagees. The learned Judge of first appeal, it is true, doubts whether these facts are proved, but it is on that footing that the appellant has argued the case and it seems to be the view most favourable to him. I shall, therefore, assume that the facts were as I am now setting them forth and that after these four mortgages, the mortgagor executed a Rajinama in respect of each of the four survey numbers to each one of the four mortgagees, the said mortgagees in turn executing complementary Kabu-layats. The effect of these Rajinamas and Kabulayats has frequently been discussed and to more than one judgment on the subject I have been a party. The latest case, Imam valad Ibrahim v. Bhau Appaji (1917) 41 Bom. 510, was decided by Scott C. J. and myself. The learned Chief Justice gave a very exhaustive analysis of the legal content of the matter then in dispu...
Nagar Kashi Patel Vs. Bai Dhuli
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-21-1918
Reported in: AIR1918Bom225; (1918)20BOMLR342; 45Ind.Cas.577
Stanley Batchelor, Kt., Acting C.J.1. Omitting any reference to certain allegations, which are not now material, the substance of the plaint was a prayer to recover from the defendants possession of the two Survey Nos. 196 and 208 on the ground that the original owner of them was the plaintiff's brother Fakir Garbad, and that the plaintiff was both his heiress under Hindu law and his legatee under a will; that the defendants being distant cousins of Fakir Garbad took from the plaintiff a certain deed of gift, Exh. 16, in respect of these fields, but that that deed was void, and of no effect, under the terms of Section 3 of the Bhagdari and Narvadari Act (Bom. Act V of 1862). The lower Courts have decided this latter point in favour of the plaintiff, and the defendants bring the present appeal.2. Mr. Thakor on their behalf contends that Section 3 of the Bhagdari Act does not apply to such a case as we have here, where a dispute between the plaintiff and the defendants regarding their cl...
Manju Mahadev Shetti Vs. Shivappa Manju Shetti
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-21-1918
Reported in: AIR1918Bom197; (1918)20BOMLR447
Stanley Batchelor, Kt., Acting C.J.1. The facts upon which this Second Appeal comes up for decision are these. In 1883, a sum of money was deposited by the trustees of a certain temple with the father of one Manju Mahadu. In 1889, there was a demand for the return of the money, and a refusal by Manju's father. In 1897, on the occasion of another refusal, it is found that there was an oral contract of guarantee by one Manju Buddu, who undertook to repay the temple trustees in case Manju Mahadu should not do so. In 1900, the temple trustees brought a suit against both Manju Mahadu and Manju Buddu to recover the deposit. The Subordinate Judge decreed the claim both against Manju Mahadu and against Manju Buddu. From this decree an appeal was taken to the District Judge, Mr. Leggatt. But it was taken only by Manju Mahadu. The learned District Judge held that the deposit with Manju Mahadu's father was proved, but that the suit had become time-barred five years prior to its institution in 190...
Chunilal Harilal Vs. Bai Mani
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-21-1918
Reported in: AIR1918Bom165; (1918)20BOMLR660
Beaman, J.1. In my opinion the learned Judge below is wrong. Before the present Civil Procedure Code, we had no statutory definition of 'legal representative' such as is now incorporated in it. That being obviously restrictive in cases arising out of the status of members of a joint Hindu family, Section 53 has been enacted, in my opinion, expressly to enforce one recognised rule of the Hindu law, namely, that members of a joint Hindu family may not escape the payment out of the joint family property of any debt incurred and decreed against their father before his death provided that such debt is not tainted with immorality. The only possible ground upon which the respondent's argument could have been put, as far as I can see, is that Section 53 is generally descriptive and in no sense limitative. If it could be read as defining every kind of property which might in any circumstances be liable for a decreed debt of a deceased Hindu father in the hands of his descendants or sons as join...
Ganu Ramji Patil Vs. Bhau Bapuji Patil
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jan-21-1918
Reported in: AIR1918Bom145; (1918)20BOMLR684
Shah, J.1. The facts which have given rise to this appeal are briefly these :Bala and Ganu, who were originally natural brothers, and became first cousins in consequence of Ganu's adoption by their uncle, and each of whom was entitled to a moiety of certain property, purported to sell the property to one Shankar in 1892. On the 18th of August 1898, Shankar purported to convey some of these lands for 11s. 100 to Bhau Patil who is defendant No. 1. On the 17th of September 1904, Shankar conveyed certain other properties for Rs. 161 to defendant No. 1. The properties conveyed in 1898 have been described before us as roughly representing the moiety owned by Ganu and the properties conveyed in 1904 by Shankar as representing the moiety owned by Bala.2. The present suit was brought by Ganu to have it declared that the plaint properties, that is, the properties first conveyed, or mortgaged by Bala and Ganu to Shankar, belonged to and were in possession of the plaintiff. The defendants, Bhau Pa...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »