Mumbai Court May 1922 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.
In Re: Maruti Babaji Sonar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-10-1922
Reported in: (1923)ILR47Bom71
Marten, J.1. This is a somewhat curious case. A boy found some property, and very properly handed it over to the Police for enquiries to be made. The Magistrate thereupon under the Bombay District Police Act IV of 1890 issued a proclamation for the true owner. No' such owner has come forward, and eventually the Magistrate sold the property, and has made an order vesting the sale proceeds of the property in Government.2. It does not seem at first sight clear why the Government should get the property and why the boy who found the property and who prima facie is entitled to it in the absence of the true owner, should be deprived of it.3. On investigation we find that this very point has been decided in this High Court by Mr. Justice Russell and Mr. Justice Chandavarkar in 1911 where almost precisely a similar case arose from Ahmedabad. There a similar course had been taken by the Magistrate, but that decision was set aside by the High Court, and the property was ordered to be restored to...
L. Oppenheim and Co. Vs. Mahomed Haneef
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: May-07-1922
Reported in: (1922)24BOMLR1245
Viscount Cave, J.1. This is an appeal from a decree of the High Court of Judicature at Madras, in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction, allowing an appeal from a decree made by Mr. Justice Coutts Trotter in the exercise of the ordinary original civil jurisdiction of the same Court.2. The appellants are merchants carrying on business in London, and the original respondent (who has died during the pendency of this appeal and is represented by the present respondents) was a merchant carrying on business in Madras.3. By a contract in writing made in London and dated October 23, 1913, the appellants bought from the respondent 20,000 tanned Madras sheepskins of a specified quality to be shipped to the appellants in London. The contract contained the following clause :-Any differences arising out of this contract, failing amicable adjustment, to be submitted to arbitration in London in the usual manner, and the award of such arbitration to be final and binding on both buyer and seller.4...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›