Mumbai Court March 1923 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.
Sankaran Nair Vs. Atchuthan and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-06-1923
Reported in: (1923)ILR46Bom734
1. The question referred to us is whether a District Munsif, receiving by transfer a decree of a village Court under Section 66 of the Madras Act I of 1889 or withdrawing execution of a decree to his own file under Section 67, has or has not jurisdiction to transfer it for execution to another District Munsif's Court under Section 39, Civil Procedure Code.2. The learned District Munsif in referring this question has pointed out the great practical inconvenience of a negative answer to it; and we fully appreciate the considerations he has referred to. It is, however, our duty to deal with the matter with reference to the law as it stands. Under Section 48.the decree shall be executed by the Village Court, which passed it, or by a Village Court or District Munsif, to whom it is sent for execution under the provisions hereinafter contained.3. Under Section 66.any decree passed by a Village Court may, on the application of the decree-holder, be transmitted for execution to the District Mun...
Thakoredas Tribhovandas Vs. Lallubhai Tribhovandas
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-05-1923
Reported in: AIR1923Bom401; (1923)25BOMLR452
Norman Macleod, Kt., C.J.1. In this case, there being an agreement to refer to arbitration the disputes between the parties without the intervention of the Court, the arbitrators made an award and thereupon the defendants applied for a decree in terms of the award. That would be an application under Order XXIII Rule 3, the defendants seeking to prove to the satisfaction of the Court that the suit had been adjusted by a lawful agreement or compromise. The plaintiffs impugned the award on the ground that the arbitrators were guilty of misconduct. The trial Court passed a decree in terms of the award. An appeal was filed to the District Judge who held that the award was vitiated and could not be given effect to in accordance with law on various grounds, and accordingly the Judge directed that the decree on the award should be set aside and the suit remanded for trial.2. An application has now been made under Section 115 of the Code to revise the order of the District Judge. The first grou...
Thakoredas Tribhavandas and anr. Vs. Lalubhai Tribhovandas and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-03-1923
Reported in: 75Ind.Cas.102
1. In this case, there being an agreement to refer to arbitration the disputes between the parties without the intervention of the Court, the arbitrators made an award, and thereupon the defendants applied for a decree in terms of the award. That would be an application under Order XXIII, Rule 3, the defendants seeking to prove to the satisfaction of the Court that the suit had been adjusted by a lawful agreement or compromise. The plaintiffs impugned the award on the ground that the arbitrators were guilty of misconduct. The Trial Court passed a decree In terms of the award. An appeal was filed to the District Judge who held that the award was vitiated and could not be given effect to in accordance with law on various grounds and accordingly the Judge directed that the decree on the award should be set aside and the suit remanded for trial.2. An application has now been made under Section 115 of the Code to revise the order of the District Judge. The first ground relied upon was that ...
Tyebbhai Essubhai Thanawalla Vs. Abdul HuseIn Tyebally
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-01-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Bom149; (1923)25BOMLR392
Fawcett, J.1.The plaintiff alleges that he was anxious to be heard by the arbitrators and to lay before them his evidence on the question of damages to be awarded to him.2. The ordinary rule is that the enquiry before the arbitrator is assimilated as near as may be to the proceedings on a trial in the Courts. In the ordinary course, at the appointed time and place the parties appear with their witnesses to support their respective cases, as stated in Russell on Arbitration, 10th Edn., p. 379. This rule has been applied in India. I need only refer to the leading cas9 of Ganga Sahai v. Lekhraj Singh I.L.R. (1886) All. 253 and the Privy Council case of Amir Begam v. Badr-ud-din Husain I.L.R. (1914) All. 336 where it is said:If irregularities in procedure can be proved which would amount to no proper hearing of the matters in dispute there would be misconduct sufficient to vitiate the award without any imputation on the honesty or impartiality of the arbitrator.3. Therefore, if the parties...
Tyebbhai Essubhai Thana Walla Vs. Abdul HuseIn Tyebally
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-01-1923
Reported in: 85Ind.Cas.424
Fawcett, J.1. After stating the facts of the case his Lordship proceeded: The plaintiff alleges that he was anxious to be heard by the arbitrators and to lay before them his evidence on the question of damages to be awarded to him.2. The ordinary rule is that the enquiry before the arbitrator is assimilated as near as may be to the proceedings on a trial in the Courts. In the ordinary course, at the appointed time and place the parties appear with their witnesses to support their respective cases, as stated in Russell on Arbitration, 10th Edition, page 379. This rule has been applied in India. I need only refer to the leading case of Ganga Sahai v. Lekhraj Singh 9 A. 253 : 5 Ind. Dec. 604 and the Privy Council case of Amir Begam v. Badr-ud-din Husain 23 Ind. Cas. 625 : 36 A. 336: 18 C.W.N. 755 : 1 O.L.J. 249 : 12 A.L.J. 537 : 17 O.C. 120 : 16 Bom. L.R. 413 : (1914) M.W.N. 472 : 16 M.L.T. 35 : 27 M.L.J. 181 : 19 C.L.J. 494, where it is said:If irregularities in procedure can be proved w...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›