Mumbai Court July 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.
William Jacks and Co. Vs. Joosab Mahomed
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-18-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Bom115; (1923)25BOMLR1170
Pratt, J.1. The plaintiffs in this suit granted to the defendant a lease of a part of a bungalow and compound in the Nesbit Road, Mazgaon, for the period of one year from April 1, 1918. The lease terminated by efflux of time on March 31, 1919. But the defendant held over. There had been a dispute as to alleged encroachments by the defendant and the plaintiffs now aver that they require the premises included in the original lease as well as those encroached upon for their own use and occupation, and gave notice on December 30, 1922, terminating the tenancy as from February 1, 1923.2. It is admitted that the defendant required the premises to the knowledge of the plaintiffs for manufacturing purposes and that he has so used them. The defendant accordingly pleads that he is entitled to six months notice Under Section 105 of the Transfer of Property Act, and that the notice given on the supposition that the tenancy was monthly is ineffectual to terminate the lease. An against this plaintif...
Subhadrabai Vs. Mahomedbhai I.M. Rowji
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-17-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Bom187; (1923)25BOMLR931
Mulla, J.1. This is an originating summons taken out by that plaintiff and the second defendant (purchasers) for the determination of the question whether the first defendant (vendor) is entitled to interest on the balance of the purchase money from February 18, 1923, as claimed by him.2. On January 18, 1923, the plaintiff and the second defendant purchased certain immoveable property at an auction sale held by the first defendant as mortgagee of the property for Rs. 1,19,500 subject to certain conditions of which a print is Exh. A herein. On the same day the purchasers paid Rs. 30,000 as earnest. The sale was to be completed on February 18, 1923.3. After the date of the agreement for sale, the purchasers' attorneys took search of the register of assurances when they discovered that the property was subject to a mortgage dated August 11, 1873, but there was no reconveyance. The amount of the mortgage was Rs. 2,000; the parties to the mortgage Were Hindoos; and, having regard to the rul...
Ahmed Saheb Bapu Saheb Kafre Vs. Ubhaiya Harsi
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-16-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Bom44; (1923)25BOMLR867; 87Ind.Cas.37
Lallubhai Shah, Kt., Ag. C.J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment of Mr. Justice Marten in a suit filed by the plaintiffs on a promissory note dated May 20, 1920, whereby the defendant promised to pay them on demand Rs. 2000 and interest thereon at the rate of one and a half per cent, per mensem. The consideration stated in the note is Rs. 2000 borrowed in cash. The defendant admitted the note but denied receipt of any consideration from the plaintiffs for the promissory note. He further pleaded that the promissory note was passed in the following circumstances:This defendant mortgaged his land known as 'Bagicha' at Koli Kalyan to the plaintiffs by an indenture of mortgage dated May 17, 1920. The said land was formerly mortgaged by this defendant to Hakma Mota & Co. and subsequently redeemed by this defendant on payment of the mortgage moneys but through oversight the reconveyance was not taken from the then mortgagees In order to indemnify the plaintiffs against the claims of the sa...
Haribhai Gulab Vs. Mathur Lallu
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-12-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Bom140; (1923)25BOMLR929
Lallubhai Shah, Kt., Ag. C.J.1. The only question argued in this appeal is that Haribhai, the plaintiff, would take equally with his uncle Lallu as reversionary heir to the deceased Varadhbhai who was the first cousin of Lallu's father. The relationship of the parties is given at page 3 of the print in the judgment of the lower Court, and according to the relationship it is clear that Lallu is nearer by one degree to Varadhbhai, Haribhai being the son of Lallu's brother Gulab who was dead at the date the inheritance opened.2. It is urged on behalf of the plaintiff, who raised this contention in the lower Court without success, that as according to the rule under the Vyavahara Mayukha a brother's son takes with the brother when the inheritance to another deceased brother opens, by the same analogy in the case of distant Sapindas the same rule should be adopted. It is a contention which is not supported by any authority. It seems to us to be entirely opposed to the whole scheme of the ru...
Dattatraya Vithal Garware Vs. Vasudeo Anant Gargate
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-12-1923
Reported in: AIR1924Bom98; 76Ind.Cas.1023
Lallubhai Shah, Kt., Ag. C.J.1. In this case the few material facts are these. A decree was passed by the lower appellate Court on November 27, 1917, under which the mortgagor was to pay a certain sum within six months, and in the event of his failure to pay he was to be debarred from redeeming. That time expired on May 27, 1918. In the meanwhile the mortgagor preferred a second appeal to this Court from that decree on March 12, 1918, which was dismissed under Order XLI, Rule 11, on July 9, 1918. On the application of the mortgagee the decree was made absolute on October 3, 1918, after notice to the mortgagor. The mortgagor tendered the money payable under the decree passed on November 27, 1917, in Court on October 23, 1918, and made an application for execution of the decree claiming redemption. Bus his application was rejected, and his further prayer for extension of time under Order XXXIV, Rule 8, also was disallowed.2. From this order of the Subordinate Judge rejecting his applicat...
Hari Ramchandra Navare Vs. G.i.P. Ry. Co.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-12-1923
Reported in: AIR1925Bom196
1. The plaintiff in this case sued the G.I.P. Railway Co., for the value of the goods which consisted of goat skins consigned by him at Ahmednagar on the 11th July, 1921, for despatch to Poona, It appears that instead of the bags containing the goat skins some other consignment of 9 bags containing sheepskins reached Poona. These 9 bags were offered to the plaintiff, but he naturally declined to accept them. Ultimately the Railway Co. sold these 9 bags containing sheep-skins and realised Rs. 140.2. The plaintiff's claim was for Rs. 932-8-0 as representing the value of goods lost through the negligence of the Railway Company. The Company put the plaintiff to the proof of the value of the goods, and also contended that on account of the non-observance by the plaintiff of Rule 34-A the Company was not liable. There was some confusion in the identification and the marking of the goods at Ahmednagar. As a result of these pleadings the following four points were raised for decision:1. Were p...
Madhavrao Vaman Vs. Raghunath Venkatesh
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-10-1923
Reported in: (1923)25BOMLR1005
John Edge, J.1. The suit in which this appeal has arisen was brought on October 22, 1914, in the Court of the First Class Subordinate Judge of Belgaum by Vatandars for the ejectment of the defendants from service Vatan lands in Mauza Bhivashi in Taluka Chikodi in the District of Belgaum, and for mesne profits. The defendants are not Vatandars, nor is any one of them a Vatandar, of the Vatan. The defendants Nos. 1 to 4 in their written statement, allege that they, from before 1853, acquired adversely to the family of the plaintiffs a right to the possession of the lands in question as permanent tenants, and enjoyed that right for more than twelve years before suit in the life-time of the father of the plaintiffs, and that 'the cause of action arose in the year 1865, when the plaintiffs' grandfather died.' The title, if any, of the other defendants depends on the title of the defendants Nos. 1 to 4.2. The facts of the case will be briefly stated presently, but in order to see whether und...
imperial Bank of India Vs. U Rai Gyaw Thu and Co. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-10-1923
Reported in: (1923)25BOMLR1279
Dunedin, J.1. These are two consolidated appeals, The facts in Appeal No. 148 of 1920 are as follows:One Abdul Hakim on December 28, 1911, handed to the Bank of Bengal (now reperesented by the appellants the Imperial Bank of India who took over their business) the following document:AKYAB,28th December, 1911.To The Agent, Bank of Bengal, Akyab.DEAR SIR,I beg to hand you the title-deeds as at foot to be held as Collateral Security for the advances made by you or to be made by you to me hereafter.I further beg to submit you that all those title-deeds as an foot deposited with you are free from encumbrances.Yors faithfully,ABDUL HAKIM II.(In Burmese).DETAILS OF PROPERTIES REFERRED TO ABOVE.2. The schedule was not filled up. The Bank thereafter made advances on current account from time to time. On June 1, 1914. Abdul Hakim was indebted to the Bank to the extent of Rs. 24,500. His liabilities to the Bank subsequently rose and fell; the minimum amount due at any one time being Rs. 15,000 on...
Bai Suraj Widow of Bhavsang Dadabhai Vs. Jijibhai Bhavsang and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-09-1923
Reported in: AIR1925Bom38
Coyajee, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by plaintiff Bai Suraj (now appellant) to redeem a mortgage (Ex. 20) effected by her husband Bhavsang Dalabhai and one Rahakuver in favour of Bhavasang Adesang in the year 1885. For purposes of this litigation Rahakuver's interest in the mortgaged property may be taken as negligible.2. Bhavsang Dalabhai died on the 30th December 1908 leaving no issue. His widows Bai Man and Bai Suraj survived him. On June 4, 1908, Bhavsang made a will (Ex. 21) in the Gujarati language, and got it duly registered. The translation supplied to us is accepted by the parties to be correct. The material provisions of the will are: 'I direct that after my death the whole of my immovable and movable property described (herein) below shall be given to my said wife Man. My new wife named Suraj has not at all won my affection until now and has likewise taken no part whatever in serving and attending upon me... Therefore by reason of her such actions (conduct)...
A. Cecil Cole Vs. Nanalal Moraji Dave and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-04-1923
Reported in: 92Ind.Cas.191
Amberson Marten, J.1. [His Lordship after giving the facts of the case proceeded:] The first point that really arises is what is the nature of the agreement which the parties entered into. Was it a hire-purchase agreement in the sense in which it is so understood in England, viz., no absolute sale, but only a hiring of the chattel by a person, who has the option of returning it at anytime before the various installments are paid Or, on the other hand, despite the language which, the parties have used, was it really a sale having regard to what the parties in fact agreed to do Before I turn to the natural document in this case, I wish, to keep (sic) two points of principle clearly before me so that when I come to the document, I can show what in particular are the relevant passages to be borne in mind.2. Now there are two lines of authority illustrating, what I have Just said. The first line of cases illustrates a hire-purchase agreement proper, viz, where the hirer of a chattel has on...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »