Mumbai Court October 1924 Judgments
Raja Sasi Sekhareswar Roy Vs. Lalit Mohan Maitra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-31-1924
Reported in: (1925)27BOMLR166
Dunedin, J.1. In this cane n question has arisen between two Zemindars. They were in possession of certain properties in what may be called a very uncomfortable manner, that is to say, they possessed certain lands in common, and the way of possession was a, very uncomfortable way. Ono got the rents of certain tenants, and the other got the rents of others, and sometimes they both went to the same tenant and each realised a portion of his rent. In order to get rid of this inconvenient situation, they agreed to arbitration; an arbitration was accordingly held and the arbitrator allotted certain villages to one, and certain villages to the other. Thereupon possess to a certain extent was taken in accordance with the award. The present suit was raised by the plaintiff, and the object of the suit was to get possession of certain lands which he said were his under the award, and of which the defendant was improper possession. He makes a plain averment in the plaint. He says, after setting ou...
Tag this Judgment!Jai NaraIn Vs. Ujagar Lal and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-30-1924
Reported in: (1925)27BOMLR713
John Edge, J.1. The suit in which these two consolidated appeals from a decree of the High Court at Allahabad have arisen was brought in the Court of the District Judge of Mainpuri in the United Provinces on May 20, 1915. The reliefs claimed in the suit were the removal of the then trustees of an endowment for religious and charitable purposes on account of alleged misappropriation of the endowed property, and the appointment of new trustees to whom the possession of the entire endowed property should be given; that accounts Should be furnished of the property of the endowment and the misappropriations should be made good; that a scheme for the management of the endowment should be settled; that any other beneficial relief should be granted; and that costs should be decreed against any of the defendants who might be found 'liable. The suit was brought under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The plaintiffs had obtained the consent in writing of the Legal Remembrancer of t...
Tag this Judgment!Ladhuram Manormal Marwadi Vs. Sale Mahomed Illiyas Memon
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-29-1924
Reported in: (1925)27BOMLR95
Lallubhai Shah, Kt., Acting C.J.1. The few facts relating to this second appeal are these. On March 9, 1882, a document which is described as Kararnama, was executed by Kashi Bahiru Patil to Hormasji Burjorji in respect of land which is described as Prat Bandi No. 49, Pot No. 1, measuring three acres and two gunthas, the assessment of the land being Rs. 0-15-3. Another document was executed by Hormasji Burjorji on the same day, which is described as a rent-note. It will be sufficient to refer to the terms of this rent-note for the purposes of this appeal. After the description of the land, the document contains the following terms:-This rent-note is passed in respect of the whole land as such. The rent in respect of the land as is included within the boundaries as mentioned above shall be paid by us from this day every year annually at the rate of Rs. 19 per year immediately on the completion of the respective year and in case there happens to be any default in payment as above, then w...
Tag this Judgment!Cowasji Edalji Dadachanji Vs. Ratanbai
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-28-1924
Reported in: (1925)27BOMLR1
Carson, J. 1. The only question which this Board is asked to decide is whether upon the true construction of the will dated July 10, 1913, of a Parsi named Rustomji Edalji Dada-chanji who died on July 17, 1913, a bequest of the residuary estate in favour of his son since deceased was vested or contingent upon his attaining his majority.2. The clauses of the will, which are material for the determination of this question, are in the words and figures following :-5. My present surviving wife Ratanbai is now in the family way. And she has expressed in my presence her free will and accord to live as a member of the family with my executor (i. o.) my elder (or eldest) brother Dr. Cawasji Edaljee Dadachanji. As to whatever children (or child) that may be born of her womb, my brother shall bring up and maintain the same. And my said executor shall defray all the expenses in connection therewith out of my property and effects. And he shall maintain the family. (The expression maintenance of th...
Tag this Judgment!Emperor Vs. Barendra Kumar Ghosh
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-23-1924
Reported in: (1925)27BOMLR148
Sumner, J.1. This was an appeal from the High Court of Calcutta brought in a criminal matter under Article 41 of the Letters Patent. The trial Judge reserved no question of law and the case came to the High Court on the certificate of the advocate-General of Bengal wider Article 26. Objection wan take at their lordships' bar to the competence of this appeal on the ground that Article 41 does not give an appeal to their lordships from the determination of the High Court, unless the case came before that Court at the instance of the trial Judge. Thereupon the appellant applied in the alternative for special leave to appeal. The materials being the same in both proceedings, Ghosh though the questions arising are not identical, their lordships were able to decide the appeal and the application together, and, in view of the gravity and urgency of the case, they dispensed with a formal petition for-special leave to appeal. After hearing the arguments, they announced last July the substance o...
Tag this Judgment!Sat NaraIn Vs. Behari Lal
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-21-1924
Reported in: (1925)27BOMLR135
John Edge, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff in the suit from a decree of the High Court at Lahore, which dismissed his suit. The suit was brought on March 17,1915, by the plaintiff, then a minor, through his next friend, in the Court of the District Judge of Delhi for possession of a house in Delhi by pre-emption. The District Judge gave the plaintiff a decree, but the High Court in appeal dismissed the suit on the sole ground that hit, father bad been adjudicated insolvent on September 27. 1918, under the Presidency-towns Insolvency Act, 1909, the High Court being of opinion that on that adjudication of insolvency the plaintiff had ceased to have a right to pre-empt the house in question.2. The question on which this appeal depends is, what is the right or interest which an official assignee acquires under Sir John Edge Act III of 1909, the Presidency-towns Insolvency Act, 1909, in the joint and unpartitioned immoveable property of a Hindu joint family governed by the law of th...
Tag this Judgment!Royal Bank of Scotland Vs. Rahim Cassum and Son
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-18-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Bom369; (1925)27BOMLR506; 87Ind.Cas.982
Lallubhai Shah, Kt., Acting C.J.1. This suit came on for hearing as a contested short cause on August '30, 1923, before Mr, Justice Coyajee when issues were raised. On that day the plaintiffs found it necessary to ask for an adjournment to have evidence relating to a certain letter of lien passed in their favour by Marshall & Co., Glasgow, taken on commission and the case was adjourned. It has now come on for hearing before me. After recording evidence and hearing arguments on October 15, I reserved judgment. I ordered the case to be set down for further arguments today. I have heard further arguments and have recorded further evidence of the defendants as to certain facts relating to the presentation of the bill for acceptance which were adverted to in the course of the arguments.2. The material facts relating to this suit are really not in dispute and are sufficiently proved. The defendants are dealers in crockery and glassware in Bombay. They indented certain goods through Marshall ...
Tag this Judgment!Atmaram Sakharam Kalkye Vs. Vaman Janardan Kashelikar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-17-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Bom210; (1925)27BOMLR290; 87Ind.Cas.490
Lallubhai Shah, Kt., Acting C.J.1. The questions arising on this reference have been fully and ably argued on both sides. I have already indicated in my referring judgment the view to which I was inclined then, and my reasons for that view. It is not necessary to repeat the facts. I have considered the arguments on both sides and after giving my best consideration to the arguments, my opinion is that question No 1 should be answered in the affirmative, and question No. 2 should be answered in the negative.2. I shall briefly state my reasons for this view in the light of the arguments which have been urged before us. Chapter VII of the Transfer of Property Act deals with gifts, and Section 122 defines 'gift' as ' the transfer of certain existing moveable or immoveable property made voluntarily and without consideration by one person, called the donor, to another, called the donee and accepted by or on behalf of the donee.' It further provides that ' such acceptance must be made during t...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Jagerdeo Ramsumer Tewari
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-14-1924
Reported in: (1924)26BOMLR1252; 85Ind.Cas.138
Marten, J.1. This is an application under Section 491 of the Criminal Procedure Code in the nature of habeas corpus. The accused who are three brothers complained originally to us that they were illegally arrested by the Police on September 17, 1924; that it was not till several days afterwards they were told what the charge against them was; that they were then informed they were charged with being undesirable foreigners whom it was intended to report; and that the case was being reported to Government for orders.2. Accordingly, on September 23, a rule nisi was obtained from this Court, and on the same day it appears that the Police reported the matter to Government.3. The rule came before us for hearing on September 26, when it was pointed out by the Court that having regard to the Act under which the authorities were proceeding, viz., Section 3A of the Foreigners Act III of 1864 which has been inserted in that Act by Section 3 of Act III of 1915, it was incumbent on the Commissioner...
Tag this Judgment!John over Vs. Muriel A.i. over
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-14-1924
Reported in: (1925)27BOMLR251
Lallubhai Shah, Kt., Acting C.J.1. When this matter came before us on June 20 last, we directed the District Court to record further evidence as to the alleged adultery, and to examine the petitioner. The District Court has recorded further evidence. The petitioner has been examined on oath now, and his son also has given evidence. The respondent, the wife of the petitioner, has not appeared at any stage of the proceedings. The letters written by the wife to the petitioner are on the record. On the strength of the letters and the evidence given by the petitioner and his son, the learned District Judge has expressed his opinion that the adultery of the respondent with another person not known is proved. He held the letters written by the respondent to be conclusive.2. The matter is now before us, and the learned pleader for the petitioner supports that new. The respondent has not appeared. In the evidence given by the petitioner, he stated that the respondent had committed adultery with...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »