Mumbai Court March 1924 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.
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Phillip Seddon Mellor
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-06-1924
Reported in: AIR1924Bom361; (1924)26BOMLR366
Norman Macleod, C.J.1. This is a reference by the Commissioner of Income Tax under Scetion 66(2) of the Indian Income Tax Act of 1922 in the matter of the assessment for super-tax of Mr. P.S. Mellor. The assessee was a partner in Messrs. P. Chrystal & Co., a registered firm. For the purpose of income tax for the year 1922-23 the basis of the assessment was the profits of the year ending September 30, 1921. During that year Mr. Mellor's share in the partnership was three-sixteenths. At the time of the assessment for the year 1922 23, namely December 6, 1922, the constitution of the firm had changed, and Mr. Mellor had become entitled to a three-eighths share. For the purpose of assessment for income tax, the change in the constitution of the firm made no difference. The firm was liable to pay income tax on the profits of the year ending September 30, 1921. If the firm had not been registered then it would also have been liable to pay super-tax under Scetion 55 of the Act, and consequent...
Ganpaya Narnappa Vs. Krishnappa Annaya Hegde
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-06-1924
Reported in: AIR1924Bom394; (1924)26BOMLR491
Norman Macleod, Kt., C.J.1. This was an application under Order XXI, Rule 16, Civil Procedure Code, by the assignee of a decree to be placed on the record as the decree-holder. The decree was originally paused in favour of Ganpaya defendant in Suit No. 333 of 1911. Ganpaya died leaving a daughter-in-law Mahadev-amma. A succession certificate was granted to her mother-in-law, who was also called Mahadevarama. As a holder of that succession certificate she collected Rs. 500 of the decretal amount after agreeing with the judgment-debtor to compromise for Rs. 50 less. Since the case was before the District Judge, we have decided in Raghunath v. Gangaram : AIR1923Bom404 that when an application is made to the Court under 0. XXI, Rule 16, it must be made to the Court as the Court which passed the decree and not as the Court which is executing the decree, so that proof can be given of any uncertified payments. Therefore the judgment-debtor was entitled in resisting the application to plead th...
The Narsinggirji Manufacturing Company Vs. Budansaheb Abdulsaheb Kaji
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-06-1924
Reported in: (1924)26BOMLR523
Norman Macleod, Kt., C.J.1. The plaintiff Company, hereafter called the plaintiff, sued to recover Rs. 83,818-9-9 by way of damages for breach of contract. There were various contracts entered into between the plaintiff and the defendant from July 3, 1918, to September 1, 1918, for the purchase of saris, yarn, and dhotis. The delivery was to be taken on or about December 31, 1918.2. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant did not take delivery of all the goods within the stipulated period. He took delivery of only forty bales as described in para 2 of the plaint at the rates of Rs. 16-14-0 per piece. The plaintiff then informed the defendant by a notice of December 31, 1918, that he should take delivery of the goods after paying their price, and it was stated therein that the goods would be sold by public auction if delivery was not taken. After the notice, the defendant requested the plaintiff to extend the time up to the end of March, and the plaintiff agreed to do so on deposit of ...
Emperor Vs. Raghya Nagya
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-05-1924
Reported in: AIR1924Bom432; (1924)26BOMLR323
Norman Macleod, C.J.1. The two accused were charged before the Sessions Judge of Thana with having committed the murder of one Lakhu on November 26, 1923. The chief evidence against the accused was their own confessions which were persisted in before the Sessions Court. Those confessions show that the first accused had murdered Lakhu, while the second accused had instigated the first accused to commit the crime. She had not taken any part in the actual killing of Lakhu, though afterwards she assisted the first accused in burying the corpse. The Sessions Judge directed the jury that the accused would be guilty of abetment of murder unless the jury could be satisfied that she had taken part in the actual killing of Lakhu, which certainly was not clear on the evidence. Accordingly the jury found the first accused guilty of murder and the second accused guilty of abetjnent of murder. Both were sentenced to death.2. We are now confronted with the decision of this Court in Reg. v. Chand Nur ...
irabasappa BIn Gangappa Dalal and anr. Vs. Bhadrawa Kom Dod Basappa Pr ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-01-1924
Reported in: 80Ind.Cas.189
1. The plaintiff, a minor, filed this suit through his next friend, the natural father, to get a declaration of his title under a Will which he propounded as being the last Will of one Dod-Basappa. This document is a holograph Will, purporting to have been written and executed by Dod-Basappa on the 16th September 1918. Dod-Basappa at that time was a comparatively young man, but he was suffering from chronic asthma; and although a person may be suffering from asthma for many years without any fatal result, it is common knowledge that attacks of asthma are very unpleasant. They may vary in severity, and one of these severe attacks might have induced a desire in Dod-Basappa to make provision for the future.2. Briefly, the Will, after reciting that the testator had no heirs such as near Bhaubands etc., and no male or female issue, but only his wife Bhadri, directed his wife to adopt the plaintiff, and no one else. Then there is a further direction that if the plaintiff was not adopted by B...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›