Mumbai Court September 1924 Judgments
Bhikubai Yeshwantrao Meher Vs. Hariba Sawalaram Meher
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-30-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Bom153; (1925)27BOMLR13; 94Ind.Cas.665
Lallubhai Shah, Kt., Acting C.J.1. [His lordship after discussing evidence held that it was not proved that Bhikubai had married Shankar; but held that Bhikubai had been intimate with Shankar. The judgment then proceeded:] The next question of fact to be determined is whether the finding that she has reverted to a moral life is correct. Its correctness has been challenged by Mr. Setalvad. It appears from the evidence that Shankar married one Jijibai at Dehu in December 1918. The case for the plaintiff is that ever since that marriage there is nothing to show that Shankar has been living on terms of improper intimacy with Bhikubai. It appears from the various receipts of money-orders sent by the defendant to Bhikubai at Dehu and Junnar that Shankar signed for Bhikubai, and that his association with her has not ceased. There are other letters in the case, which it is not necessary to refer to, that the apparent association of Shankar with Bhikubai, who has been living apparently since 19...
Tag this Judgment!Becharsang Bhupatsang Vs. Naran Moti Meghji
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-30-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Bom277; (1925)27BOMLR217
Lallubhai Shah, Kt., Acting C.J.1. We have heard the learned pleader for the appellants in this case. The history of the execution of this decree is long; but it is not necessary to go into the details of that history for the purposes of the short point which has been argued in support of this appeal.2. It appears that a decree for sale of the mortgaged property was passed in favour of the plaintiff's on November 17, 1896 and after a number of proceedings ultimately it was sent for execution to the Collector along with two other money decrees which were then pending before the Talukdari Settlement . Officer for execution against the same judgment-debtors. That Officer made a certain arrangement for the satisfaction of the decrees including the decree in question which is described in the judgment of the first Court in these terms :-The compromise for the dues of the plaintiffs under all the three decrees, which on November 16, 1918, amounted to Us. 31,500 was settled for Rs. 15,750 by ...
Tag this Judgment!Juvansingji Motisingji Thakor Vs. Dola Chhala
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-30-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Bom390; (1925)27BOMLR890
The plaintiff' was in possession of certain wants land, for which he paid a fixed quit-rent or Salami of Rs. 5 per year, lie relied on title-deeds the earliest of which was dated 1835 A D,, and described the land as pasaita. His father purchased the land in 1870. In 1885, the defendant landlord tried unsuccessfully in the Mamlatdar's Court to raise the rent. He gave in 1892 a notice to quit which was disregarded by the plaintiff, However, in the years 1895, 1896 and 1898, the plaintiff passed rent-notes for the land in suit as well as for an adjoining plot of land, agreeing to pay Rs. 5 as rent and to give up possession at the end of the cultivating season. These rent notes were held to have been passed under a misapprehension that they related only to the adjoining land. The plaintiff having sued for declaration of his right to hold the land permanently at a fixed Salami of Rs. 6 a year :-Held:(1) that the plaintiff was a permanent tenant at a fixed quit-rent or Salami of Rs. 5 a year...
Tag this Judgment!Hanmant Gurunath Kulkarni Vs. Ramappa Lagamappa Ilager
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-29-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Bom292; (1925)27BOMLR211
Lallubhai Shah, Kt., Acting C.J.1. The facts which have given rise to this second appeal are these. The properly in anil belonged to plaintiff No.2 while he was a minor. His mother, us his natural guardian, sold it to defendant No.1 for Rs. 700 on May 15, 1905. The defendant No. I obtained possession. On April 2,; 909 he sold the property to defendant No 2, and defendant No 2 has been in possession since then. Plaintiff No. 2 attained majority on April 11 1916, and he conveyed his interest in these lands, with another land to plaintiff No.1 for Rs. 1J500 on September 13, 1916. The present suit was filed on December 20, 1918, by plaintiff No. 1, who purchased the interest of plaintiff No 2, to set aside the alienation made by the mother of plaintiff No. 2 during his minority, an < for possession;and mesne profits.2. The defendant No. 1 pleaded that the sale by the guardian of plaintiff No. 2 was for necessity, and that the plaintiff's claim was time-barred. Defendant No. 2 raised the sa...
Tag this Judgment!A.M. Roberts Vs. A.D. Shanks
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-29-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Bom360; (1925)27BOMLR548; 94Ind.Cas.551
Pratt, J.1. This is a suit by the plaintiff for damages for in--jury done to her car in a collision due to the negligence of the driver of the defendant's car.2. The defendant pleads contributory negligence, and also that the collision was due to the negligence of the plaintiff's driver, and accordingly supplements his written statement by a counter-claim for damages.3. The accident occurred on January 13, 1922, at 9-30 p. M. The plaintiff's car is an Overland car and her husband was being driven in it to Mahim. Mr. Roberts was seated on the rear of the car and the driver wan in the front seat driving. The accident occurred opposite the Church-Gate Street Station. Mr. Roberts did not actually see how the accident occurred, but he saw the defendant's car sixty or seventy yards ahead driven at great speed. He looked down to arrange some parcels of provisions, which were rolling about at the bottom of the car, and the next thing that he knew was that the defendant's car had crashed into h...
Tag this Judgment!Ratilal Nathalal Vs. Motilal Sankalchand
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-26-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Bom380; (1925)27BOMLR880
Marten, J.1. The question in dispute in this second appeal is one of the right of succession to the estate of a Hindu child widow who died at the age of nine years on July 9, 1913, and without issue. She belonged to the Kadwa Kunbi caste and had been married as a child to the plaintiff in the suit. Her father predeceased her leaving no male issue, and consequently she succeeded to his property.2. But a question that has arisen on her death is, does this property go to the plaintiff as the heir of his deceased wife Kamla, or does the property pass to her own blood relations on her father's side It common ground that under ordinary Hindu law the plaintiff would take as her husband, but a special custom is set up by the defendant who claims to be her heir on her father's side, that in this particular caste where a married woman dies under such circumstances without issue, the property reverts to her father's family and does not pass to her husband, The onus of proving such a custom, being...
Tag this Judgment!Ratilal Nathalal Vs. Motilal Sankal Chand
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-26-1924
Reported in: 88Ind.Cas.891
Marten, J.1. The question in dispute in this second appeal is one of the right of succession to the estate of a Hindu child widow who died at the age of nine years on July 9, 1913, and without issue. She belonged to the kadwa kunbi caste and had been married as a child to the plaintiff in the suit. Her father predeceased her leaving no male issue, and consequently she succeeded to his property.2. But a question that has arisen on her death is, does this property go to the plaintiff as the heir of his deceased wife Kamla or does the property pass to her own blood relations on her father's side? It is common ground that under ordinary Hindu Law the plaintiff would take as her husband, but a special custom is set up by the defendant who claims to be her heir on her father's side, that in this particular caste where a married woman dies under such circumstances without issue, the property reverts to her father's family and does not pass to her husband. The onus of proving such a custom, be...
Tag this Judgment!Emperor Vs. Mohamed Roshan
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-24-1924
Reported in: (1924)26BOMLR1232
Fawcett, J.1. This is an appeal against a conviction under Section 457, read with Section 511, Indian Penal Code, by the Additional Presidency Magistrate, Mr. Thacker, who sentenced the appellant to one year's imprisonment. In the appeal it is alleged that the appellant was decoyed by a stranger to the place where he was arrested and wrongly accused of house breaking and theft.2. There is no record of the statements of the witnesses at the trial. Their names only are given, with an indication that they gave evidence and were cross examined. The Magistrate has thus failed to comply with the provisions of Sub -sections (1) and (2) of Section 362, read with Section 411, Criminal Procedure Code, for the sentence inflicted upon the appellant exceeded six months.3. The learned Magistrate was asked why evidence had not been properly recorded as required by Section 362 Criminal Procedure Code, and his explanation is that he was misled by the analogy of sending juvenile offenders to Reformatory...
Tag this Judgment!Mohamed Roshan Vs. Emperor
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-24-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Bom147; 85Ind.Cas.134
Fawcett, J.1. This is an appeal against a conviction under Section 457, read with Section 511, Indian Penal Code, by the Additional Presidency Magistrate, Mr. Thacker, who sentenced the appellant to one year's imprisonment. In the appeal it is alleged that the appellant was decoyed by a stranger to the place where he was arrested and wrongly accused of house-breaking and theft.2. There is no record of the statements of the witnesses at the trial. Their names only are given, with an indication that they gave evidence and were, cross-examined. The Magistrate has thus failed to comply with the provisions If Sub-section (1) and (2) of Section 362, read with Section 411, Cr.P.C., for the sentence inflicted upon the appellant exceeded six months.3. The learned Magistrate was asked why evidence had not been properly recorded as required by Section 362, Cr.P.C., and his explanation is that he was misled by the analogy of sending juvenile offenders to Reformatory Institutions for three years or...
Tag this Judgment!Velchand Sawaji Marwadi Vs. Sitaram Tukaram
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-19-1924
Reported in: AIR1925Bom287; (1925)27BOMLR205
Lullubhai Shah, Kt., Acting C.J.1. The plaintiffs in this case sued for a declaration that the sale-deed passed by defendant No. 1 to defendant No. 2 on January 4, 1921, was hollow and executed with the intention to defraud the plaintiffs and that therefore it was null and void. Plaintiff No. 1 had obtained a decree against defendant No. 1 in April 1921 and was a decree-holder against defendant No. 1 at the date of the suit. Plaintiff' No. 2 was a creditor but had not obtained a decree. It appears from the evidence that the plaintiff stated that the suit was on behalf of all the creditors of defendant No. 1. Defendant No. 1 did not appear to contest the suit. Defendant No. 2 contended that he was a true and bona fide purchaser for value, and that the deed was not executed with intention to defraud the plaintiffs. The first issue framed was : 'Is the sale-deed (Exhibit 17) dated January 4, 1921, executed to defraud and delay the plaintiffs and other creditors of the defendant No. 1 ?' T...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »