Mumbai Court March 1926 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.
Vassanji Mulji Vs. Mulji Ranchhod Ved
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-23-1926
Reported in: (1926)28BOMLR677
Norman Macleod, Kt., C.J.1. This is an appeal against an order of Mr. Justice Taraporewalla adjudicating certain persons insolvents, under the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act, on the petition of a creditor, one Mulji Ranchhod, Various acts of in-solvency were alleged in the petition. The Judge considered that none of the acts mentioned had been proved except the act alleged under heading (6), viz,:-That with intent to defeat and delay their creditors bhe saidVasanji Mulji and Daraodar Kallianji have suspended payment since the early part of June 1925 and had declaredtheir inability to meet their creditors and had for that reason been declared defaulters by the Native Share and stock Brokers Association on June 17, 1925.2. Section 9 of the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act deals with acts of insolvency. By Clause (g) it is an act of insolvency ' if the debtor gives notice to any of his creditors that he has suspended, or that he is about to suspend, payment of his debts.' It was necessary...
Ganesh Lal Vs. Khetramohan Mahaptra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-23-1926
Reported in: (1926)28BOMLR931
Ameer Ali, J.1. Their lordships are relieved of the neceesity of narrating at length the facts of this complicated litigation, as the judgment under appeal summarises very clearly the history of the transactions in debate.2. This is an ex parte appeal from the judgment and decree of the High Court of Patna which partly affirmed and partly reversed the Order of the Court of first instance.3. A Hindu lady of the name of Suryamani, who died in 1904 or 1905, conveyed by mortgage and sale to one Behari Lal Pandit, the father of defendant No. 1, almost the whole of the property which had devolved on her as the widow of one Banamali Mahapatra, a native of Orissa, subject to the Mita-kshara law. Banamali appears to have died in the year 1863, leaving him surviving his widow, Suryamani, and two daughters, one of whom died not long after, childless ; the other Satyabhama, survived her mother, and was the original plaintiff in the present suit, which was instituted in the Court of the Subordinate...
Caitano De Mello Vs. the Meridian Electrical Engineering Co.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-23-1926
Reported in: (1927)29BOMLR402
Kemp, J.1. This is a suit by the plaintiff for compensation from the defendants or either of them under Act XIII of 1855 for the death of his son, who was a youth of eighteen, on July 6, 1922. The essentials for such an action are laid down in Section 1 of the Fatal Accidents Act which requires that the wrongful act, neglect or default which causes death must have been such, as, if death had not ensued, would have entitled the party injured to maintain an action and recover damages in respect thereof, and the Act gives a right to recover such compensation to the representatives of the deceased person.2. Now, I have attempted to give my close attention to the facts of this case not only because the plaintiff obtained leave to sue as a pauper but also because I think he has some ground for complaint in the fact that his suit has been so long pending. The suit originally came before me in April 1925 and then issues were framed, and the evidence of a witness was ordered to be taken de bene...
Vassanji Mulji and ors. Vs. Mulji Ranchhod Ved and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-23-1926
Reported in: AIR1926Bom405
Macleod, C.J.1. This is an appeal against an order of Mr. Justice Taraporewalla adjudicating certain persons insolvents, under the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act, on the petition of a creditor, one Mulji Eanchhod. Various acts of insolvency were alleged in the petition. The Judge considered that none of the acts mentioned had been proved except the act alleged under heading (b), viz:That with intent to defeat and delay their creditors the said Vasanji Mulji and Damodar Kalllanji have suspended payment since the early part of June 1925 and had declared their inability to meet their creditors and had for that reason been declared defaulters by the Native Share and Stockbrokers' Association on June 17, 1925.2. Section 9 of the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act deals with acts of insolvency. By Clause (g) it is an act of insolvencyif the debtor gives notice to any of his creditors that ha has suspended, or that he is about to suspend, payment of his debts.3. It was necessary then, for the c...
Krishnaji Govind Pophale Vs. Gopal Krishna Sarvate
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-18-1926
Reported in: (1926)28BOMLR676
Norman Macleod, Kt., C.J.1. The question in this suit was whether the defendants were agriculturists. The Judge found that their income derived from land was at the most Rs. 400, while there was income of Rs. 300 from Toddy trees. He said that such income was not derived from agriculture. I cannot agree. The trees have to be planted and looked after, and standing crop in the Act includes juice from trees. Clearly, it was intended that the fruit of trees, or the produce in the shape of juice, should be treated as crop. Therefore, the income from toddy juice can be treated as agricultural income.2. Rule will be made absolute with costs and the case remanded for disposal to the lower Court....
Manchersha Sorabji Shet Vs. Virijvalavdas Jekisandas
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-18-1926
Reported in: (1926)28BOMLR1158
Norman Macleod, Kt., C.J.1. The plaintiff sued for a mandatory injunction to the dafeudant to remove the wall that he had erected obstructing plaintiff's way from his Survey No. 519, on the south to Naroda Road, and for an injunction to defendant restraining him from obstructing plaintiff, his servants, and tenants, their carriages, horses, etc., from using the said way on the south of his land to Naroda Road.2. In the trial Court the plaintiff proved that he had squired a right of way by prescription over the defendant's land. The plaintiff's land was used for agriculture, and the plaintiff's pleader conceded also that no horses and horse-carriages passed by the way, and to such a right they were not entitled; that the plaintiff's way was only for agricultural purposes, and that was the use to which Survey No, 519 had been put excepting once when bones were allowed to be stored; and that the plaintiff had never exercised the right to take horse-carriages etc. The Judge, therefore, pas...
Krishnaji Govind Pophale and ors. Vs. Gopal Krishna Sarvate
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-18-1926
Reported in: AIR1926Bom478
Macleod, C.J.1. The question in this, suit was whether the defendants were agriculturists. The Judge found that their income derived from land was at the most Rs. 400, while there was income of Rs. 300 from toddy trees. He said that such income was not derived from agriculture. I cannot agree. The trees have to be planted and looked after, and Standing crop in the Act includes juice from trees. Clearly, it was intended that the fruit of trees, or the produce in the shape of juice, should be treated as crop. Therefore, the income from toddy juice can be treated as agricultural income.2. Rule will be made absolute with costs and the case remanded for disposal to the lower Court....
Manchersha Sorabji Vs. Virjivallabhdas Jekisondas
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-18-1926
Reported in: AIR1926Bom537
Macleod, C.J.1. The plaintiff sued for a mandatory injunction to the defendant to remove the wall that he had erected obstructing the plaintiff's way from his Survey No. 519, on the south to Naroda Road, and for an injunction restraining him from obstructing the plaintiff, his servants, and tenants, their carriages, horses, etc., from using the said way on the south of his land to Naroda Road.2. In the trial Court the plaintiff proved that he had acquired a right of way by prescription over the defendant's land. The plaintiff's land was used for agriculture, and the plaintiff's pleader conceded also that no horses and horse-carriages passed by the way, and to such a right they were not entitled; that the plaintiff's way was only for agricultural purposes, and that was the use to which Survey No. 519 had been put excepting once when bones were allowed to be stored; and that the plaintiff had never exercised the right to take horse-carriages, etc. The Judge, therefore, passed the followi...
Muthu K.R.V. Alagappa Chettiar Vs. Nagindas Fulchand Chinoy
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-15-1926
Reported in: (1926)28BOMLR680
Norman Macleod, Kt., C.J.1. On November 2, 1925, a petition was presented in this Court alleging that one Muthu K.R.V. Alag-appa Chettiar of Madura, who carried on business at various places including Bombay, had committed certain acts of insolvency within three months of the date of the petition, in that (a) he had mortgaged one of the properties belonging to him at Madura for Rs. 18,000 to a creditor, Messrs. Jhaverchand Gumanchand, as security for their debt of Rs. 25,000; (b) that the said mortgage was executed when many of the branches of the said Chettiar's business were in insolvent circumstances and was made to defraud the creditors; and (c) that with intent to defraud the creditors of the said firm he stopped payment to the creditors since the last three months. All the petitioners, who sent their men to call for the money due to them, were given a reply by his agent, Nagalingam Pillai, in charge of the Bombay firm, that his master had stopped payment, and that as no remittanc...
Rajaram Tukaram Vs. the Central Bank of India Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-15-1926
Reported in: (1926)28BOMLR879
Fawcett, J.1. In this suit the defendant bank in their written statement admit that paras, 1 to 3 of the plaint are correct; and the point at issue is a purely legal one, which has been argued without the necessity of taking any evidence. The defendant bank brought a suit No. 3965 of 1924 against the plaintiff trading in the same of Section Narayen & Co, to enforce an equitable mortgage created by the plaintiff in their favour, and, on December 9, 1924, by consent, a preliminary decree was passed in favour of the bank. That decree was superseded by a final decree for sale on July 16, 1925. The mortgaged property was situated at Andheri, which admittedly is outside the local limits of the ordinary original civil jurisdiction of this Court, But, at that time, according to the ruling in Holkar v. Dadabhai, I.L.R. (1890) 14 Bom. 353 the Court had jurisdiction, both because according to that ruling a suit on a mortgage was not a suit for land within the meaning of Clause 12 of the Letters P...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »