Mumbai Court August 1926 Judgments
Emperor Vs. Nanoo Sheikh Ahmed
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-31-1926
Reported in: (1926)28BOMLR1196
Amberson Marten, Kt., C.J.1. The question for this Full Bench is :-Is an Abkari-officer, who, in the conduct of investigation of an offence punishable under the Bombay Abkari Act, exercises the powers conferred by the Code of Criminal Procedure 1893 upon an officer in charge of a Police-Btation for the investigation of a cognizable offence, a Police-officer Within the meaning of Section 25 of the IndianEvidence Act 2. The ease itself has a somewhat sordid, if not petty, origin. The accused are alleged to have fallen into a trap laid for them by an Excise-officer, and to have sold to him two bottles of beer under the mistaken belief that he was visiting the brothel, in which the accused are apparently interested. The Magistrate has fined the accused Rs. 10 and Rs. 20 respectively, and they have applied in revision to the High Court.3. In convicting the accused, the Magistrate has relied upon a certain confession, alleged to have been made by them to the Excise-officer. It is contended t...
Tag this Judgment!Nanoo Sheikh Ahmed Vs. Emperor
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-31-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Bom4
Marten, C.J.1. The question for this Full Bench is:Is an Abkari-officer, who, in the conduct of investigation of an offence punishable under the Bombay Abkari Act. exercises the powers conferred by the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, upon an officer in charge of a police station for the investigation of a congizable offence, a Police officer within the meaning of Section 25 of the Indian Evidence Act ?2. The case itself has a somewhat sordid, if not petty, origin. The accused are alleged to have fallen into a trap laid for them by an Excise officer, and to have sold to him two bottles of beer under the mistaken belief that he was visiting the brothel in which the accused are apparently interested. The Magistrate has fined the accused Rs. 10 and Rs. 20 respectively, and they applied in revision to the High Court.3. In convicting the accused, the Magistrate has relied upon a certain confession alleged to have been made by them to the Excise officer. It is contended that this confession ...
Tag this Judgment!Phillip A. Watkins Vs. Laxminarayen Basdeodas
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-26-1926
Reported in: (1927)29BOMLR131
Amberson Marten, C.J.1. This is an exceptional ease. The plaintiff an Indian merchant bought gold bullion through the defendants in London in May 1922. The bullion was shipped on SS. Egypt and was lost on the sinking of that ship. But the defendants had insured the gold for its value and upwards, with the result that the plaintiff was repaid his entire cost of the purchase of the gold plus a certain additional sum. But he is not content with that. He says that the defendants ought to have insured not for say live or six per cent. above the value of the gold, as they in fact did, but for ton per cent. above that value. Accordingly, he claims the difference between this five per cent. and ten per cent.2. This claim is based solely on an alleged custom of the bullion market in London : and it is thus pleaded in the plaint which, I am glad to notice, is concisely and clearly drawn, differing in that respect from most of the plaints I see in this Court. Para, 3 runs as follows :-In accord w...
Tag this Judgment!Sheikh Sultan Rahim Vs. Ranchhodji Mulji
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-26-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Bom149; (1927)29BOMLR249; 101Ind.Cas.140
Fawcett, J.1. The plaintiff sued to redeem a mortgage dated July 15, 1919, contending that, though in form the document is a sale-deed, it was treated as a mortgage under a contemporaneous oral agreement. In respect of this contention, he claimed to be entitled to the benefit of Section 10A of the Dekkhan Agriculturists' Relief Act. An issue was, accordingly, raised in the trial Court 'whether the plaintiff is an agriculturist as defined by law'. Upon this, the Subordinate Judge held that he was not an agriculturist at the date of the suit, but was one at the date of the suit transaction. On this finding he held that the plaintiff was entitled to the benefit of Section 10A. On the merits he passed a decree for redemption in favour of the plaintiff.2. The defendant appealed, one of the grounds urged being that the trial Court erred in holding that the plaintiff was an agriculturist at the date of the suit transaction. The District Judge, however, agreed with the finding of the lower Cou...
Tag this Judgment!Matheran Steam Light Tramway Vs. B.N. Lang
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-24-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Bom113; (1927)29BOMLR126
Amberson Marten, C.J.1. In our judgment given on August 16, we directed to be determined as a preliminary issue the question whether there was any judgment validly delivered by Mr. Justice Taraporewala.2. This was a petition to rectify the Company's register. The petition was adjourned into Court, and judgment was reserved by Mr. Justice Taraporewala on April 10, 1926. On. April 23, the learned Judge dictated notes of his judgment to a shorthandwriter Mr. Daji. The next day Mr. Justice Taraporewala left Bombay by the mail boat Ranpura for England. The shorthandwriter did not transcribe the notes, but himself went on leave from April 26 to June 2.3. On April 28; the learned Judge wrote a letter from the SS. Ranpura to the Prothonotary of this Court, which, in the ordinary course of post, would have reached him on or about May 7. The learned Judge there said that he had dictated to Daji his judgment which was to be delivered on June 7. He there states :-Will you kindly request Mirza J. t...
Tag this Judgment!Balai Shidli Jogati Vs. Subba Santu Mahar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-21-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Bom191; (1927)29BOMLR246; 101Ind.Cas.135
Patkar, J.1. In this case the plaintiff sues to recover possession of the watan lands pertaining to a Mharki watan. Shantu was the original Watandar and was succeeded by the daughter Shidli some time before 1886. Shidli died on October 21, 1918, leaving a daughter Balai, the present plaintiff, and a son Bala. The defendants claim under the son Bala. The question arising in the case is whether the plaintiff, the daughter of Shidli, is entitled to succeed to the watan property or whether she is postponed in the order of succession to the son Bala by virtue of Section 2 of Act V of 1886. Shidli, the mother of the plaintiff, inherited the watan property before Act V of 1886 came into force. It is common ground that Shidli got the property by inheritance and according to ordinary Hindu law the plaintiff would succeed as heir to Shidli to her mother's stridhan. It is contended on behalf of the defendants that the plaintiff being a female is postponed in order of succession to Bala, the son o...
Tag this Judgment!Sitaram Dattaji Rangnekar Vs. Anant Hari Kamat Agarkar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-20-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Bom156; (1927)29BOMLR244; 101Ind.Cas.129
Shah, J.1. The few facts, which are necessary for the purpose of dealing with the point raised in this second appeal, are these. A decree was passed by the trial Court on November 30, 1912. That decree was confirmed by the District Court in appeal and ultimately by the High Court. The confirmation by the High Court was on December 17, 1915. It may bo mentioned that there were several defendants ; and as defendant No. 13, who was one of the appellants in the appeal to the High Court, died, his heirs were brought on the record in the appeal to the High Court. It was a preliminary decree on a mortgage which was confirmed by the High Court. Thereafter defendant No. 7 died on January 3, 1917. The plaintiffs then made an application on February 21, 1918, to have a final decree on the mortgage as required by the Code of Civil Procedure. In this application the heirs of defendant No. 7 were mentioned, but apparently the date of the death of defendant No. 7 was not indicated and a fortiori no s...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Maneklal Garbaddas
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-17-1926
Reported in: (1926)28BOMLR1296
Shah, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 476B, Criminal Procedure Code, against an order made by the Sessions Judge of Kaira ordering a complaint to be filed for the offence of perjury with regard to statements made by Maneklal Garbaddas before the Additional Sessions Judge of Ahmedabad on November 20, 1925, Maneklal Garbaddas was examined as a witness at a trial held by the Additional Sessions Judge of Ahmedabad in a case which was committed to the Sessions Court of Ahmedabad by the Resident First Class Magistrate at Borsad. The witness gave evidence in that case, and the case was decided on November 21, 1925.2. By a Government Notification, dated October 6, 1925, after January 1, 1926, the District Judge of Kaira was constituted a Sessions Division distinct from the Sessions Division of Ahmedabad under the name of the Sessions Division of Kaira. An application was made by the original accused Nos. 1 and 2 in the Sessions case to which I have referred, to the Court of Session at Nad...
Tag this Judgment!Shankar Baji Joshi Vs. Kashinath Ganesh Puranik
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-16-1926
Reported in: (1927)29BOMLR1
Shah, J.1. After hearing arguments on both sides in this case, we have come to the conclusion that the question referred to the Full Bench should be answered in the negative.2. I shall state my reasons for this conclusion briefly. So far as this Court is concerned this very question was considered very fully in Vithalrao v. Ramrao. I.L.R. (1900) 24 Bom. 317 Jenkins C.J. and Ranade J., who decided the case, came to the conclusion that the opinion expressed by Westropp C.J. in the earlier decision of Samat v. Amra I.L.R. (1882) 6 Bom. 394 should be accepted, and that the preference of the whole blood over the half-blood should be confined to the brothers and their sons as expressly mentioned by Vijnaneshvara in the Mitakshara and by Nilakantha in the Vyavahara Mayukha and could not be extended to the case of uncles and more distant gotraja sapindas. They had before them the view taken by the Full Bench of the Allahabad High Court with reference to a similar point in Suba Singh v. Sarafra...
Tag this Judgment!Haji Mirza Masham Ispahani Vs. Mirza Ahmed Ispahani
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-13-1926
Reported in: AIR1927Bom256; (1927)29BOMLR214
Amberson Marten, Kt., C.J.1. In dismissing this appeal in the absence of any parties) we only wish to add that we must not necessarily be taken to approve of what Mr. Justice Taraporewala has said as to the propriety of hearing applications for the appointment of receivers in Chambers. As at present advised, we think that these applications should be made in the ordinary way by notice of motion in open Court and not in Chambers. But of course as regards the present case we have heard no arguments as to whether there was anything exceptional to justify the course actually taken....
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »