Mumbai Court March 1927 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.
Natvarlal Tribhovandas Vs. E.D. Sassoon and Co. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-07-1927
Reported in: (1927)29BOMLR921; 103Ind.Cas.256
Crump, J.1. There were certain dealings between the firm of Chunilal Lallubhai and the firm of E.D. Sassoon, which dealings were referred to arbitration. An award followed upon that arbitration, and the firm of Chunilal Lallubhai sued to set aside the award. The plaint was filed on December 2, 1923. The defendants counterclaimed on the footing of the award, and called upon the plaintiffs' solicitors to disclose the names of the partners in the firm. That was presumably done under the provisions of Order XXX, Rule 2. In reply on February 4, 1924, the plaintiffs' solicitors gave five names including the name of Natvarlal Tribhovandas who is now the appellant before us. The suit was dismissed with costs and the counterclaim was allowed with costs. The decree was against the firm of Chunilal Lallubhai. This decree was then transferred for execution to the Court, of the First Class Subordinate Judge of Broach, and defendants Messrs. E.D. Sassoon & Co., who were the decree-holders, moved the...
In Re: an Attorney
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-07-1927
Reported in: AIR1927Bom537; (1927)29BOMLR1066
Amberson Marten, Kt., C.J.1. The main facts in this case are concisely and clearly set out in the report of Mr. Justice Blackwell. By agreement between the parties the exhibits on the enquiry before him are to be treated as exhibits on the present petition by the Advocate General. I need not, therefore, recapitulate the facts.2. The attorney has pleaded guilty to the three charges of professional misconduct (a), (b) and (c) formulated in the report. Having regard to the gravity of those charges, the only question which remains is whether under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent he should be removed merely or suspended from practice. Shortly stated, the charges to which he has pleaded guilty show grave professional misconduct. Being entrusted by one set of clients with Rs. 20,000 to advance on a mortgage of two properties in Sankli Street and Ripon Road, he deliberately omitted to register the mortgage made in their favour. The result was that that mortgage became useless. The clients afte...
Emperor Vs. NurudIn Shaikh Adam
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-04-1927
Reported in: AIR1927Bom445; (1927)29BOMLR701; 103Ind.Cas.109
Fawcett, J.1. This is a reference by the Sessions Judge of Surat, in which he recommends that the order of the District Magistrate, summarily dismissing an appeal to his Court from a conviction and sentence passed by the Second Class Magistrate, Surat, as barred by limitation, be set aside.2. The main facts are that the accused was convicted on June 29, 1926, and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 25. Under some misapprehension, a revisional application was made to the Sessions Court on July 28, 1926. The Sessions Judge on September 29, 1926, held that the sentence was appealable, that the proper Court to hear the appeal was the District Magistrate, and that there being a right of appeal, the application in revision could not be entertained. On the same day that the revisional application was thus heard and decided, the accused's pleader presented an appeal to the District Magistrate at Surat praying that the delay caused in prosecuting the revisional application by mistake should be excus...
Sheobaran Singh Vs. Kulsum-un-nissa
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-04-1927
Reported in: (1927)29BOMLR877
Viscount Dunedin, J.1. In this case, pre-emption in a share in a village is claimed by a co-sharer as against the buyer from the assignee in bankruptcy of another co-sharer. The claim was decreed by the Subordinate Judge, but his judgment was reversed and the case dismissed by the High Court of Allahabad on appeal.2. There was another like suit by another co-sharer.3. The circumstances are these. Rai Bahadur Shri Kishan Das was a co-sharer of the plaintiff and others in the' village of Peotha Gokalpur. On September 26, 1913, he was declared insolvent by the Bombay High Court, and all his property, including the share in question was vested in the Official Assignee of Bombay. The Official Assignee put up the property for sale at Aligarh by public auction on November 8, 1914. A bid was made but was not accepted by the Official Assignee, and the sale was re-advertised for December 6, 1914. A bid of Rs. 40,000 was made by one, Sheoraj Singh, and he was declared purchaser, subject to confir...
Motor Emporium Company Vs. N.H. Moos
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-04-1927
Reported in: AIR1927Bom606; (1927)29BOMLR1446
Talyarkhan, J.1. An important question under the Indian Companies Act has been raised in this liquidation as regards the right of the Crown in a winding up to payment of its debt in priority to all other creditors of the company.2. The Secretary of State for India is a judgment-creditor of the company in liquidation for Rs. 3922-15-8 including costs, for monies due in respect of certain trade or commercial dealings between the parties, and he claims that his debt is a Crown debt and that under the Indian Companies Act it is entitled in the winding up to priority of payment over all other creditors of the company.3. It is not disputed that the debt is a Crown debt but the liquidator denies that it is entitled to priority under the Indian Companies Act.4. It is to be observed at the outset that the Crown has two distinct prerogatives of which it may avail itself both in bankruptcy and in the winding up of companies. The one is that the Crown is not bound by the statute unless by express ...
Dhanna Mal Vs. Moti Sagar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-03-1927
Reported in: (1927)29BOMLR870
Blanesburgh, J.1. This suit relates to a plot of land about 2,250 square yards in area situate in the Sudder Bazaar in Delhi. The laud belongs to the respondent. At the commencement of the suit it was in the occupation of the appellants at a rent of Rs. 25 per mensem. The buildings upon the land are the property of the appellants. The suit by the respondent as plaintiff' is a suit in ejectment and for arrears of rent. The great question between the parties is as to the nature of the appellants' interest in the land. Were they, as the respondent contends, mere tenants at will, or, as they themselves assert, are they entitled to a permanent inheritable right therein subject to the payment of a fixed rent ?2. The Subordinate Judge of Delhi decreed the suit. On appeal by the defendants the District Judge of Delhi dismissed it. On March 17, 1922, the High Court of Judicature at Lahore, on second appeal by the plaintiff, reversed the decree of the District Judge and restored that of the Subo...
Kala Chand Banerjee Vs. Jagannath Marwari
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-03-1927
Reported in: (1927)29BOMLR882
Salvesen, J.1. This is an appeal from the decision of the High Court of Judicature at Fort William in Bengal, dated November 25, 1924, by which the judgment of the Subordinate Judge of Asansol in Zillah Burdwan, dated February 5, 1923, was reversed and the suit dismissed with costs. The appellant prays that the decision of the High Court should be reversed and that of the Subordinate Judge restored.2. The material facts are as follows:-The appellant is the receiver of the estate of Amulya Krishna Bose, who was adjudicated an insolvent on February 21, 1914, by the District Judge of Bankura who, by the same order, appointed a receiver of Amulya's estate. Amulya was the son of Tara Prasanna Bose, who, in February 1913, had executed a mortgage for the sum of Rs. 40,000 in favour of the defendants over certain properties that belonged to him. He failed to pay the mortgage interest, and on January 11, 1913, the mortgagees instituted a suit for foreclosure of the mortgage. After some procedur...
Secretary of State for India Vs. Tarak Chandra Sadhukhan
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-03-1927
Reported in: (1927)29BOMLR953
Viscount Dunedin, J.1. This is really a most hopeless case for appeal. Their Lordships do not think it necessary to add anything to what was so very well said by the President of the Improvement Tribunal, who has examined the facts with great accuracy.2. As far as the construction of the Act is concerned (and the construction of the Act is the only thing to be determined), their Lordships will only say that it seems to them that the epithet 'permanently' is used as an antithesis to 'temporarily,' and that upon the facts as put by the learned President there can be no doubt that these attachments were anything but temporary and fall absolutely within the word 'permanently,' Indeed, their Lordships can only add that they wonder that such a case was appealed on behalf of the Government.3. Their Lordships will, therefore, humbly advise His Majesty that these appeals be dismissed with costs....
In Re: an Advocate
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-01-1927
Reported in: AIR1927Bom517; (1927)29BOMLR1062
Amberson Marten, Kt., C.J.1. This is a petition under the Disciplinary Jurisdiction in respect of an Advocate of this Court. Counsel have agreed that the papers in the appeal paper book are to be taken as evidence in the case.2. The matter arises out of an inquest which was held by the Coroner of Bombay on the death of one Umar Haji Yusuf Sobani. In his affidavit the advocate states: the deceased 'was an intimate friend of mine and his sudden death upset me. I did not however represent his brother Osman Sobani or any one else in my professional capacity at the inquest before the Coroner. I attended the inquest merely as a friend of the deceased'.3. It appears from the advocate's explanation, Ex. F, that at the adjourned hearing on July 20, the Police Surgeon gave out that the Chemical Analyser's report indicated that opium was found and that death was due to opium. The next day a certain letter was placed in the hands of the advocate, and on the following day, viz., July 22, he visited...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›