Mumbai Court June 1927 Judgments
Purshottam Yeshwant Acharekar Vs. Vishnu GoraThe Dalvi
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-29-1927
Reported in: (1927)29BOMLR1332
Amberson Marten, Kt., C.J.1. In this second appeal, on the facts as found by the lower appellate Court, the 1894 lease set up by the appellant-plaintiff is held not proved, nor is there any evidence that the defendants were tenants after 1890. It is, however, contended in appeal that the tenancy must be presumed to have continued, and that in effect the defendants are estopped from denying their landlord's title, and that consequently the defendants cannot rely on the plea of limitation. The suit having been brought in 1923 it follows from the findings in the lower Court that it is Some thirty-three years since the defendants were proved to have been tenants of the property. The tenancy which was proved was for a fixed period, i. e., one year, and, on the other hand, the defendants have since been in possession of the property for some thirty-three years and paid no rent.2. Under those circumstances we think the case is concluded by authority in this Court, with which we respectfully a...
Tag this Judgment!Kaikhushroo Rustomji Wallace Vs. the Bombay Company Limited
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-28-1927
Reported in: (1927)29BOMLR1367
Viscount Sumner, J.1. This action was brought by the appellant, Mr, Wallace, to recover a balance of commission, alleged to be due to him under an agreement dated February 9, 1920, between himself and the respondents, his former employers. Ultimately the question is one of construction, and the words which are chiefly material are these :-1918-1919 Accounts.-Yon will receive a sum equivalent to 5 per cent, of the nett profits (as shown in the books) Bombay Branch of the Bombay Company, Limited, as accruing from the sales of all goods for which you were salesman, whether on purchase or joint account.In addition to this ... you will be credited with a farther sum equivalent to 5 per cent, of the nett profits as shown in the books of the Bombay Branch as having accrued from the sale of all goods sold on joint account and for which you were salesman during the years 1916-1917, 1917-1918, and 1918-1919.1919-1920 Accounts.-As regards other goods sold by you prior to February 7, 1920, the res...
Tag this Judgment!Raja Rajeswara Setupati Vs. Muthanan Servai
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-28-1927
Reported in: (1927)29BOMLR1400
Viscount Dunedin, J.1. These are two suits which were brought by the Raja of Ramnad, as plaintiff against the cowledar, who held a lease of certain villages, as defendant. The two suits relate to two different villages. The date of the leases is 1894, and, there being no practical difference between them, it will be sufficient to quote one lease.2. The lease, which is termed a cowlenama, was executed on December 10, 1894, and was in these terms:-Whereas cowle has been given to you for 30 faslis from fasli 1303 last with a poruppu of Rs. 420-10-10 per fasli according to peshkash rate, in respect of Vahaikudi village situate within the four boundaries mentioned below and, attached to Kottakudi division, Rajasingamangalam taluk, which is of the extent of nanja seed land kalams. 187-3-0 and punja kurukams 3-0-0 whose average per fasli for the aggregate 10 faslis from fasli 1289 to fasli 1298 works at Rs. 972 3-2, you shall enjoy the same together with mavadai maravadai thittuthidal, etc., ...
Tag this Judgment!Emperor Vs. Nana Khanderao Ghadge
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-28-1927
Reported in: (1927)29BOMLR1476
Madgavkar, J.1. The petitioner Nana Khanderao has been convicted under Section 179, Indian Penal Code, for refusing to answer questions put to him by the Commissioner appointed by the Sub-ordinate Judge of Koregaon. The learned Subordinate Judge under Section 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure sanctioned his prosecution under a 179 of the Indian Penal Code and he has been convicted and applies in revision. The single ground taken in revision is that the sanction by the Subordinate Judge is incompetent and should have been by the Commissioner. The offence alleged being under Section 179, Indian Penal Code, the sanction' would naturally be under Section 195, Clause (a), of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The question on the present application is whether the Commissioner before whom the alleged offence took place was or was not subordinate to the Subordinate Judge.2. It is conceded that the Commissioner is a public servant under Section 21, Clause (4), of the Indian Penal Code. In the...
Tag this Judgment!Laxmanrao Madhavrao Jahagirdar Vs. Shrinivas Lingo Nadgir
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-28-1927
Reported in: (1927)29BOMLR1484
John Wallis, J.1. This is an appeal from a judgment and decree of the High Court of Bombay reversing the decree of the District Judge of Dharwar and dismissing the suit brought by the plaintiff, Laxmanrao jahagirdar of Hebli, for declarations (1) that the plaintiff and defendants Nos. 12 and 13 are and that the Nadgirs are not watandar patils and kulkarnis of Hebli village, (2) that the lands measuring 120 mars entered in the Watan Register of the village prepared under Bombay Act III of 1874 are not watan lands, (3) for a cancellation of the Register, (4) for a declaration that these lands were not liable for the remuneration of patils and kulkarnis, and (5) for the recovery of Rs. 969-0-8 levied from the plaintiff under Bombay Act III of 1874.2. The plaint alleged that the grant to their ancestors in 1748 of the village included 200 mars of land assigned for the remuneration of the patil kulkarni and nadgir offices in the village, and also the offices themselves, that as the defendan...
Tag this Judgment!Premchand Hira Vs. Bai Galal
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-25-1927
Reported in: AIR1927Bom594; (1927)29BOMLR1336
Amberson Marten, Kt., C.J.1. This is another instance of the apparent difficulty of the mofussil Courts in appreciating the essentials for a valid decree under the Indian Divorce Act. In a case from Poona not long ago Walsh v. Walsh, (1926) 29 Bom L.R. 308 we had to send the case back no less than twice for remands in order to have the essential evidence before the Court. In the present case from Nadiad, I regret that it is also necessary to send the case to the learned District Judge for a remand to determine essential points. I also regret that like several other divorce cases from the mofussil we have not had the benefit of the assistance of counsel, and that the time of no less than three Judges is occupied in doing work that should properly have been done in the trial Court.2. Now in the first place the learned Judge here has never had the marriage proved properly. There is no certificate of marriage. There is a statement in the petition that the marriage was solemnized in a Salva...
Tag this Judgment!Gopal Narayan Kulkarni Vs. Sanmukhappa Ningappa Angadi
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-24-1927
Reported in: AIR1927Bom603; (1927)29BOMLR1325
Amberson Marten, Kt., C.J.1. In this second appeal the questions for our consideration are whether a notice of the meeting was 'circulated' to the members within the meaning of Section 35(2)(b) of the Bombay Local Boards Act, 1923, and whether the meeting was validly convened. Secondly, if so, whether the retiring President had power to dissolve the meeting, and, thirdly, whether the fact that seven members left after he had pronounced the meeting dissolved affected the subsequent proceedings in which a new Chairman was elected, and then a President for the ensuing three years elected,2. Now, we are bound in second appeal by the facts as found by the lower appellate Court, and those facts are that a notice convening the meeting was sent by post to all the members of the board: and that it was received by all except the one member in question, via., Mr. Majli, but it was delivered at the latter's house, though in fact he did not receive it. On this I would only say that the learned Judg...
Tag this Judgment!Balla Mal Vs. Ata Ullah Khan
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-23-1927
Reported in: (1927)29BOMLR1289
John Wallis, J.1. On March 16, 1907, the late Mian Muhammed Bakhsh executed a wakfnama or a deed of wakf, by which he purported to dedicate all his remaining properties to charity subject to certain provisions for his own maintenance and the maintenance of the people who had claims on him. He died within the year, on January 15, 1908, and thereupon his son Nasir-ud-Din took possession of the properties, successfully opposed the application for mutation of names made on behalf of the present plaintiff, who was then a minor, as mutawalli of the wakf, and remained in possession until his death in July, 1913. In the following year, the house property included in the wakfnama was attached in execution by one of his creditors, and the plaintiff's objections as mutawalli to the attachment having been disallowed, he filed the present suit by his next friend to establish the rights of wakf.2. The Subordinate Judge at Amritsar and the High Court at Lahore both decided in his favour, and the defe...
Tag this Judgment!Yeshvadabai Vaman Karandikar Vs. Ramchandra Shankar Patvardhan
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-20-1927
Reported in: (1927)29BOMLR1320
Patkar, J.1. [His Lordship after setting out the facts of the case proceeded.] It is contended on behalf of plaintiff No. 1 that the adoption of defendant No. 1 was invalid on the grounds that lI the authority given by the father-in-law by his will could operate only during his life-time, that on the death of Keshav the estate vested in the widow, defendant No. 2, that the adoption could not divest the estate thus vested in defendant No. 2, and that the consent given by defendant No. 2 and the plaintiff was not a valid and free consent. It is further contended that the consent even if given is not sufficient to validate the adoption, and that the plaintiff is not estopped from disputing the adoption. The learned pleader on behalf of the appellant relied on the case of Lakehmibai v. Vishnu Vasudev (1905) I.L.R. 29 Bom. 410 7 Bom. L.R. 436 where it was held that the father-in-law's assent did not survive beyond his life-time so as to enable the son's widow to divest the estate which had ...
Tag this Judgment!Lim Yam Hong Vs. Lam Choon and Company
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-18-1927
Reported in: (1928)30BOMLR757
Darling, J.1. This case was tried by Sir James Murison, Chief Justice, and the nature of the matter in dispute is sufficiently stated by him in these words :-The plaintiffs in this case sue the defendants for $ 10,164 for breach of contract to take delivery of fifteen tons of Singapore Standard Flat Bark Crepe at $ 1,03 1/4 per pound, The defendant denies that ho over made such a contract. The damages represent the difference in price when the rubber in question was sold in the open market after defendant's repudiation of the agreement.The only issue is whether defendant made the agreement or not.The plaintiff says that the agreement was made on his behalf by Cheng Kee, clerk of Messrs, Green & Collier, Brokers, with the defendant on August 4, 1925.The burden of proof lies upon the plaintiff, His witnesses are Cheng Kee, clerk to Messrs. Green & Collier, and Mr. Green.2. The Chief Justice was not satisfied that the plaintiffs had proved the making of the alleged contract, and he theref...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »