Mumbai Court June 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.
Manche Anege Akue Vs. Manche Kojo Ababio Iv
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-16-1927
Reported in: (1928)30BOMLR755
Warrington J.1. The subject matter of the litigation in which the present appeal arises is a sum of money representing the purchase money paid by the Government of the colony for certain lands taken by them for public purposes under statutory powers.2. Rival claims were made to this money. The appellant, the Manche or chief of Sempe, claiming on behalf of communities known as Sempe and Akumaji, asserts that those communities are entitled to share in the fund. The respondent, the Manche of James Town and also the Manche of Alata asserts, that he, as Manche of Alata, is solely entitled to the fund on that community.3. On July 24, 1918, the Divisional Court, consisting of the Chief Justice, Sir Philip Crampton Smyly, rejected the claim of the appellant and gave judgment in favour of the respondent. On May 16, 1924, this judgment was unanimously affirmed by the Full Court, composed of Michelin J., and acting Judges Gardiner Smith and Aitken. Leave to appeal from this judgment to his Majest...
J.B. Petit Vs. the Municipal Corporation of Bombay
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-01-1927
Reported in: AIR1927Bom622; (1927)29BOMLR1430
Blackwell, J.1. This is a suit to question the validity of the election of the second defendant to the office of President of the Municipal Corporation of Bombay. The issues raised are as follows:-(1) Whether the regulations for the appointment of the President of the Corporation made on March 28, 1927, are ultra vires ?(2) Whether, after announcing the result of the drawing of lots the Chairman said that he gave his casting vote for the second defendant ?(3) Whether, if the last issue is answered in the affirmative, the Chairman thereby can be deemed to have given a valid casting vote ?(4) Whether the appointment of the second defendant as President of the Corporation is valid ?(5) Whether, if issue No. 1 is answered in the affirmative, or issue No. 2 in the negative, the plaintiff is entitled to the relief claimed in paragraph (6) of the plaint.2. The appointment of President of the Corporation is governed by Section 37 of Bombay Act III of 1888. Sub-s. (1) of that section is in the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›