Mumbai Court November 1928 Judgments
Sarat Kumari Bibi Vs. Sakhi Chand Bahadur
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-30-1928
Reported in: (1929)31BOMLR270
Lancelot Sanderson, J.1. These are consolidated appeals by Sarat Kumari Bibi against two decrees of the High Court of Judicature at Patna dated December 9, 1925, whereby the decree of the learned District Judge of Bhagalpur dated June 23, 1924, was reversed.2. The respondents, Rai Sakhi Chand Bahadur, Babu Ganesh Lal, Madusudan Das and Moulvi Jamaluddin Khan, who are four out of the five trustees named in the will purporting to have been made by one Raghunandan Lal on July 24, 1923, filed an application for probate on February 27, 1924, in the Court of the said District Judge of Bhagalpur.3. Raghunandan died on August 31, 1923, leaving two daughters, Raj Kumari Bibi and Sarat Kumari Bibi.4. His other near relations were his widowed sister Rajdulari Bibi and Krishna Bibi, the widow of Raghunandan's brother, Jadunandan Lal.5. Caveats were filed by the two daughters and by Krishna Bibi; but objections were filed by Krishna Bibi and Sarat Kumari Bibi only.6. In these appeals the Board is c...
Tag this Judgment!Ma Ngwe Naing Vs. Maung Tha Maung
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-30-1928
Reported in: (1929)31BOMLR311
Atkin, J.1. This is an appeal from the High Court at Rangoon allowing an appeal from a decree of the District Judge of Tharrawaddy, made in favour of the plaintiff, the present appellant. The suit was brought by the plaintiff, Ma Ngwe Naing, against her father, the defendant, Maung Tha Maung, claiming possession of certain lands, of which she was the registered owner. It is not disputed that the father, by deed dated January 15, 1904, purported to have made a partition of property and to have conveyed the property in question to his daughter. He alleges, however, that the transaction was a fictitious transaction intended merely to defeat his creditors. The High Court reversing the District Judge have be held; the daughter has appealed.2. Maung Tha Maung married as his first wife Ma Pu; the plaintiff is the only issue of the marriage. In February, 1903, Ma Pu died; the plaintiff was then eight or nine years old, Later, in 1903, the defendant married Ngwe Hlaing. On the remarriage the pl...
Tag this Judgment!Narayan Kondaji Temkar Vs. Govind Krishna Abhyankar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-30-1928
Reported in: (1929)31BOMLR345
Madgavkar, J.1. The question in this appeal is whether defendant No. 5-appellant, by reason of his vendors' purchase of the interest of Kanoji at the sale in 1920 held under Sections 88 and 89 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is entitled to the property as against the plaintiff-respondent who is a decree-holder in a suit for specific performance against the same Kanoji instituted on August 24, 1927, Both the lower Courts decided that the attachment by the civil suit by the plaintiff-respondent being prior, the doctrine of lis pendens applied to the sale by the criminal Court to the appellant, and decreed the claim. Defendant No. 5 appeals.2. The relevant facts are shortly as follows : There was an agreement by Kanoji to sell the plaint property to the plaintiff-respondent, dated August 2, 1916. The respondent's suit No. 164 of 1917 was filed on August 24, 1917, was decreed on November 30, 1920, in favour of the plaintiff-respondent and directed Kanoji and his sons to execute the sale ...
Tag this Judgment!Madhusudan Pandurang Samant Vs. Bhagwan Atmaram
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-30-1928
Reported in: (1929)31BOMLR395; 118Ind.Cas.788
Baker, J.1. [His Lordship, after setting out facts, continued:] The first question is, whether the suit is barred by res judicata by reason of suit No. 116 of 1910, in which all questions relating to the mortgage were decided as between the fathers of the plaintiffs and the mortgagees, the defendants. We are now only concerned with plaintiffs Nos. 1 and 2, sons of Pandurang; the other plaintiffs not being born at the date of the suit in 1910. The property is ancestral property and the trying Judge decided that the suit was not barred by res judieata, on the short ground that the present plaintiffs were not parties to the suit of 1910, and they claim not through their fathers but in their own right and that the grandsons take an inherent interest in the ancestral property as such.2. The learned District Judge was of opinion that the defendant in the former suit (the fathers of the present plaintiffs) were held to be litigating in respect of a private right claimed in common for themselv...
Tag this Judgment!Pandu Mahipat Vs. Shivshankardas Shivlaldas
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-29-1928
Reported in: (1929)31BOMLR335; 118Ind.Cas.702
Baker, J.1. These are three companion appeals which may be disposed of in one judgment. They arise out of three suits brought by the Jahagirdar of; Nandurbar in Khandesh against certain tenants to recover possession of the lands on the basis that they are annual tenants under rent notes passed by them to the landlord. The tenants set up a permanent tenancy, which both the Courts below havei found not proved, and the tenants have made these three second appeals. The first contention raised by the learned pleader for the appellants is that the leases in question are compulsorily registrable under Section 17(d) of the Indian Registration Act, inasmuch as they are leases of immovable property from year to year, and reserve a yearly rent. The case law on the subject of leases is voluminous, but each case must be decided on its own merits according to the terms of the lease in question. Now the leases in question are of a somewhat peculiar nature, and will have to be set out. The first lease...
Tag this Judgment!Bomanji Ardeshir Wadia Vs. the Secretary of State for India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-28-1928
Reported in: (1929)31BOMLR256
Viscount Dunedin, J.1. Early in the last century an ancestor of the leading plaintiff for services rendered to the Government received a grant of Ks, 4.000 per annum. In 1844 his successor prayed that the grant might be changed into a grant of villages in Salaette, an island near Bombay. This after some negotiations was done in 1847 and the grant which falls to be construed in this action was given. This grant, after a preamble narrating the original grant of Rs. 4,C0O to the family and the request that it might be exchanged for a grant of villages, goes on as follows :-The aforesaid villages of Juhu and Vile Parla in the island of Salsette are hereby assigned to you and your heirs in perpetuity from the year A.D.. 1847-8. The particulars of the cultivation, etc., founded on the Janaabandi of 1842-3 and the conditions of the grant are as follows :-2. Then follows a long and minute description of the villages, the boundaries and the various lands from which revenue was levied calculated...
Tag this Judgment!Lakhamgowda Basavaprabhu Vs. Appanna Basaprabhu Iti
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-27-1928
Reported in: (1929)31BOMLR235
John Wallis, J.1. This is an appeal from a decree of the High Court at Bombay reversing a decree of the Subordinate Judge of Belgaum and dismissing a suit brought by the plaintiff, the Desai of Vantmuri, to eject the defendants from certain lands held by them on service tenure in the village of Nagannanoli in case of their not agreeing to render to the plaintiff the services claimed from them, and also for damages.2. The important office of Desai had formerly been hereditary in the plaintiff's family; and Nagannanoli, one of the villages which had formed the watan or endowment of the office, had been confirmed to them in inam by the British Government after the office and its duties had ceased to exist.3. According to the plaint, the plaintiff's inam lands in the village included three parcels, A, B, C, containing 7 1/2 bighas, 3 3/4 bighas and 7 1/2 bighas respectively, of which A and B had been granted by the plaintiff's ancestor to one Shivappa Iti in Fasli 1180(1769-70) and C had b...
Tag this Judgment!Venidas Nemchand Vs. Bai Champabai
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-27-1928
Reported in: (1929)31BOMLR1014
Rangnekar, J.1. [His Lordship, after setting out facts and issues raised, proceeded-] The point raised relates to a question of procedure under the testamentary and intestate jurisdiction of this Court as to what is the proper procedure to be followed where two wills are set up by two persons in regard to the same estate, and I have taken time to consider my decision in order to settle the practice once for all.2. The first question is, What is the procedure to be followed For that I have to turn to Section 295 of the Indian Succession Act and Rule 602 of the Original Side Rules. Section 295 provides that wherever there is contention in probate proceedings, the proceedings shall take, as nearly as may be, the form of a regular suit, according to the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, 1928 in which the petitioner for probate or letters of administration, as the case may be, shall be the plaintiff', and the person who has appeared to oppose the grant shall be the defendant....
Tag this Judgment!Sripatiprasadji Biharilalji Vs. Laxmidas Dungerbhai
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-23-1928
Reported in: (1929)31BOMLR243
Shaw, J.1. These are consolidated appeals from a decree of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, dated December 22, 1922, and made in appeals Nos. 164 and 199 of 1919, varying a decree of the Court of the District Judge of Ahmedabad dated August 14, 1919.2. The suit arises in this way, In 1804 a Hindu religious reformer, an ascetic coming from Northern India, named Smaminarayan, formed in the Bombay Presidency a new religious sect named after his own name, It consisted of men who. had renounced the world, secondly, of widows of men who had renounced the world, and thirdly of lay followers. He built two main temples one in the city of Ahmedabad and the other at Vadtal in the Kaira District, with the latter of which this suit is concerned. Amongst the buildings were a temple, a monastery, a theological and Sanskrit school and other accommodation for dwelling and residence.3. The head of the establishment was the Acharya. The founder was worshipped as an incarnation of the god Krishna. ...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Prakash Singh Vs. the Allahabad Bank Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-23-1928
Reported in: (1929)31BOMLR289
Lancelot Sanderson, J.1. By an Order of His Majesty in Council dated April 22, 1927, special leave was granted to the appellant Raja Shri Prakash Singh to appeal against the decree of the Chief Court of Oudh dated October 4, 1926.2. The facts relevant to the appeal are as follows :-3. By two mortgage deeds, one dated March 24, 1911, to secure the sum of Rs. 3,50,000 and interest and the other, dated March 20, 1913, to secure the sum of Rs. 12,00,000 and interest, certain property now belonging to the appellant was mortgaged to the respondents. In the year 1916 the respondents brought a suit in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Sitapur to recover the amount due on these two mortgages and future interest against Raja Debi Prakash Singh (the father of the appellant since deceased) and the appellant; and on December 4, 1916, a decree was passed in the terms of a compromise made between the parties.4. By the said compromise it was agreed that a sum of Rs. 16,67,049-12-6 was due under th...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »