Mumbai Court July 1929 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.
Basappa Gurubasappa Kittur Vs. Tayawa Virupaxappa
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-31-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Bom79; (1929)31BOMLR1266
Madgavkar, J.1. The question in this appeal is, whether the registered deed, Exhibit 45, dated June 15, 1907, is an ostensible sale or in reality a mortgage. There was also an unregistered document bearing the date previous to the registered document containing an agreement to reconvey. The plaintiff-appellant's case was that it was antedated as confirmation of the mortgage nature of the traneaction of June 13, 1907. The defendants-respondents did not admit the genuineness of this document and denied the mortgage. The trial Court held that this document Exhibit 46 did not require registration and was admissible. The Subordinate Judge thought that it was actually passed on the date prior to the ostensible sale and on the strength of Exhibit 46 and the oral evidence declared that the plaint transaction was a mortgage and as the result of making accounts under the Dekkhan Agriculturists' Belief Act that the plaintiffs should pay Rs. 1,000 to the defendants, the representatives of the mort...
Parsu Dhondi Vs. the Trustees of the Port of Bombay
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-31-1929
Reported in: (1929)31BOMLR1304
Murphy, J.1. The workman in this case was injured while stacking certain bales in a shed alongside the wharf in the Victoria Docks, Bombay. It is contended before us that the words 'for the purpose of' unloading, loading, &c;, which are to be found in Schedule II (5) of the Workmen's Compensation Act VIII of 1923, should be interpreted very liberally, and as implying a wider meaning than had the word 'in' been used in their place. But it seems to me that such a meaning cannot be read into them and that the expression 'for the purpose of' used in this connection means the same thing as 'in' and that other words would have been used had it been intended to include a man, injured while engaged in preparations for the purpose of ultimately, loading bales on to a ship, In fact the same argument might be used to apply to the case of every person engaged in working on such bales at any one of the many steps which intervene from where the bales are pressed in the mill to where they are stacked...
Ravjibhai Nathabhai Patel Vs. Ranchhod Ragunath Patel
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-29-1929
Reported in: (1929)31BOMLR1262
Madgavkar, J.1. The facts of this appeal are stated in Ranchhod v. Ravjibhai (1925) 28 Bom. L.R. 631. This Court remanded the appeal for decision on the merits to the District Judge, and on remand, the District Judge held that the plaintiff could fall back on the original loan of Rs. 2,000 as the cause of action. He set aside the decree of the trial Court dismissing the suit, and decreed the claim which, he held, was not barred by limitation. The defend-ant appeals.2. The two questions in appeal are, firstly, whether the respondent can be allowed to fall back on the loan as his original cause of action, notwithstanding the material alteration in the promissory note, and, if so, secondly, whether the claim is barred by limitation. Paragraph 2 of the plaint states as follows:-the abovenamed defendant had borrowed Rs. 2,000 cash from the plaintiff No. 1, the guardian of plaintiff No. 2, in the month of Aso of Samvat 1974 (A.D. 1918) and the defendant in respect of this liability had execu...
Ramchandra Anant Naik Vs. Lakshman Sambarao Sadekar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-29-1929
Reported in: (1929)31BOMLR1271
Patkar, J.1. In this case the plaintiff sued for specific performance of the agreements to convey passed by the defendant in respect of two survey Nos., survey No. 121 in the village in Bijrukanchanally and survey No. 34 in the village of Nalawani.2. It appears that the defendant borrowed Rs. 420 from the present plaintiff and purchased survey No. 121 at an auction sale. On September 20, 1922, Rs. 105 were borrowed from the plaintiff and one-fourth of the auction purchase money was paid on September 20, 1922, and on October 3, the defendant borrowed Rs. 315 from the plaintiff and passed a receipt, Exhibit 22, for the sum of Rs. 420, In respect of survey No. 34 the defendant borrowed Rs. 60 from the plaintiff on September 26, 1922, for payment of one-fourth of the purchase money, and on October 9, 1922, he borrowed Rs. 180 from the plaintiff and passed a receipt, Exhibit 14. The present plaintiff brought two suits for specific performance of the two agreements to sell contained in Exhib...
B.B. and C.i. Railway Vs. the Rajnagar Spining and C. Co. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-29-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Bom129; (1929)31BOMLR1426
Norman Kemp, Kt., A.C.J.1. This is a revision application against the decree of the learned Small Causes Court Judge at Ahmedabad decreeing the plaintiff's suit. The plaintiff consigned eighteen bales of cotton piece-goods from Ahmedabad to Cawnpore under Invoiae No. 807, Railway Receipt No. 78862 of July 27, 1926; at owner's risk in risk note form B. The wagon arrived at Kasganj station by the 358 down train on August 1, 1926. Theire the seals were found missing but the rivets which had fastened the doors were intact. The door was immediately resealed and the train remained at Kasganj the whole of the night of August 1, 1926, and the next day it left at 19-20 hours. The 'railway train consisted of thirty-three wagons in all and the particular wagon in question was the sixth from the engine. When the Spiriting train arrived at Shamsabad at about 23-27 hours on August 2, 1926, it was noticed that the door of the wagon in question was Kemp open and that the off-side seal and rivets were ...
Bijai Saran Sahi Vs. Rudra Bageshwari Prasad Bahadur Sahi
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-29-1929
Reported in: (1930)32BOMLR144
Carson, J.1. The present suit was brought in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Gorakhpur by the plaintiffs (first three respondents) to recover possession from the defendants (appellants) of certain villages known as Kanchanpur and Patkoli with mesne profits and costs. The Subordinate Judge made a decree for possession and on appeal the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad by a decree dated May 28, 1926, affirmed the decree of the Subordinate Judge. At the hearings before the Courts respectively the defendants (appellants) relied upon their possession under a certain purchase deed dated November 19, 1908, of the. equity of redemption of one Mahant Karya Bharathi in the said villages, whilst the plaintiffs (respondents) claimed a superior title through certain sale certificates in respect of each of the villages eventuating out of suits filed by the predecessor of the plaintiffs (respondents). It is unnecessary to go into any detail as to this branch of the controversy between the ...
Lallubhai Brijmohan Vs. Jamnadas Harakhji Sanghavi
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-29-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Bom462; (1930)32BOMLR193
Rangnekar, J 1. The summons raises the question whether in a case governed by the Indian Arbitration Act IX of 1899 the Court has, under Section 12 of the Act, power to extend the time for making the award after the time for making the award had expired, and although the award has in fact already been made.2. Briefly the facts are as follows. The respondent employed the petitioner to carry out some repairs and structural alterations to his building under a written agreement dated February 16, 1927. The petitioner carried out the work, but a dispute arose between the parties as to his bills. Ultimately, on September 17, 1927, all matters in dispute between the petitioner and the respondent were by mutual consent referred to the sole arbitration of an engineer. The agreement to refer contained no provision as to the time within which the award was to be made. The arbitrator entered on the reference on March 8, 1928. It is clear, therefore, that by virtue of Section 6 of the Act the third...
Haji Abadi Hassan and Sons Vs. a Besse
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-25-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Bom57; (1929)31BOMLR1302; 122Ind.Cas.851
Norman Kemp. Kt., A.C.J.1. This is a reference under the Aden Act II of 1864. Under Section 8 of that Act the value of the subject matter of the suit in appeal being over Rs. 1,000 the Resident had to accede to the request of the applicant to refer the case to this Court.2. This application arises out of a suit filed at Aden for the price of a certain quantity of petrol supplied to the firm of Haji Abadi & Sons. The suit was filed against the company through its managing partner, Abdul Hamid. A decree was passed and subsequently under Order XXI, Rule 50, proceedings were taken against one Haji Abadi bin Haspan, father of Abdul Hamid. Haji Abadi Hassan denied that be was a partner in the firm and said that he was a partner in another firm Haji Abadi Hassan. The trial Court found against this contention and held that he was a partner and that finding has been confirmed in appeal, but the Resident under the circumstances I have mentioned has referred the case to us for a decision on the q...
Raghunath Prasad Singh Vs. the Deputy Commissioner
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-25-1929
Reported in: (1930)32BOMLR129
Binod Mitter, J.1. This is an appeal from the decree dated April 27, 1926, of the Chief Court of Oudh, affirming the decree of the Subordinate Judge of Partabgarh dated April 22, 1924. The litigation relates to properties originally owned by one Rajah Ajit Singh, who died on December 18, 1889, having devised and bequeathed those properties to Rajah Partab Bahadur Singh by his will dated November 6, 1884. Rajah Partab Bahadur Singh died on June 18, 1921.2. The principal question for determination in the present appeal is whether on the true construction of the said will Partab took a life interest or an absolute interest in the property devised by the said will. The appellants (who are the heirs of Raja Ajit Singh) claimed to be entitled to the property in dispute in this appeal on the footing that Partab took only a life interest under the said will, and the respondents 4 to 9, who are devisees or transferees of or from Partab, contend that Partab took an absolute interest under the wi...
Ma Pwa May Vs. S.R.M.M.a Chettyar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-25-1929
Reported in: (1930)32BOMLR117
Atkin, J.1. This is an appeal from a decree of the High Court of Judicature at Rangoon. The plaintiffs arc the mortgagees under a mortgage dated March 13, 1924, by which Maung Po Saving' and his wife Ma Twe mortgaged to the plaintiffs for Rs. 20,000 four oil wells in the Yenangaung oil field. The consideration for the mortgage is alleged to be a sum of Rs. 1.3,764 the balance of principal and interest on three promissory notes dated June 25, 1921, November 25, 1921, and May 30, 1923, for the sums of Rs. 7,700, Rs. 1,700, and Rs. 2,600 respectively, and made by tile mortgagors in favour of the first named mortgagee and her husband. The second-named mortgagee is Ma Pwa May's son. His wife is the niece of Maung Po Saung, one of the mortgagors. The further consideration, making up the total sum of Rs. 20,000, is alleged to be a present advance of Rs. 6,236 in cash. The mortgage was registered on March 14, 1924-There is no doubt that at the date of this mortgage the mortgagors were heavily ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »