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.
Jayaram Bhivaji Acharekar Vs. Dattatraya Jayram Prabhu-desai
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-23-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Bom53; (1929)31BOMLR1259
Madgavkar, J.1. The defendant-respondent was admittedly the owner of the land in suit. In suit No. 159 of 1921 in ejectment against the plaintiff appellant, the latter set up a defence of permanent tenancy which he failed to establish in the trial Court. The present defendant respondent obtained a decree. The plaintiff appealed in appeal No. 131 of 1923 to the District Court and gave a purshis as follows :-There having been no proper opportunity for us to adduce evidence in the lower Court we could not duly prove our tight of permanent tenancy. We have no objection, therefore, to the decree of the lower Court being confirmed. Only the question of permanent tenanoy should be kept undecided and we should be left free to bring a separate suit to have our right of permanent tenancy established.2. That purshis for some reason, which is not intelligible, was accepted by the learned First Class Subordinate Judge A.P., Mr. M.H. Vakil, who ordered 'that the decree of the lower Court is confirme...
Bhimji N. Dalal Vs. the Bombay Trust Corporation Ld.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-20-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Bom306; (1930)32BOMLR64
Wadia, J.1. The plaintiff is a solicitor of this Court, and has filed this suit against the defendants in tort for conversion of a Dodge car No. Z8529. On or about May 29, 1924, the plaintiff negotiated with the Bombay Cycle and Motor Agency Limited for the purchase of the car for the sum of Rs, 5150, and the amount was entered in the daily sale book of the said Agency Company against the plaintiff's name, The plaintiff' evidently was not in a position to pay the whole of the purchase price down at once, and he, therefore, through the intervention of one KhersedjiLimji, the Managing Director of the Agency Company, applied to the defendant corporation to arrange for payment of the said sum on certain terms. The said application was made on a printed form of the defendant corporation ' for the purchase' of a Dodge car to be used, in Bombay for the ' purchase price ' of Rs. 5150 on 'your Hire Purchase system,' meaning the Hire Purchase system of the defendants. The details of the payment ...
Emperor Vs. Daljitsing Fattehsing
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-20-1929
Reported in: (1930)32BOMLR106
Patkar, J.1. In this case the accused was tried on a charge under Section 19 (a) and (d) of the Indian Arms Act XI of 1878 before the Honorary First Class Magistrate at Bhusaval, and convicted and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 250. On appeal, the learned Sessions Judge confirmed the conviction and reduced the fine to Rs. 50.2. The accused, who is a Sikh resident of Delhi, was found in possession of thirty-five kirpans or jarabias at Bhusaval. The accused admitted that he had brought them from Delhi and desired to take them in the Nizam's territory for sale and also admitted that he had already sold two Kirpans at Bhusaval. Out of the thirty-five kirpans nine kirpans were below nine inches, twenty-three were between nine and nine- and a half inches, and three were ten inches in length.3. Under a 27 of the Indian Arms Act, 1878, the Governor General in Council may, from time to time, by notification published in the Gazette of India:(a) exempt any person by name or in virtue of his offi...
The Midnapore Zamindary Company Vs. the Secretary of State for India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-20-1929
Reported in: (1930)32BOMLR114
Binod Mitter, J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment and o decree of the High Court of Judicature at Fort William in Bengal dated August 4, 1924, which reversed the decree of December 9, 1921, and restored the decree of the Subordinate Judge of Murshidabad dated March 28,1919.2. The questions for determination in the suit out of which the present appeal arises were (1) whether the appellants are raiyats or tenure holders of a certain holding in Chur Narainpur consisting of about 800 Bighas, (2) whether the suit comes within the purview of Section 104H or the proviso to Section 111A of the Bengal Tenancy Act, and (3) whether the suit is within time having regard to the law of limitation under Section 104H of the same Act.3. The Subordinate Judge held that the appellants have not proved that the entry in the record of rights finally published on April 2, 1915, to the effect that the appellants are tenure holders is incorrect and they further held that the plaintiffs' suit is not mainta...
Daljitsing Fattehsing Vs. Emperor
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-20-1929
Reported in: 125Ind.Cas.435
Patkar, J.1. In this case the accused was tried on a charge under Section 19 (a) and (d) of the Indian Arms Act XI of 1878 before the Honorary First Glass Magistrate at Bhusawal, and convicted and sentenced to pay a fine of Re. 250. On appeal, the learned Sessions Judge confirmed the conviction and reduced the fine to Rs. 50.2. The accused, who is a Sikh resident of Delhi, was found in possession of thirty-five kirpans or jambias at Bhusawal. The accused admitted that he had brought them from Delhi and desired to take them in the. Nizam's territory for sale and also admitted that he had already sold two kirpans at Bhusawal. Oat of the thirty-five kirpans nine kirpans were below nine inches, twenty-three were between nine and nine and-a-half inches, and three were ten inches in length.3. Under Section 27 of the Indian Arms Act, 1878, the Governor-General in Council may, from time to time, by notification published in the Gazette of India:(a) exempt any person by name or in virtue of his...
Dattatraya Jayaram Prabhu Desai Vs. the Secretary of State for India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-18-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Bom95; (1929)31BOMLR1235
Murphy, J.1. The subject matter of this appeal is the disposal of certain land situated in the Malvan taluka of the Ratnagiri District and known as 'Sheri' land. This is Government waste land and the former arrangement was that it was let to certain persons on a thirty years' lease. The group of survey numbers! involved in this suit had originally been leased in 1859 to one appellant's ancestors. His lease was renewed for thirty years in 1883, and expired in 1913. It the meanwhile, the Collector of Ratnagiri and Government had been considering the question of the disposal of the Sheri lands, and in October 1912 Government issued a resolution, No. 9415 of that date, containing order as to their disposal, based on the Collector's report and the comments in forwarding the report of the Divisional Com-of State missioner. In accordance with this resolution, enquiries were Parted, an(j in this case, these were made by the District Deputy Collector in charge of the Malwan taluka. His order wa...
Shiddappa Irappa Dubalgundi Vs. Revappa Somappa Sajjan
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-18-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Bom141; (1929)31BOMLR1254
Madgabkar, J.1. The question in this appeal is, whether the decree in appeal No. 4 of 1924 of the District Court of Bijapur was a nullity as the judgment-debtor the defendant-respondent contended. The trial Court held that it was not a nullity and dismissed the respondent's objection. In appeal by the defendant judgment-debtor the District Court allowed the appeal and dismissed the darkhast with costs, The plaintiff decree-holder appeals.2. One Irappa Dubalgundi who had a son, the minor Shiddappa, owned two shops, one at Bijapur which went by his own name, and the other at Talikot which went by the name of the minor. The respondent-defendant judgment-debtor passed a khata to the Talikot shop, which bore the name of the minor. Irappa died leaving a will and appointing three executors among whom one was Raghavji Nathuram and another Rao Saheb Shivlinga Jagdev Deshmukh. After his death suit No. 173 of 1922 was instituted against the respondent in the Subordinate Court at Bijapur and ended...
Hari Govind Kalkundri Vs. the City Municipality of Belgaum
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-17-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Bom68; (1929)31BOMLR1249
Norman Kemp, Kt., A.C.J.1. This is a re visional application to set aside the decree of the Second Glass Subordinate Judge of in Small Cause Civil Suit No. 613 of 1927. This was a suit by the applicant to recover the excess paid by him in respect of the cess known as 'Sullage Water Cess' levied on his house, The house in suit is divided into seventeen tenements occupied by seventeen families residing separately. A rough sketch of the premises-has been put in but we have been able to gather from the arguments before us that the space in which this building is erected has two outside walls in which there are three gates each of which opens into a small space and the seventeen tenements have seventeen doors opening into this space. Each tenement has, therefore, direct communication with this space and through the gate to the road. The learned Subordinate Judge construed the rule passed by the Belgaum Municipality under Section 46(1) of the Bombay City Municipalities Act as meaning that th...
Ghelabhai Jinabhai Vs. Chaggan Narasi
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-16-1929
Reported in: (1929)31BOMLR1232
Norman Kemp. Kt., A.C.J.1. Defendants Nos. 2, 3, and 4 are the sons of defendant No. 1 and are members of a joint Hindu family. Defendant No. 1 opened a khata in his own name for goods supplied from June 28, 1923, to May 80, 1924. Another khata was opened in the plaintiff's books by defendant No. 2 which runs from June 3, 1924, to May 22, 1925, A third khata was opened in the names of defendants Nos. 2 and 4, and the items in that khata run from May 29, 1925, to October 26, 1925. The plaintiff filed his suit on the first khata in the name of Chhagan, the father, claiming a certain sum of money as the balance due at the foot of that khata. That suit was No. 800 of 1927. In the course of the hearing if transpired on the production of a 'samadaskat' book that certain credits, which should have been credited to that khata, were credited to the kbata in the name of defendant No. 2, whereupon the learned Judge decided that the plaintiff cannot sue in respect of the khata in the 1st defendant...
James R.R. Skinner Vs. Robert Hercules Skinner
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-16-1929
Reported in: (1930)32BOMLR1
George Lowndes, J.1. One Richard Skinner died in 1913 intestate, and his estate, which included immovable properties of considerable value, devolved upon his brother George Skinner and his sister Alice Skinner in equal shares. Richard Skinner was at the time of his death indebted to the Delhi and London Bank, and administration of his estate was granted to a Mr. Angelo, the Bank's manager. On June 18, 1918, while the estate was still under administration, George Skinner executed in favour of Robert Hercules Skinner, the first respondent in this appeal, a document in the following terms :-[The first sentence, is torn out.'This day between Mr. (torn out) at present at Meerut of the one part, hereinafter called the first party, and Mr. R. H. Skinner of Hansi of the second part, hereinafter called the second party.Whereas Mr. G.C.E. Skinner, the said first party (paper torn), heir to the estate of his late brother, Mr. R, K. Skinner, and the said first party therefore as heir has a (paper ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »