Mumbai Court August 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.
Hanmant Ramchandra Kulkarni Vs. Secretary of State for India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-29-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Bom254; (1930)32BOMLR155; 129Ind.Cas.391
Patkar, J....
Gopalrao Krishnarao Sarnobat Vs. Hari Lakshman Patil
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-22-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Bom65; (1929)31BOMLR1291; 122Ind.Cas.856
Madgavkar, J.1. The question in this appeal is, whether the darkhast by the plaintiff-appellant-decree-holder against the defendants-respondents is barred by limitation, The appellant obtained a decree on April 4, 1918, against Had Lakshman, the deceased father of the respondent who was a member of a joint Hindu family. In May 1921 the sons were brought upon the record in the Darkhast No. 188 of 1921. On November 7, 1922, the Court ordered notices to issue and on November 17, the notices were issued returnable on January 23, 1928, On November 23, 1922, the appellant gave an application (Exhibit 4) to meet the objections of two of the sons who had refused to accept service on the ground that their names were not properly described in the notice. The objections as to these names, as is clear from the order of that date, was futile. Thus, the son named Ram chandra had been described in the decree as Bamrao which is in fact synonymous. Similarly, Gajanan was called Gaja. The third son Trim...
Manilal Lallubhai Vs. Chandulal Tribhovandas
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-22-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Bom430; (1930)32BOMLR424
Norman Kemp, Kt., Acting C.J.1. The question for our consideration here involves the construction of a mortgage dated May 16, 1922, registered on May 30, 1922, and the terms of a rent-note passed by the plaintiff to the defendant on May 30, 1922. The facts of the case are sufficiently set out in the judgment of the lower Court. Shortly put, the plaintiff contends that his agent to discharge the mortgage has overpaid the defendant two months' interest as rent for two intercalary months. The dispute arises through the alleged difference between the mortgage and the rent note. In the lower Court the plaintiff contended that the mortgage was altered by the rent-note and in this Court he contends that the mortgage is to be construed by the subsequent rent-note. The mortgage stipulates for repayment at the end of six years and provides that interest should be reckoned according to the vernacular months taking into calculation any intercalary months. The mortgage goes on to say : ' We have re...
Dhondi Shivaji Rajivade Vs. Lakshman Mhaskuji Khaire
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-16-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Bom55; (1929)31BOMLR1287; 122Ind.Cas.862
Patkar, J.1. In this ease plaintiffs sued to redeem and recover possession of plaint property alleged to have been mortgaged by their ancestor in 1799. The plaintiffs, relying on an acknowledgment of 1865, have brought the present suit on August 12, 1924. The learned Subordinate Judge held that the acknowledgment was not valid and binding, and therefore the suit was barred by limitation. On appeal the learned Assistant Judge did not go into the question as to whether the acknowledgment was valid, but held that the plaintiffs' suit was barred by limitation as the right to redeem was lost on account of the Acts of 1859 and 1861.2. It is urged on behalf of the appellants that the mortgage deed of 1799 provided a period of seven years for payment of the mortgage amount, and the cause of action arose in 1806 and the acknowledgment of 1865 before the expiry of sixty years gave a fresh starting point of limitation, and therefore the present suit was within time.3. According to Regulation V of...
Mahomedalli Ibrahimji Vs. Lakshmibai Anant Palande
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-14-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Bom122; (1929)31BOMLR1442
Norman Kemp, Kt., A.C.J.1. This is a Letters Patent Appeal against the summary dismissal of the appeal from the decision of the District Judge of Poona who reversed the decision of the Extra-Joint Subordinate Judge, Poona, in Darkhast No. 211 of 1925. Shortly put, the facts of the case are as follows:-In Suit 192 of 1924 the plaintiff applied for an order for attachment before judgment. The deceased, one Anant Wasudeo Palande, stood surety for the defendant under Civil Procedure Code, Order XXX.VIII, Rule 5. He executed a bond in Form 6 to Appendix F to the Code. On April 12, 1924, the plaintiff and the defendant arrived at a compromise which was subsequently recorded as an adjustment of the suit and a decree passed in terms thereof by the Extra-Joint Subordinate Judge. The compromise allowed the judgment-debtor to pay the amount by instalments of Rs. 200 per month. The first instalment was payable on May 12, 1924, the second on Jane 12, 1924, and the decree further provided that in de...
Jodha Bijal Vs. Maganlal Chhaganlal Desai
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-13-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Bom80; (1929)31BOMLR1307
Norman Kemp, Kt., A.C.J.1. These are revision applications against the decision of the District Judge of Broach and Panch Mahals reversing the decision of the Joint Second Class Subordinate Judge of Godhra who passed a decree in favour of the plaintiffs for the excess rent recovered from them. The plaintiffs are the tenants and the defendants the Inamdars of the village. All the suits and appeals were heard together. Suit No. 10 of 1926, out of which revision application No. 429 of 1928 arises, is the main appeal and our decision in it applies to all.2. The facts have been stated at considerable length in the Judgments of the lower Courts. We are of opinion that Suit No. 10 of 1926, out of which revision application No. 429 of 1929 arises, was for recovery of the amount paid under threat of seizure plus the penalty and interest by way of damages for the detention of the money. This being so, it was a suit cognizable by a Court of Small Causes. The plaintiff filed it as a Small Causes C...
Nathuram Hiraram Thakur Vs. the Secretary of State for India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-13-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Bom497; (1930)32BOMLR907
Murphy, J.1. The point we have to decide is whether Survey-No. 656 of Kanj, in the Viramgam Taluka of the Ahmedabad District, is liable to the assessment of Rs. 2 for land revenue, and to annas two for local fund cess which has been imposed on it. The way in which this point comes up for decision is as follows:-This survey number is within the talukdari estate of Bhankoda, which is held by defendants Nos. 8 to 38 as talukdars. But the land has been possessed by plaintiffs and their predecessors in interest for as far back as memory goes, and it is alleged by the plaintiffs and not seriously denied by the talukdars, free of any payment to them of, either rent, or the proportionate share of the assessment and local fund, which the talukdars themselves pay to Government for it, in the form of 'jama.'2. The explanation probably is that the plaintiffs being of a Brahmin family the talukdars' ancestors allowed those of the plaintiffs to occupy the land, without exacting any of the usual dues...
Mansukh Panachand Shah Vs. Trikambhai Ichhabhai Patel
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-09-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Bom39; (1929)31BOMLR1279
Madgavkar, J.1. The question in this appeal was, whether the defendant-respondent was a permanent or merely an annual tenant of the plaintiff's-appellants. The trial Court held in favour of the plaintiffs-appellants and the District Court in favour of the respondent-defendant. The plaintiffs' appeal was summarily dismissed by this Court and the present appeal is under the Letters Patent.2. The question of permanent tenancy, though it is to be decided on facts, is a legal inference from facts and therefore a question of law, which it is open to consider in second appeal: Dhanna Mal v. Moti Sagar : (1927)29BOMLR870 and Rama v. Abdul Rahim : AIR1921Bom395 .3. The history of the land is as follows:-4. It was alleged by the appellants, but not admitted by the respondent, that the original title to the land vested in the respondent's ancestors and that they made a gift of it for their spiritual benefit to the ancestors of the vendors of the appellants, who were Brahmin priests. The appellant...
Emperor Vs. Bhalchandra Trimbak Ranadive
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-05-1929
Reported in: (1929)31BOMLR1151
Patkar, J.1. In this case the two accused are members of the managing committee of the Girni Kamgar Union, Accused No. 2 is also a secretary of the Union and the editor of the newspaper Kranti, which is the organ of the Girni Kamgar Union, On July 12, 1929, the Commissioner of Police issued a notification, Ex. A, under Sub-section (3) of Section 23 of the City of Bombay Police Act IV of 1902 prohibiting the president, the secretary, the members of the managing committee, and the members of the Girni Kamgar Union, from holding, convening or calling together any assembly of mill hands or employees of the Textile mills of Bombay for one week from the date of the order. The notification was duly published in the mill area in the evening of the 12th. On July 13 in the morning Superintendent Mr. Spiers got a copy of the hand-bill, Ex. C, purporting to be signed by six persons including the accused inviting the strikers to attend the meeting for women Article 3 p. m. and for men at 5 p. m. an...
Gotiram Nana Nevade Vs. Kesarbai Kevalchand
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-01-1929
Reported in: AIR1930Bom47; (1929)31BOMLR1276
Madgavkar, J.1. The question is, whether the property purchased by defendants Nos. 2 and 3 appellants from defendant No. 1 is subject to the right of residence in favour of the plaintiff-respondent, the widowed mother of defendant No. 1. The trial Court held that it was not. The lower appellate Court held that it was. Defendants Nos. 2 and 3 appeal.2. The plaintiff's claim in the first instance was based on an agreement to sell the property to her passed by her son and bearing a date anterior to the conveyance in favour of the appellants. That document has been held by both the lower Courts, and in my opinion justly, to be spurious and to be in fact the result of a conspiracy between the mother and the son to defeat the right of the appellants purchasers. Both the lower Courts have also found that they were transferees in good faith with notice of the right of residence of the widow but in theory only, because as a matter of fact for five years prior to the suit she had of her own acco...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›