Mumbai Court March 1930 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.
Emperor Vs. Vishram Narayan Devli
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-11-1930
Reported in: (1930)32BOMLR596
Broomfield, J.1. There is a society in Bombay called the Nutan Marathi Hitavardhak Sangha, At a meeting of the society on October 14, 1928, there was a dispute between the President, S. D. Tandulkar, and the present petitioner V. N. Devli, who claims to be a member of the society but whose membership is disputed. Each of the parties filed a criminal complaint against the other. The President's complaint against the petitioner for offences under Sections 447, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code was filed on October 19, 1928, and was heard and decided on November 13,1929. The witnesses for the prosecution were examined and cross-examined; the accused (that is, the petitioner) was examined by the Court at some length under Section 342, Criminal Procedure Code; then the charge was framed; the accused was asked if he wished to cross-examine the prosecution witnesses further and he said he did not; and lastly some defence witnesses, who were present in Court, were examined. The accused was ...
Emperor Vs. Sattegowda Satgowda Patil
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-06-1930
Reported in: AIR1930Bom174; (1930)32BOMLR571
Mirza, J.1. The opponent is one of the founders and promoters of a gymnasium class started in Sankeshwar in July 1928, It is admitted that he either brought or ordered from Poona four spears and one dagger for the purposes of the gymnasium class 3A where exercises with spears and daggers were being practised. Two of these spears had brass heads and the dagger also was of brass. The other two spears had iron heads.2. The opponent was prosecuted before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, First Class, Belgaum, for offences under Clauses (d), (e) and (f) of. Section 19 of the Indian Arms Act in respect of these five articles. The Magistrate held that the two brass spears and the brass dagger were not capable of inflicting injuries and were not arms within the meaning of Section 4 of the Indian Arms Act, 1878. He held, however, that the two iron spears were dangerous weapons and could inflict injuries on human beings and cattle. He convicted the opponent in respect of the two iron spears of offe...
Kallava Parbhu Desai Vs. Vithabai Appu Desai
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-04-1930
Reported in: AIR1930Bom396; (1930)32BOMLR995
Patkar, J.1. The property in suit belonged to one Shiddappa Ramappa Desai who died unmarried on October 5, 1919, leaving Kallava defendant No. 1, the widow of his predeceased uncle Parbhu, and two widows of his predeceased uncle Appu (1) Vithabai, the plaintiff, and (2) Kashibai, defendant No. 2. The present suit was brought by Vithabai, one of the widows of Appu, for partition of the property.2. The learned Subordinate Judge held that according to Hindu law the widows of a gotraja sapinda took per capita, and that the plaintiff, defendant No. 1, and defendant No. 2, who were equally related to their deceased nephew Shiddappa, inherited the property in equal shares.3. The first question arising in the case is whether the widows of the collaterals succeeding as gotraja sapinda take per capita or per stirpes. It is urged on behalf of the appellant that the right of the widow is co-extensive with her husband, and reliance has been placed on West and Buhler's Hindu Law, p. 84, and on the d...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›