Mumbai Court December 1931 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.
Moreshwar Pandharinath Babare Vs. Umraosing Mahalalsing
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-06-1931
Reported in: AIR1932Bom397; (1932)34BOMLR778; 140Ind.Cas.248
Baker, J.1. The only question in this appeal is whether the respondents can be considered to be agriculturists. The respondents admittedly are hay merchants who despatch large quantities of grass to Bombay from Wangaon. They have themselves leased lands at Wangaon on which grass is grown, and they employ men to watch and cut grass. The question of their being agriculturists arises out of a suit on a mortgage, the facts of which it is not necessary to mention as they have not been gone into. The respondents who were the plaintiffs in the original suit claimed to be agriculturists within the meaning of the Dekkhan Agriculturists' Relief Act The first Court held that they were not. On appeal, the second Assistant Judge at Thana held that they were.2. The learned advocate for the appellants has referred to various definitions of ' agriculturist' from Webster and one or two English cases. He has referred to the fact that in the Dekkhan Agriculturists' Relief Act, Section 2, Clause (6), the ...
Lakshmibai Anant Kondkar Vs. Jagannath Ravji Kondkar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-04-1931
Reported in: AIR1932Bom222; (1932)34BOMLR447
John Beaumont, Kt., C.J.1 This is an appeal from the decision of the First Class Subordinate Judge of Thana. The plaintiff sues to recover from the defendants eighty khandis of paddy or its price Rs. 4,800 for the income of the suit property for the year 1927 and Rs. 400 being the amount of assessment for the year 1927 28. The learned Judge held that the plaintiff's claim was barred by res judicata and estoppel, and he also held upon the facts that the defendants had proved that they had left the possession of the suit properties and did not receive the income for which they were being sued.2. The first point, which is one of law, arises in this way. In 1926 the plaintiff brought a suit against the defendants in which she alleged that the defendants had been the tenants of her property at a rent of Rs. 3,000 a year, that, the tenancy had expired, and she claimed possession, arrears of rent and mesne profits until delivery of possession. On March 29, 1927, a decree was made by consent i...
Thakur Bageshwari Charan Singh Vs. ThakuraIn Jagarnath Kuari
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-04-1931
Reported in: (1932)34BOMLR463
Viscount Dunedin, J. 1. This is an appeal from a decree of the High Court of Judicature at Patna, dated January 9, 1929, which affirmed a decree of the Additional Subordinate Judge of Hazaribagh, dated April 26, 1926, dismissing the plaintiff-appellant's suit.2. Thakur Jadu Charan Singh, the plaintiff's grandfather, was the owner of an impartible estate, known as the Dhargulli Estate in the District of Hazavibagh. He was heavily in debt, and by an order passed under Section 2 of the Chota Nagpur Encumbered Estates Act (VI of 1876) in 1894, the management of the whole of his estate was vested in a manager appointed under that Act. The management of the estate continued under the Act until May 15, 1909, when the estate was released and made over to him according to the provisions of the Act.3. Section 12a, paras. 1, 2 and 3 of the Act provide:-12A-(1) When the possession and enjoyment of property is restored, under the circumstances mentioned in the first or the third clause of Section 1...
In Re: Indrachand Bachraj
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-02-1931
Reported in: AIR1932Bom185; (1932)34BOMLR294; 137Ind.Cas.134
John Beaumont, Kt., C.J.1. This is an application to the Court in revision in which we are asked to quash the proceedings taken against the accused under Section 193 of the Indian Penal Code before the District Magistrate of EastKhandesh. It appears that three persona presented a petition to the District Magistrate alleging that the accused was falsifying accounts on a large scale. The petition alleges that false decrees have been obtained on the strength of these fabricated accounts and that there are still many suits pending and that these suits are either being withdrawn by the accused because of the charges made against him or dismissed by the Court for default. Then there is a general allegation that the effect of it all is that tremendous fraud extending to several lakhs of rupees has been perpetrated on many illiterate agriculturists. The learned District Magistrate appears to have sent for one of the petitioners, and to have taken from him a statement on oath referring to a par...
In Re: Dinshahji Hirjibhai
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-01-1931
Reported in: AIR1932Bom177; (1932)34BOMLR289; 137Ind.Cas.129
John Beaumont, Kt., C.J.1. This is an application to us in revision to review an order of the Sessions Judge of Ahmedabad made in the following circumstances. It appears that the present applicant, who was accused No. 2 in the criminal proceedings out of which this application arises, has been for many years a bone-setter in Ahmedabad, and recently the complainant in such proceedings has also set up in Ahmedabad as a bone-setter, and a good deal of rivalry and a great deal of ill-feeling exist between the two, so much so that the complainant has previously lodged complaints against the present petitioner. On September 28, 1930, the complainant whilst working in his office was stabbed on the left buttock by accusedNo. 1. Accused No. 1 says that he had been a servant of the complainant and the complainant owed him money and that was the reason why he stabbed the complainant. The complainant denies that, and says that he had no quarrel with accused No. 1. The complainant was taken to the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›