Mumbai Court July 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.
ishwarappa Malleshappa Manvi Vs. Dhanji Bhanji Gujjar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-23-1931
Reported in: AIR1932Bom111; (1932)34BOMLR44
Patkar, J.1. In this casa the plaintiff filed suit No. 72 of 1925 in the Court of the Second Class Subordinate Judge of Gadag against the opponents-defendants for dissolution of the partnership and for accounts. On July 81,1926, a preliminary decree was passed dissolving the partnership and ordering accounts.2. It is alleged on behalf of the plaintiff that on September 6, 1926, the parties entered into a compromise and made an application to the Court praying that a decree in terms of the compromise be passed. The terms of the compromise are said to be that opponent No. 1 was to pay Rs. 6,000 and opponent No. 2's father Rs. 5,000 to the applicant. The learned Subordinate Judge being of opinion that he could not pass a decree exceeding the pecuniary jurisdiction of his Court, ordered the plaint to be returned to the applicant for presentation to the proper Court.3. Three years afterwards the present plaintiff, who was a minor and attained majority on November 29, 1928, made an applicati...
Sakarbhai Hukamchand Vs. Ramniklal Keshavlal
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-21-1931
Reported in: AIR1932Bom328; (1932)34BOMLR709
Rangnekar, J.1. This suit is brought by the plaintiff, who carries on business in Cambay where he resides, against the defendants, his commission agents, to recover a sum of Rs. 4,672 6-3. This sum is made up of two sums of Rs. 4,512 8-0 and Rs. 1,950, the first item being, according to him, the profit in respect of ateji-mandi transaction of one hundred bales of Broach cotton of May 1, 1929, on the footing of the difference between the selling rate of Rs. 351-4-0 and the purchase rate of Rs. 251 on March 81, 1930 ; and the second item being the amount of profit on a mandi transaction of one hundred bales of May 3, 1929, being the difference between the selling rate of Rs. 300 and the purchase rate of Rs. 261 on March 81, 1930. The plaintiff's case is that there was an account between him and the defendants in respect of certain dealings since Samvat year 1979. On May 1, 1929, the plaintiff applied teji-mandi through the defendants on hundred bales of Broach cotton of April-May 1930 de...
Mahomed Haji Hamed Vs. Pirojshaw R. Vakharia and Co.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-20-1931
Reported in: AIR1932Bom341; (1932)34BOMLR697
Wadia, J.1. [His Lordship after stating the facts proceeded:] Section 3 of the Bombay Cotton Contracts Act empowers the board of directors of the Association to make, subject to the sanction of the Governor-in- Council, by-laws for the regulation and control of transactions in cotton, and amongst other things for providing under Section 3(1) for arbitration and appeals against awards. It is provided by by-law 38(A) framed under the Act that disputes (other than those relating to quality) arising out of or in relation to contracts between members of the Association or between a member and a non-member made subject to the by-laws shall be referred to arbitration. Under the old by-law 82 the cotton contracts had to be either in writing in a prescribed form and signed or there must be an agreement by the constituent to sign a contract in the prescribed form when tendered. In place of this old by-law a new by-law, also No. 82, came into effect from July 21, 1930. It provides inter alia that...
Mahomed Hajihamed and ors. Vs. Pirojshaw R. Vakharia and Co.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-20-1931
Reported in: 138Ind.Cas.337
Wadia, J.1. (After stating the facts of the case His Lordship proceeded as follows:) Section 3 of the Bombay Cotton Contracts Act empowers the Board of Directors of the Association to make, subject to the sanction of the Governor-in-Council, by-laws for the regulation and control of transactions in cotton, and amongst other things for providing under Section 3(1) for arbitration and appeals against awards. It is provided by by law No. 38 (A) framed under the Act that disputes (other than those relating to quality) arising out of or in relation to contracts between members of the Association or between a member and a noa-member made subject to the by-laws shall be referred to arbitration. Under the old by-law No. 82 the cotton contracts had to be either in writing in a prescribed form and signed or there must be an agreement by the constituent to sign a contract in the prescribed form when tendered. In place of this old by-law a new by-law, also No. 82, came into effect from July 21, 19...
Motilal Kanji and Co. Vs. Natvarlal M. Jhaveri
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-16-1931
Reported in: AIR1932Bom78; (1931)33BOMLR1495; 136Ind.Cas.491
Patkar, J.1. In this ease the Hatim Mills ceased to work in February 1924 and went into voluntary liquidation, and on June 13, 1928, the learned District Judge on hearing the application of one Dhirajlal Bhimbhai referred the scheme, which was propounded by the present appellants Motilal Kanji and Co., to the creditors to ascertain whether the modifications suggested were acceptable to the statutory majority after first obtaining the approval of the present appellants to those modifications.2. A meeting was held on July 8, 1928, and on July 21 one of the official liquidators, Mr. N.M. Jhaveri, made a report Exhibit 58. On August 5, Dhirajlal made an application to sanction the scheme as modified. The Court declined to give sanction on the ground that there was not the requisite statutory majority as required by Section 153 of the Indian Companies Act. Dhirajlal filed First Appeal No. 556 of 1923, but died during the pendency of the appeal, and his heirs not having been brought on the r...
Bai Mangu Vs. the Bharatkhand Cotton Mills Co. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-13-1931
Reported in: AIR1932Bom90; (1931)33BOMLR1476
Patkar, J.1. This is an application for leave to appeal to the Privy Council from the decision of the High Court after taking accounts in pursuance of the directions given by their Lordships of the Privy Council.2. The appeal to the Privy Council arose in connection with certain suits brought by one Kevaldas and his family and subsequently one Tulsidas to enforce certain deposit receipts given by the company on October 31, 1911. Kevaldas alleged that he agreed with the company to have preference shares allotted to him to the extent of the face value of the debts owing by the company to him and his nominees represented by the amount of the deposit receipts, with accrued interest and some addition to current account which was incurred between October 81, 1911, and the actual date of his resignation, The company contended that there was no binding agreement in that behalf and that in any event there was due to the company a sum exceeding the amount of the receipts and that no money was du...
Allibhai Mahomed Akuji Vs. Dada Alli Isap
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-11-1931
Reported in: (1931)33BOMLR1296; 136Ind.Cas.509
Baker, J.1. The facts of this appeal are peculiar, and were I not of the opinion that they are covered by authority, I should have referred it to a bench. The plaintiffs sued for specific performance of a contract of sale dated May 14,1874. The facts are simple. The plaintiffs' ancestor Ali Isap was the original owner of the land. One Ranchhod obtained a decree against him in 1871, and then in sale in execution the suit land was sold by auction and purchased by one Jibhai on October 8, 1872. On May 14, 1874, the said Jibhai sold the suit land to the grandfather of defendants NoSection 1 to 3 and 5 to 10, and on the same day the vendee Akuji, defendants' grandfather, executed a registered agreement in favour of Abhram by which he bound himself to sell the land to Abhram for Rs. 461 at any time when the money was offered, and not to sell the land to any other person whatever. The plaintiffs' case is that Jibhai was a mere benamidar for their ancestor Isap, the father of the person to who...
Ramlal Hariram Vs. Ratanlal Balchand
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-10-1931
Reported in: AIR1932Bom99; (1931)33BOMLR1466; 136Ind.Cas.504
Baker, J.1. The point arising in this appeal is one which, so far as I know, has not come before the Courts before. The facts are that the plaintiffs obtained a decree on a mortgage against the defendants in the Court of the District Judge at Akola in Berars, The defendants pleaded that they were agriculturists, and prayed for instalments, but the Court held that the Dekkhan Agriculturists' Relief Act not having been made applicable to Berars, the defendants could not avail themselves of its provisions, and they could not claim accounts or instalments. The bulk of the mortgaged property is situated in the Khandesh District. The decree was transferred for execution to the First Class Subordinate Judge of Jalgaon. The defendants asked for instalments, but the Judge held that instalments could not now be allowed as they were claimed in the suit and were refused, and, therefore, it was not necessary to go into evidence about their status as agriculturists. The defendants make this appeal, ...
Shambhusing Sujansing Thakor Vs. Manual Vadilal Gandhi
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-09-1931
Reported in: AIR1932Bom47; (1931)33BOMLR1457
Baker, J.1. This is an appeal arising out of execution proceedings. The appellant is defendant No. 1 and the respondent No. 1 is defendant No. 2.2. The facts are that the appellant Thakor Shambhusing Sujansing had mortgaged his property to the firm of Doshi Shamaldas Jethabhai represented by one Kantilal. On this mortgage there was an award followed by a decree for Rs. 13,000 and odd. Subsequent to this award, which is on August 25, 1926, Shambhusing executed a second mortgage in favour of the plaintiff in this suit Dajibhai Bhagvandas. There was another firm known as Manilal Vadilal in which a pleader named Nagindas was a partner. He was the pleader for the mortgagee Kantilal in the execution proceedings which followed the award-decree. The date of the second mortgage to Dajibhai Bhagvandas is November 21 1926. Subsequently, by one document dated June 18, 1928, the first mortgagee sold his rights to the firm of Manilal Vadilal and the mortgagor Shambhusing sold his equity of redemptio...
Keshav Jagannath Dikshit Vs. Gangadhar Yadneshwar Dikshit
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-08-1931
Reported in: (1931)33BOMLR1443
Baker, J.1. These are cross-appeals arising out of an order made by the First Class Subordinate Judge of Jalgaon in an execution matter arising out of an award decree. The facts of this case are lengthy, but it is not necessary to go into the past history of the property, because questions relating to this property have been before this Court before, and have formed the subject of various judgments, and there is one reported case, Narayan Jagannath Dikshit v. Vasudeo Vishnu Dikshit I.L.R. (1890) Bom. 247 in which the history of this property has been dealt with. For the purposes of this case it is sufficient to say that we are here concerned with a saranjam property known as the Shendurni estate in Khandesh, This was granted by the Peshwa in exchange for another property known as Dhokani to Narayan Dikshit Patankar, who is the ancestor of the present parties. Narayan had two sons, Vasudeo and Balkrishna. The present plaintiff, who is now the holder of the saranjam since 1900, is a desc...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »