Mumbai Court December 1932 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.
Charles S. Brown Vs. Albert Donough Hanson
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-02-1932
Reported in: AIR1933Bom185; (1933)35BOMLR360
Murphy, J.1. The point we have to decide is, in the first place, whether this revision application is one which can properly be made to this Court, and, secondly, whether the lower Court's order, which was one made in execution proceedings and holding that the pay of a First Class Warrant Officer to whom the Army Act applies is not attachable under a decree of the civil Court to the extent contained in Section 60 (1) (i) of the Civil Procedure Code, is correct or not.2. Mr. Brown, the decree-holder, had a decree against the judgment-debtor for Rs. 4,680 and costs. He applied in execution of this decree, seeking to have a moiety of the defendant's pay attached by the issue of an order under Order XXI, Rule 48, of the Civil Procedure Code. An order accordingly issued and went apparently to the Controller of Military Accounts, Rawalpindi. That officer, in the first instance, sent a cheque for Rs. 236-1-0, but protested that the judgment-debtor's salary was not attachable in this way. Ther...
Emperor Vs. Mahomed Yusuf
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-02-1932
Reported in: (1933)35BOMLR1020
John Beaumont, C.J.1. The point for decision in this case is whether the evidence of a witness who was called before the Coroner, who was enquiring into the death of a man with whose murder the accused is charged, can be taken in evidence in this Court under Section 33 of the Indian Evidence Act, the particular witness having died, and died prior to the enquiry before the Magistrate, so that he was not called before the Magistrate.2. Section 33 provides that evidence given by a witness in a judicial proceeding, or before any person authorised by law to take it, is relevant for the purpose of proving, in a subsequent judicial proceeding, or in a later stage of the same judicial proceeding, the truth of the facts which it states, when the witness (amongst other things) is dead; and then it is provided that 'the proceeding was between the same parties or their representatives in interest'. Then the explanation provides that a criminal trial or inquiry shall be deemed to be a proceeding be...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›