Mumbai Court April 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.
The Central Bank of India Ltd. Vs. Nusserwanji H. Bharucha
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-18-1932
Reported in: AIR1932Bom642; (1932)34BOMLR1384
Kania, J.1. At the adjourned hearing of this suit evidence was led on behalf of the defendants to show what was the law of the Baroda State in respect of equitable mortgages. The evidence of Mr. Pranlal T. Munshi, a practising pleader of the Baroda High Court, Bhows that an Act, corresponding to our Transfer of Property Act, came into force in Baroda in Section 1957(1900-01). Before that Act the Baroda High Court in one case at least had recognised an equitable mortgage by deposit of title deeds when the deeds were deposited in Baroda. This is proved by a judgment of the Baroda High Court reported in 4 Baroda Law Reports, at p. 212. Section 83 of Act II of Section 1957 of Baroda, which corresponds with Section 59 of our Transfer of Property Act, prescribes the conditions under which a mortgage transaction should be effected in writing and registered, In that section of the Baroda Act, before it was amended by Act IX of Section 1974, it was provided that a mortgage was to be by a regist...
Walchand Jasraj Marwadi Vs. Hari Anant Joshi
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-14-1932
Reported in: AIR1932Bom534; (1932)34BOMLR1203
John Beaumont, Kt., C.J.1. This is an application in revision in respect of an order passed by the First Glass Magistrate, Bhimthadi. The applicant was the accused in certain criminal proceedings, in which he was charged with stealing some stones of the value of about Rs. 4, and he was acquitted of the charge, but notwithstanding that fact the learned Magistrate directed the stones, the subject-matter of the charge, to be handed over to the complainant. The applicant asks us to revise the order dealing with the property, and notwithstanding the trifling nature of the matter in dispute Mr. Walawalkar contends, on the authority of the decision of this Court in Khema Ruhhad, In re I.L.R. (1918) Bom. 564 : 20 Bom. L.R. 395 that only the High Court has jurisdiction in the matter.2. The question of jurisdiction turns on the true construction of Section 520 of the Criminal Procedure Code. That section provides:-Any Court of appeal, confirmation, reference or revision may direct any order unde...
Bhagwandas Vrijbhukandas Shariff Vs. Naran Kanji
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-14-1932
Reported in: AIR1932Bom595; (1932)34BOMLR1322; 140Ind.Cas.730
Patkar, J.1. This was a suit brought by the plaintiffs to enforce specific performance of the agreement of sale, Exhibit 34, passed on July 31,1926, by defendants Nos. 1 and 2. Defendant No. 3 is the minor son of defendant No. 2.2. The learned Subordinate Judge ordered the defendants to execute a sale-deed to the plaintiffs in regard to the suitproperties in terms of the agreement of sale, Exhibit 34, and get it registered.3. The appeal is filed by the plaintiffs on the ground that they ought to have been awarded possession of the property.4. In the lower Court the plaintiffs in the plaint asked for specific performance and also for possession of the property. The agreement, Exhibit 34, contains a covenant to pass a sale-deed and also to deliver over possession of the property. The plaintiffs are, therefore, entitled on the agreement to sue for specific performance of the agreement and also to recover possession of the property. See Nathu valad Pandu v. Budhu valad Bhika I.L.R. (1893) ...
Maung SeIn Done Vs. Ma Pan Nyun
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-12-1932
Reported in: (1932)34BOMLR1040
Russell, J.1. In this appeal their Lordships find it unnecessary to decide upon the merits of the case, as in their opinion the plea of res judicata must prevail. In order, however, to explain how the plea arises, it is necessary to relate the facts in some detail.2. The four parties to this appeal are two sons and two daughters of Chan Sit Shan and Ma Myit, his wife. Chan Sit Shan had three other children born of this wife, two of whom died before their father; the third died in 1903.3. Chan Sit Shan was a Chinaman, who was born in China and settled in Pyapon, Burma, There he married Ma Myit, a native of Pyapon, who before her marriage was a Burmese Buddhist. At some time, Chan Sit Shan went back to China and there married a second wife a Chinawoman, named Ma Kee Ya, He returned to Burma with this second wife and a Chinese boy named Pwin Lit whom they had adopted. Subsequently his wife, Ma Kee Ya, bore him a daughter, who was named Ma Kyin Myaing.4. Chan Sit Shan died in 1902 intestat...
Syed Mohammad Raza Vs. Abbas Bandi Bibi
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-12-1932
Reported in: 2002(2)ALD(Cri)116; (1932)34BOMLR1048
George Lowndes, J. 1. The facts necessary for the decision of this appeal are within a small compass.2. In 1868 one Sughra Bibi brought a suit against her cousin Afzal Husain, claiming a half-share in certain immoveable pro perties in Oudh which had been entered in his name at the post mutiny settlement. The litigation ended in a compromise upon which a decree was passed in the suit on September 19, 1870. The compromise was in the following terms :-We are Musammab Sughra Bibi, plaintiff, claimant of a share in Mahal Shadipur, Nusha, &c;, pargana Tanda, and Surhurpur, and 8yed Afzal Hasan, son of Syed Tegh Ali Qanungo, Lambardar of the aforesaid Mahal, defendant.Whereas between the parties to the above-mentioned case in which a share is claimed an amicable settlement has been arrived at to the effect that the plaintiff's marriage by way of nikah with the defendant maybe performed in the next month, accordingly in view of a marriage settlement, there no longer exists any dispute regardin...
In Re: Pandurang Venkatesh Malgi
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-12-1932
Reported in: AIR1932Bom476; (1932)34BOMLR1102
Broomfield, J.1. The applicant, P.V. Malgi, is a typist-sectioner in the Subordinate Judge's Court at Gadag, His brother, S.V.Malgi, a pleader of Gadag, was convicted under Section 17(2) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act on February 1, 1932, and sentenced to pay a fine of Its. 300, A warrant was issued for recovery of the fine under Section 386 of the Criminal Procedure Code, and in execution of the warrant the police on February 3, 1932, attached a typewriter, a looking-glass, and Rs. 54 in cash as moveable property belonging to the said S.V. Malgi, On that same day the present applicant made an application to the Magistrate in which he claimed all these things as his property. As regards the typewriter, he stated in his application that he had himself purchased it in the year 1920 for the purposes of his work as a sectioner. But in certain affidavits which he subsequently produced it was stated that the typewriter had been purchased by some other person in that year, and presented as...
Sorabji M. Shroff Vs. Erachshaw B. Katrak
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-12-1932
Reported in: AIR1932Bom470; (1932)34BOMLR1106
Baker, J.1. These are two companion applications made by the same applicant against two orders of the First Class Magistrate at Chikhli ordering him to pay the costs of adjournments on several occasions in the trial proceeding before the Magistrate. Application No. 10 deals with matter prior in date to No. 9, and may, therefore, be disposed of first.2. The material facts are that the complainant, one Erachshaw, charged several persons including the applicant, who is accused No. 3, with cheating in respect of a motor car which he had purchased from accused No. 1. The facts of the complaint are not material to the present application, as we have not to go into the merits. The trial proceeded before the First Class Magistrate at Chikhli, and during the progress of the trial, the present applicant fell ill, and was absent on several occasions. On two occasions an adjournment was granted on the ground of his sickness without any conditions, bat on the third occasion a notice was issued to h...
Bai Kesarba Vs. Shivsangji Bhimsangji Thakor
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-12-1932
Reported in: AIR1932Bom654; (1932)34BOMLR1332
Patkar, J.1. [His Lordship set out the facts of the case and then proceeded:] In First Appeal No. 339 two points are urged, first, that Chhatrasangji by his adoption to the Bhamaria estate did not lose his interest in the Ahima estate, and, secondly, that the plaintiff was estopped from claiming possession of the property on the ground that on the representation of the defendant, he did not make an adoption to himself before he was adopted in the Bhamaria estate.2. In First Appeal No. 338 by defendants Nos. 2 and 3, it is contended that the adopted son must be considered never to have been born in his natural family, that is, he is to be regarded as born in his adoptive family, and therefore, if it be held that defendant No. 1 by his adoption forfeited all his rights of inheritance in the natural family, defendant No. 2, the mother of defendant No. 1, had a right to adopt a eon to her husband on the ground that defendant No. 1 must be considered not to have been born in the natural fam...
Fulchand Dhanraj Vs. Clarke and Smith
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-11-1932
Reported in: (1934)36BOMLR18
John Beaumont, Kt., C.J.1. This is an appeal against a decision of Mr. Justice Rangnekar dismissing a petition to set aside an award. The facts are stated in the judgment of the learned Judge, and I need not repeat them. The agreement for reference to arbitration, which is Ex. F, purports to be made between Clarke and Smith, described as a firm of European merchants, and Dhanraj Fulchand who is the present appellant. It recites in effect that there was a dispute between the parties as to whether the appellant was liable in respect of certain business done by Clarke and Smith for a man named Ganeshdas Rampal, the allegation of Clarke and Smith being that the appellant was really the principal and liable for the losses incurred in that business; then there is a recital that the loss incurred was over Rs. 33,000 ; then there is a recital that the appellant disputes his liability in respect of all or any of the consignments of wool which were the subject-matter of the transactions, and the...
Shiba Prasad Singh Vs. Rani Prayag Kumari Debi
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-07-1932
Reported in: (1932)34BOMLR1567
Dinshah Mulla, J. 1. The questions involved in these appeals relate to the right of succession to an estate known as the Jheria Raj, situated in the district of Manbhum, and other property, movable and immovable, left by Raja Durga Prasad.2. The suit out of which the appeals arise was instituted by the widows of Raja Durga Prasad in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of the 24 Pergannas against Shiba Prasad Singh, a distant agnatio relation of the Raja, to recover the estate and other property. On November 3, 1921, the Subordinate Judge passed a decree whereby he allowed the suit in part and dismissed it as to the rest. Both parties appealed to the High Court at Calcutta, and the High Court by its decree dated August 17, 1925, allowed the appeals in part. From this decree of the High Court both parties have appealed to His Majesty in Council.3. The parties are governed by the Mitakshara School of Hindu law. The Raj is ancient and ancestral, and it is impartible by custom, and successio...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »