Mumbai Court October 1934 Judgments
Dawsons Bank Limited Vs. the Vulcan Insurance Company Limited
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-29-1934
Reported in: (1935)37BOMLR141
Atkin, J.1. This is an appeal from the High Court at Rangoon sitting in appeal, which reversed the decision of the trial Judge in a claim brought by the appellants upon a policy of insurance against fire.2. The premises were situated at Moulmeingyun in Burma. The appellants were the mortgagees of the premises, who, in accordance with the terms of the mortgage, had taken out a policy of insurance upon the mortgaged property. The particular policy was taken out with the respondents, the Vulcan Insurance Company, Limited. The premises had apparently at one time been insured in the Northern Assurance Company, but they had ceased to carry the risk. It was said that they had withdrawn from fire business in Rangoon ; whether that is so or not their Lordships do not know. At any rate, in 1929, the policy was taken out with the Vulcan Insurance Company, having originally been written by the Northern Assurance Company. The risk and description of the property was, it is said, taken from the orig...
Tag this Judgment!Vaman Vithal Kulkarni Vs. Khanderao Ramrao Sholapurkar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-20-1934
Reported in: AIR1935Bom247; (1935)37BOMLR376
John Beaumont, Kt., C.J.1. These are two cross-appeals from judgments of the First Class Subordinate Judge of Belgaum. In the suit from which Appeal No. 477 is brought, the plaintiffs are claiming a declaration that they are permanent tenants of the suit land, whilst Appeal No. 471 is an appeal in a suit brought by the landlord, defendant in the first suit, claiming possession of the suit property on the ground that the plaintiffs are annual tenants. So that the real point in both appeals is whether the plaintiffs in the first suit are permanent tenants op annual tenants.2. For the purposes of determining the plaintiffs' title, the suit land is divisible into two parts, the claim of the plaintiffs being different in respect of those two parts. There is, first, the property shown on the exhibited plan within the parallelogram A B C D, which I will refer to as the 'A property,' and then there is the rest of the suit property, partly to the north and partly to the south of the A property,...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Mahomed Haji Haroon Kadwani
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-19-1934
Reported in: AIR1935Bom254; (1935)37BOMLR396
Tyabji, J.1. The trust originated from the will of the deceased Haji Abdulla Hussein which provided that one-third of the estate should be dedicated to such good and valid charity as his executrix and executors may think proper. That bequest was, by the decree in Haji Usman Haji Esmail v. Mariambai (1921) O.C.J. Suit No. 507 of 1921 decided by Pratt J., on April 8, 1921 (unrep.), declared to be a good bequest.2. In accordance with generally prevalent Muslim sentiments-, and the law of waqfs supports these sentiments,-members of the family of the waqif ought to be given preference in appointment as trustees. Thus-In the Asul it is stated that the judge cannot appoint a stranger to the office of administrator so long as there are any of the house of the appropriator fit for the office; and if he should not. find a fit person among them, and should nominate a stranger, but should subsequently find one who is qualified, he ought to transfer the appointment to him.See Atimannessa Bibi v. Ab...
Tag this Judgment!Raghunath Shankar Dikshit Vs. Lakshmibai Hari Ware
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-18-1934
Reported in: AIR1935Bom298; (1935)37BOMLR150; 157Ind.Cas.658
Sen, J.1. This is an appeal from the appellate decree passed by the District Judge, Nasik, confirming the order of the Subordinate Judge at Nasik in Regular Darkhast No. 247 of 1930 of the last Court.2. In the suit Dwarkabai kom Govinda claimed that her husband had been adopted by the widow of Ramkrishna Gopal Bhat Ware, to whom two-thirds of the property in suit had belonged. The defendants compromised the claim by recognising her husband's title as the adopted son of Ramkrishna and allowed her a half share in the suit property and rents from 1923 to 1927 and in the rents for future years until equitable partition of the property. Thereupon a compromise decree was passed in those terms on September 10, 1927. She made no attempt to execute the decree and in the same year became a convert to Muhammadanism, and she married a Muhammadan in 1928. Thereafter the present darkhast was filed by Lakshmlibai widow of Hari Gopat Ware, who is Dwarkabai's first husband's uncle's widow and who claim...
Tag this Judgment!The Ocean Accident and Guarantee Corporation Co. Ltd. Vs. D.K. Patkar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-16-1934
Reported in: AIR1935Bom236; (1935)37BOMLR304
Rangnekar, J.1. This action is brought by the plaintiff insurance company to recover the amount of premium alleged to be due under seven motor accident policies effected by the defendant for a period of one year commencing from May 15, 1933, to May 14, 1934. The defendant is the owner of an omnibus service at Bassein.2. To the plaint several defences are filed. The first is that it was agreed between the parties that the premium should be paid either by instalments or at any time during the currency of the policies. The second is that the plaintiffs agreed to give to the defendant a rebate of thirty-five per cent, on the full amount of the premium payable by him. The substantial defence, however, to the suit is that there was no concluded agreement between the parties.3. The material facts are as follows : Messrs. Hardcastle & Co. were the principal agents of the plaintiffs and they appointed one Mr. Amin as their sub-agent, who appointed Messrs. Bright Brothers as sub-agents. Mr. Gupt...
Tag this Judgment!The Official Assignee of Madras Vs. the Mercantile Bank of India Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-15-1934
Reported in: (1935)37BOMLR130
Wright, J.1. The appellant is the Official Assignee of Madras in whom the property vested on insolvency of C. K. Narayana Ayyar & Sons (who will he referred to hereafter as the insolvents); the question in the appeal is whether the appellant or the respondents are entitled to the proceeds of certain consignments of ground nuts ; the primary issue is whether the respondents who had advanced monies on the security of the railway receipts in respect of these ground nuts obtained a valid pledge of the goods. Certain further or alternative questions will be dealt with subsequently.2. The appellant succeeded before Waller J.; his decision was, however, reversed on appeal by the High Court of Judicature of Madras, Appellate Jurisdiction ; the appellant now appeals to His Majesty in Council.3. There is little dispute about the facts. The insolvents did a large business in ground nuts, which they purchased from the up-country growers ; the nuts were then despatched by rail arrived in Madras by ...
Tag this Judgment!Bai Ujambai Govindji Vs. Harakchand Govindji
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-10-1934
Reported in: AIR1935Bom242; (1935)37BOMLR300
Kania, J.1. This petition for the letters of administration of the joint family properties and credits standing in the name of Govindji Khushal is filed by his widow Ujambai for the use and benefit of her minor son Amratlal and limited to the period of his minority. In the petition it is alleged that the deceased left a writing dated May 1, 1922, purporting to be his will, but the same was revoked, and he died intestate. In the alternative it is stated that on the birth of Amritlal, which took place after the date of the alleged will, the deceased and his minor son Amritlal constituted a joint and undivided Hindu family and the said will was, therefore, void and inoperative in law. In para. 5 of the petition it is stated that Harakhchand, the first caveator, who is the other son of the deceased, separated from his father before his death and the release passed by Harakhchand is put in as exhibit A. It is contended that on the death of the deceased Amritlal became absolutely entitled to...
Tag this Judgment!Shamrao Keshav Rajadhyaksha Vs. Shantaram Balaji Naik
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-05-1934
Reported in: AIR1935Bom174; (1935)37BOMLR123
Murphy, J.1. This is a plaintiffs' appeal. These had filed a suit to obtain a declaration that their half share in the plaint property was not liable to be attached and sold in execution of the decree in suit No. 10 of 1928. Suit No. 10 of 1928 had been brought against the appellants' father, Keshav Anant, in the following circumstances :-Keshav Anant's wife's brother, one Gajanan Yeshvant Havaldar, had started a shop in the Savantvadi State, and in order to stock it with goods entered into an agreement with the defendant Shantaram Balaji Naik by which the latter was to supply him with money. Since Havaldar had not much credit, the plaintiff's father, Keshav, undertook to stand surety for him to the extent of Rs. 10,000. In the end Havaldar's business did not prosper and he got into debt, and when accounts were made up, Rs. 10,413 were found to be due. Rs. 413 were paid down in cash, and as to the remainder, plaintiff's father executed a promissory note for Rs. 10,000. This was on Janu...
Tag this Judgment!Chand Ahmedalli Vs. Ravji Tanaji Mali
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-05-1934
Reported in: (1935)37BOMLR246
Sen, J.1. This is an appeal against the appellate decree of the District Judge of Nasik setting aside the decree of the Joint Subordinate Judge at Malegaon in Regular Civil Suit No. 14 of 1928.2. The plaintiff's case is that he purchased fifteen lands from one Kurban Alii In 1898 and the remaining two from Tanaji, the father of defendants Nos. 1 and 2, in 1915, that these lands were taken on lease by Tanaji, who passed a rent-note in 1924, agreeing thereby to vacate them nine months later, and that out of the seventeen lands nine were still in the possession of the defendants ; he, therefore, sued the defendants to recover possession of those nine lands. The case for the defendants was that the lands were originally their ancestral property, that they were ostensibly sold first to Kurban Alii and then to the plaintiff, that the transactions were really in the nature of mortgages, that the rent-notes were passed for sums which represented the interest due on the latter mortgage, and tha...
Tag this Judgment!Emperor Vs. Shridhar Mahadeo Pathak
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-04-1934
Reported in: (1934)36BOMLR1133
Murphy, J.1. This is an application in revision against an order of the learned Sessions Judge of West Khandesh, confirming the conviction of the applicant under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code, but reducing the sentence of fine passed upon him to one of Rs. 385, while upholding the sentence of imprisonment.2. The facts alleged against the accused were that, being chairman of the Nandane Co-operative Credit Society and having a sum of Rs. 385 paid to him by the complainant in the case in repayment of the loan which he had taken from the society, he criminally misappropriated this sum instead of crediting the amount in the society's books and remitting it to the society's bank. Both the Courts have found the accused guilty of the offence, having believed the complainant's evidence that he paid the amount at the village of Songir after having borrowed it on the strength of a promissory note from one Rupchand Hirachand Marwadi of that place. The conviction is, however, challenged on ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »