Mumbai Court November 1934 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.
Purshottam Dattaraya Shetye Vs. Yeshvadabai Jayadeo Shetye
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-16-1934
Reported in: 156Ind.Cas.381
ORDERBroomfield, J.1. This is an application for revision of an order of remand made by the District Judge of Ratnagiri on appeal from the Subordinate Judge of Malvan in certain execution proceedings. There had been a suit in which the opponent obtained a decree for possession of certain land, Survey No. 11, Pot No. 4, against the present applicant and his brother. When the decree was sought to be executed, it was found that there was a shed on the land which had been constructed by the judgment-debtors. On behalf of the decree-holder it was alleged that the shed had been erected since the decree. A Commissioner was appointed to draw a a map and to ascertain the age of the building. He submitted a report to the effect that the building was ten or eleven years old. The Subordinate Judge then disposed of the darkhast by directing that the decree-holder was to be given possession of the land with the exception of the shed and the land beneath it. He also directed that the judgment-debtor,...
The Khandesh Lakshmivilas Mills Co. Vs. Vinayak Atmaram Karpurkar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-15-1934
Reported in: AIR1935Bom198; (1935)37BOMLR157
Broomfield, J.1. The principal question in this appeal is whether the parties to a contract, one of whom resides at Jalgaon and the other in Bombay, may validly agree that litigation arising out of the contract should be tried in Bombay and not in Jalgaon, it being admitted that apart from the agreement such litigation might be tried in either place. The plaintiff is a company owning oil mills in Jalgaon. The defendant is a resident of Bombay. He agreed to supply funds to the company for the purpose of carrying on their business in groundnuts which were to be purchased and milled in the plaintiff's mill at Jalgaon. He failed to supply the money, and in consequence the company brought a suit to recover Rs. 7,500 damages, that being what, it is alleged, the company would have earned in the business if the defendant had supplied the funds. There was a formal written agreement between the parties, one clause of which provides ;-If any dispute arises in respect of the aforesaid business bet...
Motibhai Jesingbhai Patel Vs. Ranchhodbhai Shambhubhai Patel
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-15-1934
Reported in: AIR1935Bom222; (1935)37BOMLR241
Rangnekar, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the respondents for a declaration that they were entitled to cultivate the two suit fields on payment of assessment and local fund cess only, on the ground that they were permanent tenants of the appellant.2. The trial Court held that the respondents had failed to establish that they were liable to pay only the assessment and local fund cess, and were not entitled to the declaration sought for, and dismissed the suit. The respondents appealed against that order.3. In appeal, the learned Judge thought that certain evidence, which was tendered on behalf of the plaintiffs, was wrongly excluded by the trial Court; similarly, certain questions, which were put to a witness on behalf of the plaintiffs, were wrongly disallowed by the trial Court. The learned Judge thereupon came to the conclusion that the exclusion of that evidence had prejudiced the appellants before him, set aside the decree made by the trial Court, and sent down th...
In Re: Narsappa Naik Narappa Naik
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-13-1934
Reported in: AIR1935Bom158; (1935)37BOMLR93
John Beaumont, Kt., C.J.1. This is an application in revision in which we are asked to quash the complaint filed against the applicants for an offence under s: 467 of the Indian Penal Code, and as against applicant No. 2, an offence also under Section 471 The material facts are that a money decree was obtained in the Court of the Second Class Subordinate Judge at Haveri, and that decree' was sent to the Collector for execution. The sale in execution was fixed for February 6, 1932, and a day or two before that petitioner No. 1 applied to the Mamlatdar to postpone the sale on the ground that the decree had been settled, and he produced a receipt for Rs. 1,000 purporting to have been paid by him to the decree-holder in full satisfaction of the decree. The Mamlatdar thereupon held an inquiry as to the genuineness of this receipt, and he came-to the conclusion that the receipt was a forgery, and the decree had not therefore been adjusted. Subsequently, in April, 1932, an application was mad...
Emperor Vs. Punjaji Bapuji Bagul
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-13-1934
Reported in: (1935)37BOMLR96
John Beaumont, Kt., C.J.1. This is an application in revision in which the applicant complains of his conviction by the Second Class Magistrate of Yeola of mischief under Section 427 of the Indian Penal Code. The conviction was upheld by the District Magistrate of Nasik.2. The material facts are that the accused owns a building, in which he installed an oil engine, and the complainant is the owner or occupier of a neighbouring building. The complainant alleges that the accused has so used his engine as to cause damage to the complainant's house by means of vibration and the learned Magistrate has held that damage has been occasioned to the complainant's house by such means and that the accused must have known the consequences of his act. It is clear that if the accused has installed in his ' property an engine the working of which has damaged the complainant's pro-petty, the accused has rendered himself liable to a civil action for nuisance. But the question is whether he has also rend...
In Re: Jamnadas Nursey Ginning and Pressing Co. Ld.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-09-1934
Reported in: AIR1935Bom337; (1935)37BOMLR401; 157Ind.Cas.1093
Tyabji, J.1. This petition arises out of certain complicated proceedings, seeking the compulsory winding up of the Jamnadas Nursey Ginning and Pressing Company, Limited, in liquidation.2. The petition for winding up was presented on October 10, 1933. Six days later Mr. Justice Rangnekar appointed Mr. H.H. Wadia as provisional liquidator of the company. Then the matter came on twice before Mr. Justice Kania., First, on March 12, 1934, he sanctioned a proposed scheme with some modifications. It was a second time placed before him on April 16, 1934, and he then sanctioned the scheme without any modification and dismissed the petition for winding up. Mr. Justice Kania's latter order was reversed by the Court of Appeal on September 25, 1934. The Court of Appeal ordered the company to be wound up and appointed Mr. H.H. Wadia, official liquidator. On the next day, i.e., September 26, 1934, the official liquidator obtained am ex parte order from me sanctioning the appointment of Messrs. Ardesh...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›