Mumbai Court September 1934 Judgments
ibrahim F. Lalji Vs. Husseinbhoy A. Lalji
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-26-1934
Reported in: AIR1935Bom119; (1935)37BOMLR49; 158Ind.Cas.579
John Beaumont, Kt., C.J.1. This is an appeal from a decision of Mr. Justice B. J. Wadia, and it raises a question relating to taxation of costs.2. There was a suit in this Court for dissolution of partnership, two of the partners being defendants Nos. 2 and 10. Some three years after the suit was filed, defendants Nos. 2 and 10 were appointed by the Court receivers in the partnership suit, and in due course they filed their accounts and carried them in before the Commissioner. Defendant No. 9, who is the present appellant, filed objections to the receivers' accounts before the Commissioner, and subsequently he filed exceptions to the Commissioner's report. On the objections being heard by the Commissioner, he made a note that defendant No. 10 had appeared separately. Defendants Nos. 2 and 10 had appointed a certain firm, Messrs. Edgelow, Gulabchand, Wadia & Co., as their solicitors originally in the suit to represent them in their capacity as partners, and after they were appointed rec...
Tag this Judgment!Karumuthu Thiagarajan Chettiar Vs. Thos. Smith and Co.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-24-1934
Reported in: AIR1935Bom155; (1935)37BOMLR46; 155Ind.Cas.932
John Beaumont, Kt., C.J.1. This is an appeal against an order made by the Judge in chambers staying the suit and referring the matters in dispute to arbitration. The suit is a suit by the plaintiff against the defendants, who are brokers in Bombay. The plaintiff asks for accounts of the dealings between him and the defendants and for payment of the amount found due and various consequential reliefs. Various contracts were made between the plaintiff and the defendants, and there is a clause in them providing for matters in dispute to be referred to arbitration. The contracts being contracts relating to cotton are governed by the bye-laws of the East India Cotton Association, Ltd. The issues in the suit show that there are various questions of fact and of law to be decided, some of the questions of law possibly involving some difficulty. Although the Court will generally stay a suit and refer the matters in dispute to arbitration when the parties themselves have agreed that matters shoul...
Tag this Judgment!D.N. Rege Vs. V.C. Vijayakar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-21-1934
Reported in: AIR1935Bom150; (1935)37BOMLR39; 155Ind.Cas.945
John Beaumont, Kt., C.J.1. This is an appeal from an order made by Mr. Justice Tyabji in chambers relating to a bill of costs of solicitors who are the appellants. The appellants had acted as solicitors for a client who was engaged in certain disputes with his father. There had been a testamentary suit which had terminated, and then there was a partition action. In 1932 there was a proposal to settle the partition action, and in connection with such settlement the son desired to know the amount of the solicitors' bill. He accordingly asked the solicitors to send him their bill, and on May 13 the solicitors sent in what they described as copy of a draft bill of costs. They sent it in with a covering letter saying,As we have had not the time to go through the draft bill and examine the same, we make it clear that the bill submitted to you herewith is subject to our revising the same in the event of taxation, in which case we shall of course submit to you a copy of our revised bill. As it...
Tag this Judgment!Keshavlal Manilal Shah Vs. Chandulal Balabhai Shah
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-21-1934
Reported in: AIR1935Bom200; (1935)37BOMLR200
Murphy, J.1. The point arising in this application is new and there is no direct authority on it. 2. There was an accont suit No. 1516 of 1921 in the First Class Court, Ahmedabad, in which a decree for Rs. 11,005-2-2 was passed against the petitioner and one Manilal since dead.3. The judgment-debtor partner appealed to this Court in Appeal No. 114 of 1929, and applied for a stay of execution. A rule was issued on the application for stay and the final order was that the appellants should have a stay on their depositing the decretal sum in this Court. This was accordingly done. The respondent was allowed to withdraw the sum on furnishing security, but he did not do so.4. On this the appellants made a fresh application No. 861 of 1929, praying that the amount deposited should be invested in Government promissory notes to save interest pending the appeal. This was ordered to be done on October-9, 1929, and securities of the face value of Rs. 18,400 were bought by the Registrar.5. On the m...
Tag this Judgment!Hemraj Shivlal Vs. Joharmal Ramkaran
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-18-1934
Reported in: AIR1935Bom135; (1935)37BOMLR30; 155Ind.Cas.312
Rangnekar, J.1. This is an appeal from a judgment of Mr. Justice Mirza, by which the learned Judge passed a decree against the appellant in a suit brought by the respondents to recover the balance due at the foot of an account in respect of various transactions in cotton, linseed, wheat, etc., subsisting between them. Various defences were taken in the lower Court, but they are all now given up, and the only question which is raised on this appeal is, whether certain forward transactions in cotton are valid and binding on the defendant and whether he is liable in respect of those transactions to the plaintiffs. The learned Judge held that he was. The: issue in respect of these transactions is in these terms : 'Whether defendant is liable in respect of forward transactions in cotton inasmuch as they are not in accordance with the provisions of the Bombay Cotton Act'. It is. common ground that the plaintiffs and the defendant were not, at all material times, members of the East India Cot...
Tag this Judgment!Sir Jamshed Byramji Kanga Vs. Kaikhushru Bomanji Bharucha
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-17-1934
Reported in: AIR1935Bom1; (1934)36BOMLR1136
John Beaumont, Kt., C.J.1. These are three petitions presented by the Advocate General to this Court asking that three barristers on the roll of this Court may be suspended and removed from practice or otherwise dealt with as this Court thinks fit in exercise of the disciplinary jurisdiction vested in the Court. There are also two reports made to this Court by District Judges under Section 26 of the Bombay Pleaders Act for the purpose of action being taken by this Court under Section 25 of the Act. We will deal first with the case of barristers.2. It is not disputed that all three barristers were convicted by Presidency Magistrates under Section 17(1) and (2) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act (XXIII of 1932) in that they had been members, and assisted, and managed the operations, of the Bombay Provincial Congress Committee Emergency Council, an association declared unlawful by the Government of Bombay. All the barristers were sentenced to terms of imprisonment and fine. The petitions w...
Tag this Judgment!Emperor Vs. Suleman Abba
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-14-1934
Reported in: AIR1935Bom24; (1934)36BOMLR1124
Murphy, J.1. This is a reference from the Sessions Judge of Kaira, who has submitted the case to this Court on the ground that failure of justice has been occasioned by the accused having been tried for more than three offences of the same kind committed within the space of twelve months ; he also holds that the case involves important points of law which require to be decided by this Court.2. The applicant in this case has been convicted under Section 186 of the Indian Penal Code by the Magistrate, First Class, Kaira, in that between July 3 and 8, 1933, both days inclusive, he drove his motor bus through the Vasana checking toll bar at Vasana without stopping. He avoided the main toll bar on the abovementioned dates by taking the ' Nal road' and driving through the Vasana checking bar without stopping to pay the toll, although the toll collector signalled to him to do so. The applicant is a licensed driver who runs a motor bus between Ahmedabad and Radu.3. The three points raised by t...
Tag this Judgment!The Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. C. Macdonald and Co.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-11-1934
Reported in: (1935)37BOMLR126
John Beaumont, Kt., C.J.1. This is a reference by the Commissioner of Income-tax made under Section 66 (2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, raising the questions (1) whether in the circumstances of the case and in view of the provisions of Sections 4(J) and 10 of the Act, the assessees have been correctly assessed on the total amount of Rs, 97,882 received by them as profits and gains of the business carried on by them as managing agents of a certain company, and (2) whether under the provisions of Section 10 of the Act, or under any other provision of law, the assessees are entitled to have a deduction from their income liable to tax of the amount of Rs. 19,576 paid by them out of their earnings to certain parties as per the declaration, exhibit G. The questions arise in this way. The assessees are the agents of the Katni Cement and Industrial Company, Limited, and in respect of the year of assessment they received as such agents the sum of Rs. 97,000 odd referred to in the questio...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay Vs. C. Macdonald and Co.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-11-1934
Reported in: AIR1935Bom197; [1935]3ITR459(Bom)
BEAUMONT, C. J. - This is a reference by the commissioner on Income Tax made under Section 66(2), Income Tax Act, 1922, raising the questions, (1) whether in the circumstances of the case and in view of the provisions of Sections 4(1) and 10 of the Act the assessees have been correctly assessed on the total amount of Rs. 97,882 received by them as profits and gains of business carried on by them as managing agents of a certain company; and (2) whether under the provisions of Section 10 of the Act, or under any other provision of law, the assessees are entitled to have a deduction from their liable to tax of the amount of Rs. 19,576 paid by them out of their earnings to certain parties as per the declaration, Exhibit G. The questions arise in this way. The assessees are the agents of the Katni Cement and Industrial Company Limited; and in respect of the year of assessment they received as such agents the sum of Rs. 97,000 odd referred to in the question. But it appears that from that su...
Tag this Judgment!Vadilal Lallubhai Mehta Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bombay.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-11-1934
Reported in: 157Ind.Cas.1097; [1935]3ITR152(Bom)
BEAUMONT, C. J. - This is an application made to the court under sub-section (3) of Section 66 of the Income Tax Act, asking the court to require the commissioner to state a case and raise certain points of law. In substance the points of law are said to arise in this way. The assessee was assessee as an individual for the year 1932-33 in respect of his income for the previous year. He alleges that in May 1932 a son was born to him, and he says that having regard to construction of two documents, the business in respect of which he was assessed was, as between himself and his son, a Hindu joint family business. His contention is that the effect of the two document is to show that he acquired his share in the business from his own father by a surrender of his interest in certain ancestral immovable property, and that in that way his interest in this business is the interest of a joint Hindu family. The Income Tax Officer in the first instance, and the Assistant Commissioner on appeal, r...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »