Mumbai Court March 1935 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.
Rahimtulla Lowji Damani Vs. the Official Assignee of Bombay
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-04-1935
Reported in: AIR1935Bom340; (1935)37BOMLR440; 157Ind.Cas.1062
John Beaumont, Kt., C.J.1. This is an appeal against an order of Mr. Justice Kania made in insolvency. It raises a short point on which it is surprising to find that there is no direct authority. The Official Assignee in the insolvency of certain persons had vested in him a mortgage dated July 30, 1930, and on September 21, 1933, he put up for sale by auction the right, title and interest of the insolvents under that mortgage. The sale was made subject to certain particulars and conditions of sale, which are on the record. Those conditions provided that the highest bidder should be declared the purchaser, but the sale was to be subject to confirmation by the Official Assignee, who had the right to refuse to confirm the sale without assigning any reason therefor. Then condition 9 provided that on payment of the full purchase money the purchaser should be entitled to a proper conveyance, such conveyance to be prepared by and at the expense of the purchaser, who was to bear all the expens...
Emperor Vs. Dahu Raut
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-01-1935
Reported in: (1935)37BOMLR557
Thankerton, J.1. These are consolidated appeals by special leave from, four judgments of the High Court of Judicature at Fort William in Bengal dated respectively May 29, May 29, May 31, and June 7, 1933, which reduced the sentences passed on the respective respondents by the respective criminal Courts of first instance on March 25, February 28, April 1, and March 18, 1933.2. In each case the respective respondents presented petitions of appeal to the High 'Court against both the conviction and the sentence, in exercise of the statutory right conferred on them by the Criminal Procedure Code, and the question in the present appeals is whether the orders of the High Court in each of the four cases, by which the sentences were reduced, were in conformity with the requirements of the Code. The Crown, as appellant, maintains that the orders were passed in violation of the statutory provisions and were beyond the jurisdiction of the High Court. The Crown desires to test the validity of the p...
Atmaram Abhimanji Vs. Bajirao Janrao
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-01-1935
Reported in: (1935)37BOMLR553
Shadi Lal, J.1. The question of law, which arises in this appeal, is one of considerable importance and relates to the exact scope of the expression samanodaka as used in the Hindu law of inheritance.2. The facts bearing upon the question do not admit of any dispute. The property, which is in dispute between the parties, belonged to one Manikrao, who died in October, 1916. The plaintiffs are descended in the male line from one Tulsingh, who was an ancestor of Manikrao in the 22nd degree. They claimed the estate on the ground that they were entitled to succeed to it as the agnates of the deceased in preference to the defendant Atmaram who was his father's sister's son. The trial Judge negatived their claim, but on appeal his judgment was reversed by the Court of the Judicial Commissioner, Central Provinces and Berar, who have held that the plaintiffs come within the purview of the term samanodaka and have priority over the defendant, who, being only a bandhu, cannot succeed in the prese...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›