Mumbai Court November 1936 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.
Ratanshaw Dinshawji Chothia Vs. Bamanji Dhanjibhai
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-17-1936
Reported in: (1938)40BOMLR141
N.J. Wadia, J.1. This appeal raises an interesting question with regard to succession to intestate property among Parsis. The appellant filed a suit for the administration of the estate of one Dorabji Merwanji and for partition and separate possession of his half share therein.2. Dorabji Merwanji died intestate in the year 1899. He was a resident of the Baroda State and had been married to one Hirabai whom he divorced by mutual fargats according to the custom alleged to prevail in the Baroda State. After this divorce he married a second wife, Manekbai, and on her death he married a third wife Khurshedbai. Khurshedbai had a daughter Baimai by her former husband. At the time of his death Dorabji left behind him his third wife Khurshedbai and her daughter Baimai, Kuverbai, his daughter by his divorced wife Hirabai, the widow and four children of his brother, Dhanjibhai, and a sister Bai Avabai.3. The plaintiff's case was that on Dorabji's death his widow Khurshedbai got a half share in th...
Ratanshaw Dinshawji Chothia Vs. Bamanji Dhanjibhai and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-17-1936
Reported in: AIR1938Bom238
N.J. Wadia, J.1. This appeal raises an interesting question with regard to succession to intestate property among Parsis. The appellant filed a suit for the administration of the estate of one Dorabji Merwanji and for partition and separate possession of his half share therein. Dorabji Merwanji died intestate in the year 1899. He was a resident of the Baroda State and had been married to one Hirabai whom he divorced by mutual fargats according to the custom alleged to prevail in the Baroda State. After this divorce he married a second wife, Manekbai, and on her death he married a third wife, Khurshedbai. Khurshedbai had a daughter Baimai by her former husband. At the time of his death Dorabji left behind him his third wife Khurshedbai and her daughter Baimai, Kuverbai, his daughter by his divorced wife Hirabai, the widow and four children of his brother, Dhanjibhai and a sister Bai Avabai.2. The plaintiff's case was that on Dorabji's death his widow Khurshedbai got a half share in the ...
Ezra Sion and Co. Vs. Kailas Viraiah
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-12-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Bom242; (1937)39BOMLR263
John Beaumont, Kt., C.J.1. This is an application in revision under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code. The plaintiff sued in the Small Causes Court, Bombay, for the balance of the price of goods sold and delivered. The goods were sold and delivered on June 16, 1929, and the suit was filed in September, 1934. So that prima facie it is out of time. The plaintiff sought to bring the case within Section 13 of the Indian Limitation Act. The trial Court held that the suit was barred, and the case did not come within Section 13, and on appeal to the full Court, the full Court agreed with the decision of the trial Judge. It is not disputed that between the date of the promissory-note and the filing of the suit the defendant was living in Secunderabad, which is a British Cantonment. Section 13 of the Indian Limitation Act provides that in computing the period of limitation prescribed for any suit, the time during which the defendant has been absent from British India and from the territor...
Alexander Perera Chandarasekera Vs. the King
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-12-1936
Reported in: (1937)39BOMLR359
Roche, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave against a judgment and sentence of the Supreme Court of the Island of Ceylon dated May 1, 1935, whereby, after a trial before a Commissioner and a jury, the appellant was sentenced to death for the murder of a woman named Salami Nadatchi on May 15, 1934. The jury had returned a verdict of guilty by a majority of six to one. The main point raised in the appeal was whether information given by the deceased woman before her death was a statement within the meaning of Section 32 of the Ceylon Evidence Ordinance No. 14 of 1895, and as such was admissible in evidence by virtue of that section. This information was admitted in evidence and directly implicated the appellant. The material part of the section is as follows :-statements by Persons who cannot be called as Witnesses.32. Statements, written or verbal, of relevant facts made by a person who Cases in which is dead', or who cannot be found, or who has become incapable statement of rele- of...
Jamnadas Vrijlal Vs. Chandulal Jamnadas
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-11-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Bom167; (1937)39BOMLR138
John Beaumont, Kt., C.J.1. This is a revision application made by the defendant. The plaintiff, who is a son of the defendant, alleges in the plaint that the defendant is wasting the joint family property, and misappropriating it, and he-asks in the plaint for a declaration that he is entitled along with the defendant and a cousin to the joint possession, enjoyment and management of the joint family property, and then he asks for injunctions, both prohibitory and mandatory, against the defendant. The claims were valued, for the purposes of the Court-fees Act at Rs. 230, but it is admitted by the pleaders on both sides, in a purshis which they signed, that the value of the immoveable and moveable properties in suit is more than Rs. 15,000. The suit was started in the Court of the Second Class Subordinate Judge, and two preliminary issues were raised, the first one, as to whether the. plaint was adequately stamped, and, secondly, whether the Court had pecuniary jurisdiction to try the su...
S.H. Patel Vs. Husseinbhai Mahomed
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-11-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Bom225; (1937)39BOMLR260
John Beaumont, Kt., C.J.1. This is an application in revision against an order dismissing the plaintiffs suit made by a Judge of the Small Cause Court, Bombay, and the basis of the application is that the learned Judge refused to exercise a jurisdiction which was vested in him. The facts are that the plaintiff and the defendant were partners in a business carried on in the name of the Union Trading Agency, and that the partnership was dissolved in August, 1934. The accounts were then made up, and the defendant paid to the plaintiff a sum of Rs. 600 odd on account of the income-tax which it was estimated the firm, would be liable for. Subsequently an assessment was made against the plaintiff on account of the Union Trading Agency for income-tax for the year ending March 31, 1934. The assessment was for Rs. 3,400 odd. The plaintiff paid the whole amount, and he now sues the defendant for half the amount, giving credit for the sum of Rs. 600 odd already paid by the defendant. The learned ...
Vithalrao Chidambarrao Heblikar Vs. Baswant Bisto Nadgir
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-09-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Bom433; (1937)39BOMLR576
Wassoodew, J.1. This is an appeal from the decision of the Joint First Baswant Class Subordinate Judge of Dharwar who decreed the claim in the suit brought by the plaintiffs as representatives of the junior branch of the nadgir family of Hebli, a jahagir village in the District of Dharwar, for possession with mesne profits from the jahagirdars defendants Nos. 1 to 10 of 47 1/4 mars of land and for accounts of the profits after adjusting the same towards the judi or quit-rent recoverable from the holders.2. The plaintiffs alleged that their ancestors were the watandar patils, kul-karnis and nadgirs of Hebli and that the lands in dispute were part of the watan lands consisting of 200 mars granted to them, prior to' the grant of the jahagir to the defendants, for remuneration by the old rulers subject to the obligation of service to the village and the payment of the judi fixed on the lands. It was further alleged that the obligation with respect to the payment of judi was not discharged ...
Tulsidas Mavji Vs. the Advocate General of Bombay
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-06-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Bom447; (1937)39BOMLR495
Kania, J.1. By this originating summons a clause in the will of the deceased testator is sought to be construed. The will does not appear to be drafted by a lawyer and has been written out in Gujarati by the deceased himself. After making diverse provisions the particular clause in the will runs as follows :Further my executors shall appropriate (utilise and spend) a sum of Rs, 3,000... towards some ' sadavarat' or building ' dharamshala/ or well, tank or havada (water trough) or towards feeding ' sadhus' and ascetics or spend the same towards any other object of ' dharam' (religious or charitable purpose) in order to perpetuate the memory of my wife Putlibai who is dead.2. On behalf of the plaintiff, who is the executor and also residuary legatee, it is contended that by the use of the word 'or' between the various objects mentioned, the clause has become disjunctive and the executor cannot be charged with committing a breach of his duty if he utilised the fund for any one of the obje...
Chimanlal Ganpat Vs. Rajaram Maganchand Oswal
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-02-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Bom158; (1937)39BOMLR103
Broomfield, J.1. This is an appeal under the Letters Patent from a judgment of Mr. Justice Divatia confirming an order of the District Judge of Poona by which the respondent was appointed guardian of his minor niece Lilavati and it was directed under Section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act that she should be restored to his custody from that of the opponents. The respondent who made the application to the District Court is the paternal uncle of the minor girl. The appellants are the persons who opposed that application. Opponent No. 1 is the maternal uncle of the girl and opponent No. 2 is his brother-in-law. According to the findings of the lower Courts, which have not been seriously disputed, the respondent, i.e., the paternal uncle, who is a resident of Kolhapur State, brought up the minor and maintained both her and her mother from the time of her father's death. It appears that the girl now and again visited her other relations who resided in Poona,. but for the greater part of ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›