Mumbai Court July 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.
In Re: Jafferbhai Hasam
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-09-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Bom10; (1936)38BOMLR961; 166Ind.Cas.562
Wassoodew, J.1. The petitioner whose motor-car has been ordered to be confiscated by the Honorary Presidency Magistrate under Section 18 of the Tobacco Duty (Town of Bombay) Act (IV of 1857) on the ground that it was employed in conveying tobacco contrary to the provisions of the said Act has applied to set aside that order as no notice had been given to him by the Magistrate prior to the order of confiscation.2. Three persons, including the petitioner's driver, were convicted on their own plea for an offence under Section 19 of the Tobacco Duty Act for illegal importation of tobacco on January 13, 1936. The order of conviction and confiscation of the car was passed on January 23, 1936. The petitioner was not among the persons prosecuted and was not heard before the order of confiscation was made. The petitioner applied to the Magistrate on March 14, 1936, to revise that order of confiscation. That application was rejected without reasons on March 19, 1936.3. The provisions of the Act ...
Demibai Gengji Sojpal Vs. Rowji Sojpal
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-09-1936
Reported in: (1937)39BOMLR471
B.J. Wadia, J.1. This is a rule nisi taken out by the defendants in suit No. 572 of 1935 against Cooverji Keshavji Shah, the editor, printer and publisher of a weekly newspaper in Bombay called the Satya Prakash and Swadesh, to show cause, if any he has, why he should not be committed for contempt of Court in having edited, printed and published in his newspaper the four articles set out in the rule, and why he should not be restrained by an order and injunction of this Court from publishing further articles of a like nature in the future.2. This suit was filed on April 9, 1935, by the plaintiff against the defendants for maintenance and residence out of joint family properties which, she says, are in the possession of the defendants. On the day on which the plaint was filed the plaintiff took out a notice of motion for an order that she should be paid a sum of Rs. 3,000 per month for interim maintenance, and that the defendants should be restrained by injunction of the Court from alie...
Demibai Gengji Sojpal Vs. Rowji Sojpal and ors. and in Re: Cooverji Ke ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-09-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Bom305
ORDER1. This is a rule nisi taken out by the defendants in Suit No. 572 of 1935 against Cooverji Keshavji Shah, the editor, printer and publisher of a weekly newspaper in Bombay called the Satya Prakash and Swadesh, to show cause, if any he has, why he should not be committed for contempt of Court in having edited, printed and published in his newspaper the four articles set out in the rule, and why he should not be restrained by an order and injunction of this Court from publishing further articles of a like nature in the future. This suit was filed on 9th April 1935 by the plaintiff against the defendants for maintenance and residence out of the joint family properties which she says are in the possession of the defendants. On the day on which the plaint was filed the plaintiff took out a notice of motion for an order that she should be paid a sum of Rs. 3,000 per month for interim maintenance, and that the defendants should be restrained by injunction of the Court from alienating th...
Emperor Vs. Baburao Tatyarao
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-08-1936
Reported in: (1936)38BOMLR946; 165Ind.Cas.8
Wassoodew, J.1. The applicant Baburao Tatyarao was convicted upon a joint trial with one Ambalal Nathalal Patel by the Resident Magistrate of Godhra for offences of criminal breach of trust and wilful destruction of accounts relating to Shantiniwas Housing Co-operative Society, under Sections 408 and 477A, Indian Penal Code, respectively, and was sentenced to suffer eighteen months' rigorous imprisonment for each of the two offences with a fine of Rs. 200. The accused Baburao as well as Ambalal, who was also convicted along with him, appealed to the Sessions Judge. In that appeal Baburao was acquitted on the charge of destruction of accounts and convicted of criminal breach of trust. The learned Sessions Judge reduced the substantive sentence of imprisonment to four months and confirmed the fine.2. The applicant Baburao was employed at the material time as a clerk of the Shantiniwas Society and was working under the Honorary Secretary of that Society, Ambalal, who was the co-accused at...
Fakir Mahomed Malang Vs. the Municipal Commissioner of Bombay
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-03-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Bom395; (1937)39BOMLR536
Kania, J.1. This is a petition filed under Section 45 of the Specific Relief Act, praying that the respondent, the Municipal Commissioner, be ordered to issue a license to the petitioner permitting him to carry on the business of a butcher at Charni Road. There is a further prayer asking for an injunction against the respondent prosecuting the petitioner in the Police Court for carrying on the business of a butcher without a license.2. The petition and the affidavits show that the petitioner has been carrying on the business of a butcher at a shop in Girgaum for many years past. In about 1928, the Municipality, after mature deliberation, came to the conclusion that it was in the municipal interest of the city of Bombay that the sale of meat should be confined to specific areas. From the annexure to the affidavit of Mr. Laud it appears that this policy was reiterated many times in the communications between the Municipal Committee and the Commissioner and the applicants for licenses and...
Bhaguji Baloba Kir Vs. the Alandi Municipality
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-01-1936
Reported in: AIR1937Bom37; (1936)38BOMLR1098; 166Ind.Cas.925
Rangnekar, Ag. C.J.1. This is an appeal in a suit for malicious prosecution brought by the appellant against the Alandi Municipality and its President. The circumstances which led to the prosecution are briefly these. The plaintiff who is a contractor was possessed of a Dharmashala on the road between Alandi and Poona. This Dharmashala was completed in about 1923 under the management of his agent, one Chavan. Then it appears that at that time a katcha shed standing on wooden poles with roof covered by corrugated iron sheets was left standing adjoining the plot and was used as a store-room for timber and other materials. In 1926, as the evidence shows, the plaintiff's agent wanted to run a business of motor bus between Alandi and Poona. For this purpose he required a garage and he started utilizing the tin shed already standing for that purpose and putting up another shed which is shown on the plan as 'B.' Admittedly no permission for either extending the so-called flimsy shed or puttin...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›