Mumbai Court October 1937 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.
Calico Printers Association Ltd. Vs. Savani and Co.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-05-1937
Reported in: AIR1939Bom103
Somjee, J.1. The plaintiffs are the registered proprietors of a certain design for printing saries. The certificate of registration of the design with a specimen print on a piece of voil is Ex. A. The design consists of a border and, what has been at this trial called, the body or the background of the sari. The design was registered under the Patents and Designs Act (2 of 1911) and therefore the plaintiff's have the exclusive right to the use of the design for printing textile goods and selling the same in British India. The plaintiffs' case is that the defendants imported into Bombay ten cases of Japanese prints for sale in Bombay, the border of which is identical with or a fraudulent or obvious imitation of the plaintiffs' registered design and that the defendants applied the design to the goods contained in the ten cases without the license or consent of the plaintiffs and were publishing or exposing or causing to be published or exposed for sale and selling the goods.2. The plaint...
Ganeshnarayan Onkarmal Vs. Raja Pratapgirji Narsingirji
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-05-1937
Reported in: AIR1938Bom161; 174Ind.Cas.361
Beaumont, C.J.1. This is an appeal from a decision of Blackwell, J. sitting in bankruptcy. The facts as found by the learned Judge, which are not in dispute, are these. The debtor is not a British-Indian subject, but is a subject of the Nizam of Hyderabad. He came to Bombay for the first time about 1926. Thereafter he used to come to and stay in Bombay from time to time at his bungalow 'Samudra Tarang' down to about the end of 1934. Since then he has lived at Hyderabad within the territories of the Nizam, and he has never again been to Bombay. His bungalow 'Samudra Tarang' was mortgaged, and in or about August, 1935, the mortgagees entered into and still are in possession. The debtor formerly had a residence known as 'Himat House', but that was at some date, not now material, settled in trust for his children. He has not within a year before the date of the presentation of the petition ordinarily resided or had a dwelling house within the limits of the ordinary original civil jurisdict...
Ramchandra Ganpatrao Dalvi Vs. Lakshmibai Shamrao Kalkundri
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-01-1937
Reported in: AIR1938Bom331; (1938)40BOMLR400
Sen, J.1. The plaintiff-appellant and defendants Nos. 2 to 8 belong to the family of the Dalvis of the village Kurnibujavade. The plaintiff sued to recover possession of the plaint village Kurnibujavade jointly with defendants Nos. 2 to 8, with mesne profits and costs. He alleged that the suit village had been acquired by the ancestors of the plaintiff and defendants Nos. 2 to 8 before the advent of the Peshwa rule; that in 1858 the British Government recognised Ramchahdrarao and Yeshwantrao, the plaintiff's ancestors, as sarva inamdars and entered in the records the property in suit as sarva inam political saranjam Class I, descendible to the male heirs of the holders and not to be interfered with as long as the Here Jahagir existed ; that the holders had nothing more than a life interest in the property ; that in 1890 five out of the then seven holders of the estate jointly passed two registered sale-deeds in favour of two brothers named Kalkundris in respect of the entire village ; ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›