Mumbai Court October 1939 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.
K. H. Mody, in Re.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-05-1939
Reported in: [1940]8ITR179(Bom)
BEAUMONT, C.J. - This is a reference made to us by the Commissioner of Income tax under Section 66 (2) of the Act. The substantial questions raised and the only question which has been argued before us is whether the assessee is carrying on business in relation to the purchase and sale of certain land and is liable to be assessed in respect of the profits of that business. The actual question which the Commissioner has raised goes a good deal beyond that but this is the substantial question raised and the only question which we are prepared to answer on the materials put before us.The material facts are that in the year 1930 the assessee purchased the Inam village of Sahijpur Bogha which is about 3 1/2 miles from Ahmedabad at a price of approximately Rs. 60,000. He borrowed the whole of that amount at 7 1/2 per cent. interest. The village comprised 1,330 acres and out of that area he proceeded to set aside for development and sale as building sites an area of 266 acres divided into 1,0...
Abdul Latif Gulam Nabi Patil Vs. the Jawhar State
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-04-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Bom172; (1940)42BOMLR262
Wassoodew, J.1. This is a Letters Patent Appeal from a decision of Mr. Justice Sen in second appeal No. 133 of 1935. The material facts can be shortly stated. The suit was instituted on behalf of the Jawhar State to recover a sum of Rs. 1,950 as the balance due for the price of certain jungle sold by the State to the defendant. The plaint was presented1 in Court signed by a Daftardar of the State. The defendant contended that the Daftardar had no authority to sue on behalf of the State and that contention was upheld by the trial Court which dismissed the suit on October 5, 1933. It seems that subsequent to that date at the request of the person appointed to carry on the administration of the State, which was communicated to the Governor-General in Council through the Political Agent and Resident at Baroda, the Central Government in the exercise of their power under Section 85 of the Civil Procedure Code appointed the Administrator of the Jawhar State to prosecute or defend on behalf of...
Ratanchand Dhulaji Vs. Jasraj Kasturchand
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-03-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Bom58; (1939)41BOMLR1296
John Beaumont, Kt., C.J.1. This is an appeal from an order made by Mr. Justice B.J. Wadia in chambers which raises an interesting question as to the liability of a next friend of a minor for the costs of the suit. The question arises in this way : The suit was instituted in 1938, the plaintiff being described as a minor aged seventeen years by his father-in-law and next friend Jasraj Kasturchand, and the object of the suit was to obtain partition of the joint family property alleged to belong to the minor and his father and brother. There were some applications in the suit in which costs were incurred. On January 18, 1939, the plaintiff attained his majority, and on January 26 he took out a summons asking for an order that this suit filed in his name by the next friend be directed to be dismissed and the next friend be ordered to pay the costs of all parties of and incidental to the suit. The matter came before the learned Chamber Judge, and counsel for the late minor plaintiff, who ha...
Purshottamdas Parbhudas Patel Vs. Bai Dahi
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-03-1939
Reported in: AIR1940Bom205; (1940)42BOMLR358
Wassoodew, J.1. The plaintiffs are the pujaris of a temple of 'Balia Kaka ' in the village of Lambha in Ahmedabad. The defendants represent the village people of Lambha. It is common ground that Hindoos from Gujarat) have for several generations made vows to that idol when striken with small-pox and similar diseases, and have personally come to fulfil their vows and made voluntary offerings of money and other goods. Those offerings the plaintiffs have been appropriating as of right as pujaris of the temple. Some time back, the villagers, perhaps animated by jealousy, attempted to claim an interest in those offerings, but in a suit instituted by the plaintiffs in 1919 the latter's right to exclusively appropriate, them was established. Recently, on May 25, 1933, one of the defendants, namely defendant No. 1, Patel Purshottam Shambhudas, purchased some open land in the village on the road leading to this temple and not far away from it, and published a notice in July, 1933, that he inten...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›