Mumbai Court February 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.
Nurbai Vs. Abhram Mahamad
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-13-1939
Reported in: AIR1939Bom449; (1939)41BOMLR825
Broomfield, J.1. The subject-matter of this litigation is a house at Anand which belonged to one Saban Aliji. He died leaving a widow Jivi and a daughter Nurbai who is the plaintiff. Nurbai was married and had a son defendant No. 1. In 1918 Jivi purported to convey the house by a deed of gift to her grandson defendant No. 1. She died in 1929. In 1930 defendant No. 1 mortgaged the house to defendant No. 2, and in 1934 he sold his equity of redemption to defendants Nos. 3 and 4. Defendant No. 2 got a decree on his mortgage, and in the execution proceedings plaintiff claimed the house as her property. She was referred to a suit and she sued accordingly for a declaration that she was the owner of the house and that the mortgage and sale by defendant No. 1 were not binding on her. The trial Court held that there was a valid gift by Jivi to defendant No. 1 and dismissed the suit. There was an appeal to the District Judge which was summarily dismissed.2. The issues which have been argued in t...
Suryajirao Ganpatrao Naik Nimbalkar Jahagirdar Vs. Shivakacharu Kumbha ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-13-1939
Reported in: AIR1939Bom421; (1939)41BOMLR951
Wassoodew, J.1. This is a second appeal from the decision of. the District judge of Jalgaon. The dispute relates to the right of the landlord, who is also an inamdar of the town of Bhusawal, to demand enhanced rent from the defendants who are permanent, tenants of the demised property measuring over 10,000 square yards in that town. The rent was recovered from the defendants since 1865 at an uniform rate of Rs. 70 per year with local fund cess in proportion to the assessment fixed on the property. The landlord has now by notice sought to increase the rent, and on refusal to pay he has instituted this action. The Courts below have held that the defendants would have been liable to pay rent if the landlord had established his claim either by virtue of an agreement or usage, and that, in the absence of such evidence, they dismissed the claim. At the same time the lower appellate Court held that if the landlord is entitled to claim rent on the basis of what is just and reasonable, that ren...
Tarabai Shriniwas Naik Guttal Vs. Murtacharya Anantacharya
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-10-1939
Reported in: AIR1939Bom414; (1939)41BOMLR924
John Beaumont, Kt., C.J.1. This is a second appeal from a judgment of the Assistant Judge of Dharwar. The plaintiff sued for a declaration that he was the preferential heir to the suit property under the provisions of the Bombay Act V of 1886, which is an Act amending the Bombay Watan Act III of 1874. The trial Judge dismissed the plaintiff's suit, but in appeal the learned Assistant Judge passed a decree in favour of the plaintiff.2. In the year 1927 the holder of the property was one Wasudevacharya, who died in that year, leaving the three defendants, as his daughters, and the plaintiff, as the son of a deceased divided brother. There is no question that under Hindu law the daughters would1 succeed as heirs. But Section 2 of Act V of 1886 provides that every1 female member of a watan family other than the widow, mothers or paternal grandmother of the last male owner, and every person claiming through a female, shall be postponed in the order of succession to any watan, or part thereo...
D.M. Jacinto Vs. J.D.B. Fernandez
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-06-1939
Reported in: AIR1939Bom454; (1939)41BOMLR921
John Beaumont, Kt., C.J.1. This is a second appeal from a judgment of the Assistant Judge of Thana, which purports to raise a question of limitation, but to my mind really raises a question of practice in execution. The point arises in this way. In 1924 there was a suit for partition of immoveable property, part of it being house property, and part of it being property subject to assessment to Government revenue. That being so, the two classes of property had to be dealt with respectively under Sub-section (2) and sub-section (1) of Order XX, Rule 18, of the Civil Procedure Code. Accordingly, on May 27, 1925, an order was duly made under that rule partitioning the property between the plaintiff and the defendants in certain shares, and directing that the plaintiff be put in possession of his share. Then it was directed that the partition of the lands assessed to. Government revenue be effected by the Collector, and of the other property by a commissioner to be appointed by the Court. T...
Mahant Narsidasji Balmukunddasji Vs. Bai Jamna
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-03-1939
Reported in: AIR1939Bom354; (1939)41BOMLR787
Broomfield, J.1. First Appeal No. 95 of 1936 is an appeal against a decree of the First Class Subordinate Judge, Ahmedabad, awarding the plaintiff Rs. 5,044 in respect of arrears of maintenance. The facts leading to the litigation were shortly these. The plaintiff's husband Ambalal, who was a wealthy and pious Hindu, died on July 27, 1929, leaving properties immoveable and moveable which have been described in a schedule annexed to the plaint. They consisted of lot No. 1 a large residential house in Jamalpur, Ahmedabad, containing several buildings in one com lot No. 2 a shop forming a portion of the above, lot No. 3 a building, and lot No. 4 a dehla also situated in Jamalpur, lot No. 5 a building known as the Apangashram or Cripples' Home which was constructed by Ambalal in his lifetime on land belonging to the temple of Shri Jagannathji, and lot No. 6 a building on the Richey Road, Ahmedabad, in which Ambalal in his lifetime had started a dispensary. The moveable properties consisted...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›