Mumbai Court December 1943 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.
Bilasrai Joharmal Vs. Shivnarayan Sarupchand
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-21-1943
Reported in: (1944)46BOMLR518
George Rankin, J.1. The appellants on September 2, 1939, with the sanction of the Advocate General, brought a suit on the Original Side of the High Court at Bombay under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, in respect of a public charity. The charity concerned is a hospital at a town in the Jaipur State called Bagar. It was established in 1926 for providing medical relief to the poor and was called Shivnarayan Joharmal Bagar Hospital. The plaint asked that the defendants, who were five in number, should be removed from their office as trustees and that new trustees be appointed by the Court. It also asked for accounts to be taken of the defendants' management, on the footing that they had been guilty of misapplying the funds of the trust; but it is now plain that this allegation is wholly without substance and that the sole ground of complaint is that the defendants have without authority changed the name of the hospital to Snivnarayan Chiranjilal Rungta Hospital and are em...
Raghunath Keshav Khadilkar Vs. Poona Municipality
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-16-1943
Reported in: (1944)46BOMLR675
N.J. Wadia, J.1. These are two Letters Patent appeals against a judgment of Mr. Justice Macklin. The appellant before us had made a petition to the Court of the District Judge of Poona under Section 15 of the Bombay Municipal Boroughs Act, 1925, in connection with the triennial elections of the Poona City Municipality which were held on February 1942. The appellant was one of the candidates. The application was made against the Poona City Municipality and the three other candidates who had stood for election from ward No. 15 and who were declared elected. The petitioner alleged that the electoral roll prepared by the first opponent, the Municipality, contained names of persons who were dead and who were not available in Poona on the date of the election and that there were also other defects in the electoral roll which facilitated personation and other malpractices. He also made certain allegations against some of the opponents. The application was transferred to the Extra Assistant Ju...
Raghunath Keshav Khadilkar Vs. Poona Municipality and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-16-1943
Reported in: AIR1945Bom7
N.J. Wadia, J.1. These are two Letters Patent appeals against a judgment of Macklin J. The appellant before us had made a petition to the Court of the District Judge of Poona under Section 15, Bombay Municipal Boroughs Act, 1925, in connexion with the triennial elections of the Poona City Municipality which were held on 23rd February 1942. The appellant was one of the candidates. The application was made against the Poona City Municipality and the three other candidates who had stood for election from ward No. 15 and who were declared elected. The petitioner alleged that the electoral roll prepared by the first opponent, the Municipality, contained names of persons who were dead and who were not available in Poona on the date of the election and that there were also-other defects in the electoral roll which facilitated personation and other malpractices, He also made certain allegations against some: of the opponents. The application was transferred to the Extra Assistant Judge for dis...
MartIn and Co. Vs. Syed Faiyaz Husain
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-13-1943
Reported in: (1945)47BOMLR575
Atkin, J.1. These are consolidated appeals from a judgment of the High Court at Allahabad reversing a judgment of the Munsif at Amroha in the District of Moradabad. Their Lordships have not had the advantage of hearing counsel for the respondents : but they have been' able to consider the careful judgments in the respondents' favour given in the High Court. The plaintiffs are Shiah Mahomedans of the township of Amroha, and like other Shias on the tenth day of the Mahomedan month of Moharram they commemorate the death of Husain, a son of Fatimah, the daughter of Mohammed, by passing in a procession along the streets of Amroha. In the procession are carried tazias, reproductions of the Mausoleum of Husain, constructed of wood, paper and tinsil, borne on the shoulders of carriers. They are of various heights and have in some instances reached the height of 27, 30, or more feet from the ground. In 1929 Martin & Co., defendant No. 3, obtained from the Local Government, pursuant to the India...
Supdu Laxmanshet Vs. Soniram Ragho
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-10-1943
Reported in: (1944)46BOMLR831
Lokur, J.1. This is a second appeal arising out of a suit filed by five brothers, the sons of Raghoshet Wani of Dabhadi, against Supadu Laxmanshet Wani, defendant No. 1, his six sons defendants Nos. 2 to 7 and their tenants defendants Nos. 8 and 9. The plaintiffs claimed to recover possession of two lands, Revision Survey No. 83 of Jalgaon and Revision Survey No. 273 of Dhandri, together with Rs. 300 as past mesne profits for three years, future raesne profits and costs of the suit. The plaintiffs based their claim on their title which, they alleged, was accepted by the defendants when Suit No. 395 of 1924 in the First Class Subordinate Judge's Court at Nasik was compromised. The defendants denied their title and contended that the compromise application, being not registered, was inadmissible in evidence and that it was not binding on them as the compromise had been brought about by undue influence. Both the Courts below disallowed these contentions and awarded to the plaintiffs posse...
Supdu Laxmanshet and ors. Vs. Soniram Ragho and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-10-1943
Reported in: AIR1945Bom143
Lokur, J.1. This is a second appeal arising out of a suit filed by five brothers, the sons of Raghoshet Wani of Dhabhadi, against Supadu Laxmanshet Wani, defendant 1, his six sons defendants 2 to 7 and their tenants defendants 8 and 9. The plaintiffs claimed to recover possession of two lands, Revision Survey No. 83 of Jalgaon and Revision Survey No. 273 of Dhandri, together with Rs. 300 as past mesne profits for three years, future mesne profits and costs of the suit. The plaintiffs based their claim on their title which, they alleged, was accepted by the defendants when Suit No. 395 of 1924 in the First Class Subordinate Judge's Court at Nasik was compromised. The defendants denied their title and contended that the compromise application, being not registered, was inadmissible in evidence and that it was not binding on them as the compromise had been brought about by undue influence. Both the Courts below disallowed these contentions and awarded to the plaintiffs possession of the t...
Emperor Vs. Kashinath Dayaram Chaudhari
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-08-1943
Reported in: (1944)46BOMLR444
Lokur, J.1. The applicant who is a communist and the secretary of the Railway Men's Union at Manmad, District Nasik, was tried by the Resident Magistrate, First Class, Manmad, for instigating a strike among the labourers in the Reserve Supply Base Depot at Manmad and thereby abetting the doing of a prejudicial act. He was convicted under Rule 38(5) read with Rule 121 of the Defence of India Rules, 1939, and was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years. His appeal to the Sessions Judge at Nasik having been dismissed, he has made this application for revision to have his conviction and sentence set aside. Five of the workmen who went on strike were also tried along with him. They were convicted under Rule 38(5) of the Defence of India Rules and were given the benefit of Section 562(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code. They did not appeal against their conviction. 2. The Reserve Supply Base Depot is a military depot where commodities required for military purposes are stored ...
Emperor Vs. Purshottam Devji Patel
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-08-1943
Reported in: (1944)46BOMLR449
N.J. Wadia, J.1. The applicant was tried by the Resident First Class Magistrate, Anand, for having attempted to export 250 maunds of tur, which he had purchased at Sarsa in the Kaira District, to Bakrol in the Baroda State, in contravention of Notification No. W.A.R. 206 issued by the District Magistrate of Kaira in exercise of the powers conferred by Rule 81 of the Defence of India Rules, 1939, directing that no person should remove wheat, wheat products, tur or tur-dal from any place within the limits of the Kaira District to any place outside the District except under a permit granted by the District Magistrate, Kaira. The offence is alleged to have been committed on the morning of September 1, 1943. He was also charged with trading in tur without a license in contravention of the Bombay Retail Trade Control and Licensing Order, 1942, made and published by the Government of Bombay on July 29, 1942, which provided that no person should engage in any undertaking which involved the sal...
Emperor Vs. Ramanlal Dalsukhbhai Shah
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-08-1943
Reported in: (1944)46BOMLR455
Lokur, J.1. This is an application in revision against the conviction of the applicant under Section 60(a)(iv) of the Factories Act, 1934, for leaving unfenced the hot water circulating tank in the Saraspur Mills in contravention of Rule 55 of the Bombay Factories Rules, 1935. The applicant is the manager of the Saraspur Mills, Ltd., Ahmedabad. On April 29, 1943, Mr. Kagal, Senior Inspector of Factories, Ahmedabad, visited that mill and discovered that the old wall which provided a fencing to the hot water circulating tank had been pulled down, and its place was taken by a wall of the newly built room of the Dyeing Department which was at a distance of about three or four feet from the old wall of the fence, and the space which was thus left open between the tank and the wall of the room of the Dyeing Department was used for storing articles required for the repairs of the nozzles in the hot water circulating tank. There was a window in the north-western corner of the wall of the room ...
In Re: Mantubhai Mehta
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-03-1943
Reported in: (1944)46BOMLR802
N.J. Wadia, J.1. This is a reference made by the Presidency Magistrate, 5th Court, Dadar, under Section 432 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898. The question referred to us for opinion arose in connection with a complaint filed before him under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, against certain police-officers for hurt alleged tohave been caused to the complainant while he was detained in the Worli Jail on October 5, 1942. The complainant said that he did not know the names of his assailants. On October 27, 1942, the complaint was sent by the Magistrate to the. Superintendent of Police, 'F' Division, to ascertain the names of the alleged assailants. The complainant was taken round the Worli Jail and he identified one of his assailants. As regards the others, the jail authorities stated that as many officers had visited the jail at various times on the day in question to quell the disturbance, it was not possible to know their names and to get them identified. After some co...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›