Mumbai Court February 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.
In Re: Manubhai Bhikabhai Patel
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-01-1943
Reported in: AIR1943Bom194; (1943)45BOMLR316
John Beaumont, Kt., C.J. 1. This is an application under Section 491 of the Criminal Procedure Code, that is to say, an application in the nature of habeas corpus.2. The applicant was arrested on December 14, 1942, the suggested charge against him being one under the Explosive' Substances Act, and he was remanded in police custody on December 15 for a week. On December 21 he was served with a notice under Rule 129 of the Defence of India Rules, 1939, stating that he had been detained under that rule for the purpose of investigation as from that day. On January 12, 1943, the District Magistrate of Ahmedabad made an order under Rule 26 of the Defence of India Rules, stating that he was satisfied with respect to the persons named in the first column of the Schedule thereto annexed (those names including the name of the applicant) that with a view to preventing them from acting in a manner prejudicial to the defence of British India, the public safety, the maintenance of public order and t...
ishwarlal Laxmichand Patel Vs. Kuber Mohan Lawar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-01-1943
Reported in: AIR1943Bom457; (1943)45BOMLR834
Lokur, J.1. The suit out of which this appeal arises was filed by the plaintiff for an injunction; against the defendants to secure certain easement rights and various other amenities for his house, The suit was dismissed with costs and the plaintiff appealed to the District Court. The appeal was admitted and notice was duly served on the respondents. The appellant died on October 2, 1940, and the respondents appeared through a pleader on October 9, 1940. Thereafter, within the period of limitation allowed by law, the son of the deceased appellant made an application to be brought on the record as his legal representative. His application was granted and his name was placed on the record as the legal representative of the deceased appellant. On the date of the hearing, which came off about ten months later, it was contended for the respondents that the widow of the deceased appellant was also one of his heirs under the Hindu Women's Rights to Property Act, XVIII of 1937, and that, as s...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›