Mumbai Court October 1944 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.
Shankar Ganesh Vs. Satara Swadeshi Commercial Co. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-06-1944
Reported in: AIR1945Bom374; (1945)47BOMLR352
Sen, J.1. This is a revision application by a judgment-debtor against an order made by the Assistant Judge of Satara on appeal from an order made by the Subordinate Judge of Islampur in an insolvency petition made by the opponent, who is the assignee of a decree obtained in Suit No. 10 of 1930 against the applicant. The said assignee filed a darkhast in 1941. During the pendency of that darkhast he also filed an application (No 2 of 1941) in insolvency against the applicant judgment-debtor who is an agriculturist. The present applicant contended; that the, application by his creditor to have him adjudged an insolvent was untenable under the Dekkhan Agriculturists' Relief Act as it was barred by Section 82(6) of the Provincial Insolvency Act. The learned Subordinate Judge accepted this contention and held that he had no jurisdiction to entertain the application. Section 82(b) of the Provincial Insolvency Act says that nothing in the Act shall apply to cases to which Chap. IV of the Dekk...
Dinsab Kasimsab Vs. Mahamad Hussen Dinsab
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-06-1944
Reported in: AIR1945Bom390; (1945)47BOMLR345
Lokur, J.1. This second appeal arises out of a suit filed by the minor plaintiffs Mahamed Hussen and Imam Hussen through their mother and next friend Begumbi to recover from their father Dinsab future maintenance at Rs. 4 each per month, together with arrears of maintenance at the same rate from the dates on which they respectively attained the age of seven. The defendant contended that as soon as the plaintiffs attained the age of seven, he became their legal guardian and as such entitled to their custody, and that, therefore, he was not liable to pay separate maintenance to them. The trial Court upheld his contention and dismissed the suit. But in appeal the learned District Judge held that the father's liability to maintain his sons during their minority was absolute and' irrespective of his right to have them in his custody, that he was bound to provide them with maintenance wherever they were, and that if he wanted their custody, he should take appropriate steps under the Guardian...
Vyasrao Hanmantrao Vs. Ramchandra Hanmant
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-06-1944
Reported in: AIR1945Bom489; (1945)47BOMLR434
Sen, J.1. This second appeal arises out of darkhast proceedings. Five persons obtained a decree in 1928 for possession and mesne profits in the Court of the Joint Subordinate Judge of Bijapur against certain judgment-debtors. The judgment-debtors appealed to the District Court and applied for stay of execution Under Order XLI, Rule 5, of the Code of Civil Procedure. Stay was granted on the present respondent's standing surety for the due satisfaction of the decree by the judgment-debtors in case the decree was confirmed or varied by the appellate Court. The decree was confirmed on appeal. The decree-holders filed three darkhasts in 1930, 1932 and 1935 in none of which execution was sought against the surety. In the present darkhast filed in 1939 execution is sought against the legal representatives of defendant No, X and the surety respondent. The main question raised was whether the present darkhast was in time against the surety. The trial Court came to the conclusion that as no dark...
Hirabai Gendalal Vs. Bhagirath Ramchandra and Company
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-06-1944
Reported in: AIR1946Bom174
Lokur, J.1. The suit out of which this appeal arises was filed by the Mamlatdar, taluka Jalgaon, representing the Court of Wards, on behalf of Messrs. Bhagirath Ramchandra & Co., of which the present owner and vahiwatdar is Shivnarayan Bhagirath Shet. In 1927 the plaintiff company was appointed the managing agents of the Bhagirath Spinning, Weaving and ., Jalgaon, hereinafter referred to in this judgment as the Mills company. The Mills company having fallen into financial difficulties, a scheme for its reconstruction was submitted to and sanctioned by the High Court on 11th January 1932. In accordance with that scheme, the plaintiff company surrendered its managing agency to the defendant company for a period of fifteen years on condition that it should be paid a quarter of the commission earned by the defendant company from the managing agency. The Mills company went into liquidation in February 1935 and during that interval the defendant company is said to have earned a commission of...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay Vs. the Great Eastern Life Insuranc ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-06-1944
Reported in: AIR1945Bom402; [1945]13ITR141(Bom)
STONE, C.J. - This is a reference under section 66 (1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, the relevant assessment year being 1939-40 and the accounting year being the calendar 1938.The assessee is a non-resident life insurance company, having a branch in British India. The questions raised concern the method of assessment of the profits and gains of the Indian business of the company. That depends on Section 10 (7) of the Indian Income-tax Act and certain rules which are set out in the Schedule to the Act. The rules, with which we are concerned, are the new rules, which became operative in 1939.Section 10, sub-section (7), of the Indian Income-tax Act is as follows :'Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in Section 8, 9, 10, 12 or 18, the profits and gains of any business of insurance and the tax payable thereon shall be computed in accordance with the rules contained in the Schedule to this Act.'Turning to the Schedule, it is to be observed that it is headed :'Rules for ...
In Re: Peregrino Rodrigues
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-05-1944
Reported in: AIR1945Bom173; (1944)46BOMLR916
Bhagwati, J.1. This is a petition filed by the Official Assignee for leave under Section 63 of the Presidency-towns Insolvency Act, 1909, to disclaim the sub-tenancy of the portion of the premises at Sassoon Dock, Bombay, occupied by the insolvent. The insolvent was adjudicated on his own petition on January 20, 1944. At the time of his adjudication he was occupying a portion of the house No. 112 at Sassoon Dock, Bombay, as a subtenant of one J. Rodrigues paying a monthly rent of Rs. 55. The insolvent was in appeal of rent and did not give vacant possession of the said premises to J. Rodrigues, with the result that J. Rodrigues filed a suit in the Small Causes Court, being suit No. 4706 of 1944, for ejectment and claiming the arrears of rent from theinsolvent. While the said suit was pending, J. Rodrigues requested the Official Assignee to disclaim the sub-tenancy of the said premises to enable him to file the notice of disclaimer in the proceedings of the said suit. Before, however, t...
In Re : Vanraj Vallabhdas
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-03-1944
Reported in: AIR1945Bom161; (1944)46BOMLR921
Bhagawati, J.1. One Vallabhdas Vandrawandas died on September 15, 1918, leaving him surviving his son, the insolvent, his widow Bai Velabai, and his daughter Bai Kusum. Before his death he made and published his last will and testament dated July 31, 1918, under which he directed that a sum of Rs. 125 per month should be paid to his widow, Bai Velabai, during her lifetime, and a sum of Rs, 50 per month should be paid to his daughter, Bai Kusum, during her lifetime. He also directed that the executors and trustees of his will should, in order to provide for the payment of the said sums of Rs. '125 and Rs. 50 per month, purchase an immoveable property, the rents and profits whereof should be charged with the payment of the said sums to his widow and daughter. The immoveable property, which is the subject-matter of this application, was accordingly purchased by his executors and trustees, and on December 7, 1926, the said Ihnmoveable property was assigned by the executors and trustees of ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›