Mumbai Court June 1945 Judgments
Abdul Karim Adenwalla Vs. Rahimabai
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-28-1945
Reported in: AIR1946Bom342; (1946)48BOMLR67
Chagla, J.1. The plaintiff has filed the suit for a declaration that the deed of wakf executed by Mahomed Moosa Adenwalla on October 16, 1928, is void and inoperative and that defendants Nos. 1, 2 and 3, who are the present trustees under that deed, hold the properties, the subject-matter of the trust, as trustees for the heirs of the deceased other than Fatmabai and Ebrahim Haji Ahmed Moosa. The wakf which was executed by Haji Ahmed Moosa purports to be wakf-alal-aulad, and what I have to determine is whether it is a good wakf within the meaning of the Mussalman Wakf Validating Act of 1913. The settlor recites his desire of making a wakf-alal-aulad in respect of his two immoveable properties in order to provide himself and his children in the manner provided in the trust deed. He declares that he would be the first mutawalli or trustee under the deed arid then he gives directions as to how. the rents and profits of the two properties are to be distributed. He directs, the trustees fir...
Tag this Judgment!Jadavbai Narayandas Vs. Shrikisan
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-27-1945
Reported in: AIR1946Bom113; (1945)47BOMLR978
Lokur, J.1. This is an application in revision against an order passed by the Joint First Class Subordinate Judge at Sholapur in suit No. 343 of 1939 granting the plaintiff's application for adjournment of the hearing on condition that she should pay Rs. 600 to the defendant for his costs of the day. The plaintiff's family is one of the richest in Sholapur and she filed this suit against her adopted son for recovering past and future maintenance at the rate of Rs. 600 per month, a portion of the family wada for her residence and Rs. 10,000 for visiting holy places. The subject matter of the suit was valued at Rs. 86,400. The defendant was prepared to give her maintenance at the rate of Rs. 250 per month but nothing for her pilgrimage. The suit was filed on February 8, 1939, and was adjourned from time to time at the request of one party or the other. It was fixed for final hearing on February 22, 1941, but on that day one of the witnesses for the plaintiff was not present. She asked fo...
Tag this Judgment!Ahmedbhai Kadubhai Vs. Badruddin
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-26-1945
Reported in: AIR1946Bom356; (1946)48BOMLR110
Rajadhyaksha, J.1. The short point that arises for decision in this civil revision application is this. When an administration suit is filed and valued for the purpose of court-fees at Rs. 130 but has been by mistake valued at Rs. 5,500 for the purpose of jurisdiction, and a decree has been passed for Rs. 25,000 odd, does the appeal from such a decree lie to the District Court or to the High Court The facts leading to the filing of this application are somewhat complicated, but it is necessary to refer to them, as there have been decisions of this very Court at some stage of the proceedings to which I shall have to refer in deciding the point that arises for decision in this case.2. One Kadubhai Gulabbhai died on February 10, 1894, leaving behind him his widow Ilahibegum, his son Dr. Ahmed and his two daughters Amirbibi and Fejbibi. Fejbibi was married to one Chandmia from whom she had a son named Ahmedmiya. Kadubhai Gulabbhai left some immoveable property, and in the year 1894 his wid...
Tag this Judgment!J. Subbiah Reddy Vs. T. Jordon
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-18-1945
Reported in: (1945)47BOMLR959
John Beaumont, J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment and decree of the Additional Judge of the Court of the Honourable the British Resident in Mysore, Bangalore, dated August 14, 1940, varying a judgment and decree of the District Judge, Bangalore, dated November 20, 1939.2. The claim of the plaintiff was for damages for injuries sustained by him in an accident to a motor car in which he was a passenger. He sued J. G. Anniah Reddy, the first defendant and second appellant who was the driver of the car, and his father, J. Subbiah Reddy, the second defendant and original first appellant, who was the owner of the car. Subbiah died on December 20, 1940, and appellants (i) to (xvi) are his legal representatives.3. The material facts are that in September, 1937, the plaintiff, who was a motor engineer and salesman, was negotiating for a position in International Motors, Bangalore, a concern owned by defendant No. 2, in which defendant No. 1 was employed. In the morning of September 27, wh...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›