Mumbai Court August 1945 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.
Firm Juggilal Kamlapat Vs. Collector of Bombay and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-09-1945
Reported in: AIR1946Bom280
ORDERBhagwati, J.1. The petitioners are a firm carrying on business at Bombay, Cawnpore, Calcutta and several other places. The partners of the petitioners' firm are three brothers, viz., Sir Padampat Singhania, Lala Kailashpat Singhania and Lala Lakshmipat Singhania. In paras. 1 and 2 of their petition the petitioners set out the various businesses and industrial concerns in which they are interested and also set out the manner in which the partners of the petitioners firm as well as the directors, managers and; representatives of one or more of the concerns of the petitioners in India are obliged to and do in fact come down to Bombay very frequently. They say that for the purpose of housing them as well as the offices, of their several businesses they have rented: since 1941 flat No. 4 on the third floor of the premises known as Ganga Bihar at Marine Drive in Bombay. The petitioners say that they have no other place in Bombay where they can have any accommodation for the aforesaid pu...
In Re: Pirojshaw Adarji Shroff
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-03-1945
Reported in: (1946)48BOMLR640
Blagden, J.1. This is a petition by a Mr. P. A. Shroff made to the Court under very extraordinary circumstances. The petitioner is one of four coowners in certain mortgaged property, which is in a bad state of repair. The amount outstanding on the mortgage is at the moment Rs. 12,OO0; or thereabouts. A chance has arisen to dispose of the property for Rs. 45,000, which is strongly recommended by a competent architect, and appears to me obviously in the interests of the co-owners. The remaining co-owners are the petitioner, his sister, Mr. Byramji A. Shroff and Mr. J. A. Shroff. Of the two latter, the first named has been adjudged a lunatic by this Court, and the proposed sale has been sanctioned by this Court on his behalf. The present difficulty arises in relation to Mr. J. A. Shroff who, it seems, left Bombay for China about twenty-eight years ago and was last heard of in 1939, when a letter was received, purporting to come from him and to have been written from China, which showed (i...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›