Mumbai Court July 1946 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.
Emperor Vs. Govind Bhimrao Kulkarni
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-19-1946
Reported in: AIR1947Bom338; (1947)49BOMLR153
Leonard Stone, Kt., C.J.1. We have before us seven matters six of them being applications and one of them being a reference to us by the learned Sessions Judge, Sholapur. All these cases arise out of the same subject-matter. The point is a very short one and it is this. The Sholapur Mills Spinning & Wearing Company, Ltd., owns six motor lorries or trucks and four touring cars; all of them used in the company's business. Now after the rationing of motor spirit came into force in the year 1941 this company was given its quota of coupons to obtain motor spirit for its ten motor vehicles, and in the course of carrying out their activities the company used, indiscriminately, the petrol coupons in respect of one vehicle to put petrol into another vehicle and what is complained of by Government is that the petrol in respect of the coupons for the lorries or trucks was used in the touring cars and vice versa. Whether or not to do this is an offence must depend solely on what interpretation is ...
Trimbak Narhar Vs. Gopal Narayan
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-17-1946
Reported in: AIR1947Bom480; (1947)49BOMLR333
Gajendragadkar, J.1. This application has been made by the appellants in second appeal No. 439 of 1943 praying that the heirs of the deceased respondent No. 1 should be brought on the record and that the delay, if any, in making the present application should be excused. The appeal under which the application has been made has been preferred by three appellants who were original defendants and it arises in the execution of a decree passed against them. There were four respondents to the appeal. Out of them respondent No. 1 died on April 11, 1945. The present application to bring the heirs of the deceased respondent on the record has been made on December 22, 1945. Prima facie this application would be beyond time since under Article 177 of the Indian Limitation Act applications to bring the legal representatives of the deceased respondent have to be made within 90 days from the date of the death of the respondent concerned. Mr. Desai has, however, contended that the provisions of O. XX...
Prahlad Tirkaraddi Vs. Laxmava
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-17-1946
Reported in: AIR1947Bom484; (1947)49BOMLR542
Sen, J.1. [After setting out the facts of the ease His Lordship proceeded as follows:]-The main contentions of Mr. Thakor on behalf of the appellants defendants Nos. 1 to 3 and 5 are (1) that the present suit was incompetent, the plaintiff's remedy being to apply in the original suit to which the surety's sons might be joined and to seek an order under Section 151 of the Civil Procedure Code (2) that plaintiff No. 2 having admittedly assigned the decree, she had no subsisting rights and was, therefore, incompetent to sue (3) that it was wrong on the part of the trial Court to transpose defendant No. 6 to the position of plaintiff No. 2 and (4) that the charge could not be enforced against defendants Nos. 1 to 3 as there were no antecedent debts or legal necessity when the bond was executed by their father.2. The first is the most important point, and Mr. Thakor has relied mainly on Raj Raghubar Singh v. Jai Indra Bahadur Singh 22 Bom. L.R. 521. In that ease an appeal to the Court of th...
Emperor Vs. Mahendra Balkrishna Shah
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-16-1946
Reported in: (1948)50BOMLR377
Bavdekar, J.1. This is an appeal by the Government of the Province of Bombay against the acquittal of one Mahendra Balkrishna Shah in a case in which he was charged for having contravened Section 6(2)(b)(2) of Ordinance No. XXXV of 1943 and Section 10 of Ordinance XXXV of 1943. The prosecution succeded in proving to the satisfaction of the learned trial Magistrate that this Mahendra Balkrishna Shah had, on June 3, 1944, sold to one witness Ayyar a bottle of Thakkar's Amla Hair Oil for Rs. 1-6-0 when the producer's selling price was Re. 1 per bottle, and also that he, on the same date, issued a cash memo in respect of the sale, which did not contain particulars of the transaction as required by Government of India Notification dated May 27, 1944. In particular, the cash memo did not mention the price at which Mahendra Balkrishna shah had sold the Amla Oil.2. Even so, the learned trial Magistrate acquitted the accused, because he was of the opinion that the prosecution in this case had b...
Maturi Sanyasilingam Vs. the Exchange Bank of India and Africa, Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-15-1946
Reported in: (1947)49BOMLR309
Coyajee, J.1. The plaintiff has filed this suit against the defendants who are a bank carrying on business in Bombay for conversion of the proceeds of a draft in the following circumstances.2. The plaintiff who carries on business at Vizianagram sends drafts to his commission agents in Bombay as well as hundies and other documents in payment of goods forwarded to him by his commission agents from Bombay. Pursuant to this practice of his the plaintiff on March 10, 1944, sent from Vizianagram a demand draft for Rs. 4,400 which was purchased by him from the Imperial Bank of India at Vizianagram, being draft No. AV 08020, and he sent the said draft which was drawn in favour of one Shantilal Lalchand Shah or order to his commission agents by ordinary post. It appears that the plaintiff's commission agents in Bombay to whom he was forwarding the same did not receive the said document. By his letter of March 14, 1944, the plaintiff informed his commission agents about the same but he was info...
GulamhuseIn Sajan Vs. Fakirmahomed Sajan
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-09-1946
Reported in: AIR1947Bom185; (1946)48BOMLR733
Chagla, J.1. This is an originating summons taken out in order to have certain provisions of an indenture of trust dated March 15, 1909, construed. The indenture of trust was executed on March 15, 1909, by Datoobhai Sajan, a Khoja Mahomedan inhabitant of Bombay. It settled upon trust a certain immoveable property. The income of the property was to be given to the settlor Datoobhai; after his death to his wife Bajbai; and after the death, of the survivor of them, the income was to be divided into two equal parts and to be paid to the two sons of the settlor, the two plaintiffs to this originating summons. On the death of plaintiff No. 1 the moiety of the trust property and the income thereof was given absolutely to his sons, and similarly the other taoiety of the trust property and the income thereof was given absolutely to the sons of plaintiff No. 2. At the date of the settlement neither of the two plaintiffs had any children. Defendants Nos. 2 and 3 are the sons of plaintiff No. 1 an...
Lala Duni Chand Vs. Musammat Anar Kali
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-09-1946
Reported in: (1947)49BOMLR1
M.R. Jayakar, J.1. This is an appeal from a judgment and decree of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, dated August 29, 1941, which affirmed tht judgment and decree of the Court of the First Civil Judge of Saharanpur, District Saharanpur, dated January 10, 1938.2. The parties are Hindus subject to the Mitakshara law of the Benares school, and this appeal involves the construction of the Hindu Law of Inheritance (Amendment) Act, 1929 (II of 1929), which is hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'. The Act is not expressed to come into operation on a particular day. It received the assent of the Governor General on February 21, 1929, and under the provisions of Section 5 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 (X of 1897), it came into operation immediately on the expiration of February 20, 1929.3. The description and preamble of the Act make it clear that the object of the Act is to alter the order of succession of certain persons therein mentioned, namely, a son's daughter, daughter's daug...
Emperor Vs. Chanbassayya Rachayya Pujari
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-03-1946
Reported in: AIR1947Bom161; (1946)48BOMLR755
Lokur, J.1. These are two appeals against two complaints under Section 193 of the Indian Penal Code filed against the appellants by the Additional Sessions Judge at Belgaum under Section 476 of the Criminal Procedure Code for giving false evidence either in his Court in Sessions Case No. 70 of 1945 or in. the Court of the Committing Magistrate. Both the appellants were examined as eye-witnesses for the prosecution in Sessions Case No. 70 of 1945 in which Fakirappa Yellappa Gaifiad and two others were tried for the murder of one Venkappa. Chanba-sayya, the appellant in criminal appeal No. 98 of 1946, stated in the Court of the Committing Magistrate as follows:I had been bathing my bullocks and I heard some row. I turned back and saw accused No. 3 and Venkappa grappling together. Then accused Nos. 1 and 2 beat him. Accused Nos. I and 3 had sticks in their hands. Accused No. 2 had nothing, but pelted stones at Venkappa. Then Venkangouda came and fell down in the river.At the trial in the ...
Emperor Vs. Pratapmal Rikhabdas
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-03-1946
Reported in: AIR1947Bom335; (1947)49BOMLR49
Leonard Stone, Kt., C.J.1. The petitioner-accused was summarily tried by Mr. Basit, City Magistrate, First Class, Poona, for offence alleged against him under Rule 81 (4) of the Defence of India Rules and el. 6 of the Bombay Rationing Order, 1943, and he was found guilty by the learned Magistrate after a summary trial and was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 150. The matter at the instance of the petitioner-accused went in revision to Mr. Nagarkar, the Sessions Judge of Poona, who dismissed the application. The petitioner-accused now applies to us in revision in order to review the circumstances of the case.2. The prosecution case in the trial Court was that at 7-30 a.m. on the morning of December 2, 1944, the petitioner sent by a hamal 224 lbs, of sugar from his licensed rationing shop at Poona with instructions to the hamal that he should hand it over to one Gatarmal. It appears that the police had reason to suppose that the petitioner had been selling sugar in the black market and so ...
Munshi and Company Vs. Yeshwant Tukaram Teli
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-01-1946
Reported in: (1947)49BOMLR539
Macklin, J.1. This is an appeal by an employer against the award of compensation to one of his workmen in respect of an injury suffered in warehouse in Prince's Dock at the time of the Bombay Explosion of April 14, 1944. The facts are not in dispute. The workman was employed in a godown. As the result of the explosion the wall suddenly collapsed, and a hot plate of metal got into what was left of the godown and hit the workman's leg. As a result of this injury his leg was amputated. His disability was assessed at 60 per cent., and he was awarded altogether Rs. 1,512 by way of compensation and an additional Rs. 4 for court-fee charges.2. It is to be noted that after the explosion the Government of India set up a Claims Commission and the applicant appeared before the Claims Commission. He was awarded by them Rs. 2,280 in respect of his injury, but that sum was made subject to a deduction of the amount awarded to him in the proceedings under the Workmen's Compensation Act. The fact of th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »