Mumbai Court December 1948 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.
Gurunath Madhav Vs. Mallappa Shantappa
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-10-1948
Reported in: AIR1950Bom340; (1950)52BOMLR288
Bhagwati, J.1. After setting out the facts of the case and holding that the transaction dated 30th September 1940, was really a transaction of sale and not a transaction of mortgage. His Lordship proceeded:] There are, however, a few further points in this connection advanced by Mr. Shah for Gurunath which we shall now consider. He contended that there was a letter dated 29th March 1940, which was addressed by Madhav to his brother Shivram in the course of which he made certain statements which if admitted in evidence would go to establish that this transaction was not a transaction of sale but was a transaction of mortgage. This letter was sought to be tendered in evidence before the learned trial Judge, but was rejected by him as not being admissible in evidence. It was contended before us that this ruling of the learned trial Judge was wrong and he ought to have really admitted this letter in evidence, firstly, on the ground that this being a transaction which the Court was entitled...
Ramchandra Narayan Kulkarni Vs. Jijaba Rangnath Jadhav
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-10-1948
Reported in: (1949)51BOMLR605
M.C. Chagla, C.J.1. This is an application in revision against an order made by the District Judge, Sholapur, holding that a suit under Section 15D read with Section 10A of the Dekkhan Agriculturists' Relief Act, 1879, instituted on January 3, 1945, in the Court of the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Pandharpur, was not maintainable and must be dismissed.2. The Bombay Agricultural Debtors' Relief Act of 1939 was made applicable to Pandharpur on January 1, 1942. Section 85 of the Bombay Agricultural Debtors' Relief Act, 1939, provides that on the date on which a Board is established, the Dekkhan Agriculturists' Relief Act, 1879, shall cease to have force in such area. Under Section 86, however, the Dekkhan Agriculturists' Relief Act is deemed to remain in force in such area for purposes of institution of suits for a period of three years from the date when the Board is established. Therefore it is not disputed that for three years after January 1, 1942, the Dekkhan Agriculturists' Relief ...
Mahadeo Sheolal Agarwal and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-07-1948
Reported in: 1950CriLJ81
ORDERMudholkab, J.1. This order will govern the decisions of criminal Revisions Nos. 292 of 1948 and 295 of 1948 also. All the three revisions arise out of three separate prosecutions launched against the applicants in respect of Reven different contraventions of Clause 8 (1), C. P. and Berar Foodgraina Control Order, 1946. The applicants have been sentenced to pay different amount of fine in respect of these contraventions.2. The applicants are partners of the firm 'Mahadeo Onkarlal' of Khandwa, whose business apparently is to deal in foodgrains. They held a licence for doing this business but it was can-celled on 13th February 1946. In spite of this the firm 'Mahadeo Onkarlal' purchased varying quantities of foodgrains from other dealerB between 10th April 1946 and 17th May 1946. It is now admitted that the applicant Onkarlal acted for the firm in respect of four transactions and that the applicant Mahadeo acted in respect of one transaction. As regards the two transactions which wer...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›