Mumbai Court February 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.
Chima Savalaram Lande Vs. Babulal Ravchand Sheth Gujar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-27-1948
Reported in: AIR1949Bom33; (1948)50BOMLR449
Jahagirdhar, J.1. This application has been filed by the original plaintiff against an order of the Civil Judge, Junior Division, at Murbad, in the Thana District, declining to transfer the suit to the Court under the Bombay Agricultural Debtors Relief Act, 1947. The facts are that in 1945 the plaintiff filed suit No. 28 of 1945 in the Court of the Civil Judge, Junior Division, at Murbad, for a declaration that the transaction of August 28, 1915, purporting to be a sale, was in fact a mortgage and for accounts. At the time when he filed this suit, a Debt Adjustment Board had been established for that taluka as far back as 1942. But by virtue of Section 45 of the Bombay Agricultural Debtors Relief Act of 1939, he could not have made an application to the Debt Adjustment Board at that time as the transaction was of the year 1915. On May 27, 1947, the Bombay Agricultural Debtors Relief Act of 1947 came into force. Thereupon, on June 13, 1947, the plaintiff prayed that the suit might be tr...
Bharmagowda Bhimagowda Patil Vs. Irappa Satyappa Dhanagar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-27-1948
Reported in: AIR1949Bom108; (1948)50BOMLR708
Jahagirdar, J.1. This is a revision application filed by the applicants who are described as creditors, against the finding given by the Court established under the Bombay Agricultural Debtors Relief Act that the sale of 1909 passed by the predecessor-in-title of the debtors was not binding upon the reversioners, i.e. the debtors. The facts leading to this application are these.2. One Irappa was the owner of the two survey Nos. 43 and 44. He had two sons, Satyappa and Mallappa. Mallappa died leaving a widow Shiddava. Shiddava on August 19, 1895, mortgaged to the predecessor-in-interest of the applicants before me her share in these two survey numbers for Rs. 150. On July 29, 1909, she sold her equity of redemption to the applicants' predecessor-in-title. Shiddava died about the year 1934. On August 3, 1944, the present opponents as the reversionery heirs of Shiddava filed Suit No. 208 of 1944 in the Court of the Civil Judge, Junior Division, at Hukeri, for redemption of the mortgage of...
Maruti Vithu Mule Vs. Ganpat Genu Dhamdhere
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-27-1948
Reported in: AIR1949Bom170; (1949)51BOMLR165
Jahagirdar, J.1. These two revision applications raise some interesting points under the Bombay Agricultural Debtors Relief Act. The facts leading to the suits out of which these applications arise are these.2. The plaintiff filed two suits Nos. 9 and 10 of 1944 in the Court of the Civil Judge (Junior Division) at Ghodnadi in the Poona District for accounts alleging that the transaction of August 18, 1884, though appearing to be a sale was in fact a mortgage. The two suits were under Section 15D of the Dekkhan Agriculturists' Relief Act. On May 1, 1945, a Debt Adjustment Board was established for that taluka. On July 12, 1945, the plaintiff passed a purshis that he was a debtor and his debts were less than Rs. 15,000 and prayed that the suits may be transferred to the Debt Adjustment Board. The trial Court, however, asked the plaintiff in each case to get a declaration by the Board that he was a debtor and adjourned the hearing of the suit. The plaintiff realising that the Bombay Agric...
Bhagwanji Morarji Goculdas Vs. the Alembic Chemical Works Company, Lim ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-26-1948
Reported in: (1948)50BOMLR499
John Beaumont, J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment and decree of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay dated November 24, 1943, dismissing the appellant's appeal from the judgment and decree dated December 16, 1942, of Mr. Justice Chagla exercising original civil jurisdiction of the High Court.2. In the suit out of which this appeal arises the appellant, who was plaintiff, claimed against the first respondent, the Alembic Chemical Works Company Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'the company') Rs. 9,00,000 damages for breach of an agreement of December 7, 1907, to employ the firm of Kotibhasker Amin and Company, of which the appellant claimed to be a member, as managing agents of the company.3. The claim arises in this way. The company was formed in the year 1907, and under clause 6 of the memorandum of association it was provided that the members who then constituted or who might thereafter constitute the firm of Messrs. Kotibhasker Amin and Company were thereby appointed secre...
Bhaskar Sadashiv Joshi Vs. Registrar, Bombay Public Trust Registration ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-26-1948
Reported in: AIR1949Bom76; (1948)50BOMLR612
Jahagirdar, J.1. This is a revision application made by the manager of the Nasik branch of the Anatha Vidyarthi Griha, Poona, against the order of the Registrar appointed under the Public Trusts Registration Act, XXV of 1935, requiring him to register the institution. The facts are that on December 13, 1944, the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nasik, who is also the Registrar under Section 4 of Bombay Act XXV of 1935, issued a notice against the applicant to show cause why action should not be taken against him for non-compliance with the requisition published in Lokasatta on December 13, 1944. The applicant on February 25, 1947, appeared before the Registrar and contended that the Anatha Vidyarthi Griha was an association registered as a society under the Societies Registration Act (XXI of 1860), the object of which was to work for the education, maintenance and welfare of poor and deserving Hindu students, with a view, mainly to make them useful public workers, and that it was not a re...
Sri Kakulam Subrahmanyam Vs. Kurra Subba Rao
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-26-1948
Reported in: (1948)50BOMLR646
Morton, J.1. This is an appeal from a judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Madras dated November 22, 1943, affirming the judgment of the District Judge of Guntur dated April 20, 1942, who had allowed the respondent's appeal from the judgment of the Subordinate Judge of Bapatla dated July 31, 1939.2. Leave to appeal to His Majesty in Council was given by the High Court of Judicature at Madras on the ground that the case involved a substantial question of law as to the true construction of Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act.3. That section is in the following terms:53A, Part Performance.-Where any person contracts to transfer for consideration any immoveable property by writing signed by him or on his behalf from which the terms necessary to constitute the transfer can be ascertained with reasonable certainty,and the transferee has, in part performance of the contract, taken possession of the property or any part thereof, or the transferee, being already in possession, co...
Pearey Lal Vs. Nanak Chand
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-25-1948
Reported in: (1948)50BOMLR643
Normand, J.1. The suit in which this appeal arises was begun in June, 1938, in the Court of the Subordinate Judge in Delhi by the respondent, Nanak Chand, with whom his two sons were associated as plaintiffs, against his father, the appellant. The respondent claimed that the family was a joint Hindu family governed by the Benares School of the Mitakshara, and prayed for a partition of a cycle business carried on at Delhi and Bombay, as he alleged, as a joint family business.: He said in his plaint that the appellant had turned him out of the business in September, 1936, and had not allowed him since then to take any part in it.2. There is now no question that the family was a joint Hindu family.3. The respondent, who was born in 1891 and married in 1912, resided in the appellant's house till 1917 according to the finding, now acquiesced in, of the Subordinate Judge. A younger son, Raghu Nath Parsad, had always had his home in the appellant's house save when he was attending to the Bomb...
Atmaram Maneklal Parikh Vs. Bai Hira
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-23-1948
Reported in: (1948)50BOMLR495
Normand, J.1. The appellant, Parikh Atmaram Maneklal, was the defendant in the main suit which was brought by the respondent, Bai Hira, in the Court of the Subordinate Judge at Ahmeadabd for a declaration that a document dated June 12, 1926, was not binding on her and for certain consequential reliefs. The chief question in the appeal is whether these consequential reliefs are time barred by Article 91 of the Indian Limitation Act (IX of 1908).2. The respondent is the widow of the appellant's son Balabhai who died intestate and without issue on February 18, 1926. The family had been an undivided Hindu family, but on December 81, 1925, a physical partition took place between Balabhai on the one hand and the remaining members of the family on the other. Balabhai had received before his death immoveable and moveable properties valued at Rs. 1,12,000 and there remained certain properties to be physically divided. Among the moveable property received by him were ornaments to the value of Rs...
Kishinchand Chellaram Vs. Vishandas Amarnath
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-18-1948
Reported in: AIR1949Bom334; (1949)51BOMLR480
Desai, J.1. By a contract dated December 30, 1946. the plaintiffs agreed to sell to the defendants 15 bales of raw silk steam filature yarn E Grade Pounds 20/22 at Rs. 37-8-0 per pound. By the said contract it is provided that 'goods shipped per S.S. 'Monroe' will be delivered on safe arrival after clearing from the Customs House.' Mr. K.T. Desai, the learned Counsel appearing for the plaintiffs, has relied on Clauses 3, 7 and 9 of the terms printed at the back of the contract; whereas Mr. Somjee, the learned Counsel for the defendants, has relied on Clauses 21 and 22.2. On February 6, 1947, the plaintiffs delivered the 15 bales to the defendants. The 15 bales did not bear any tickets. On February 7, 1497, the defendants wrote to the plaintiffs that the 15 bales were without any tickets, that they had sold the 15 bales to other parties and that Messrs. Bhojaji Sobhagchand who had purchased 10 bales from the defendants out of the said 15 bales had served the defendants with a telegraphi...
Wallace Brothers and Co. Ltd. Vs. the Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-17-1948
Reported in: (1948)50BOMLR482
Uthwatt, J.1. This is an appeal by leave of the Federal Court of India from a judgment of that Court dismissing an appeal by the appellant Wallace Brothers & Co. Ltd. from a judgment of the High Court of Bombay answering in favour of the respondent the Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay District, certain questions of law referred to the High Court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal.2. Two questions are in issue : first, the validity of certain provisions of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922-1939, by virtue of which there was made on the appellant company an assessment to income-tax on income which included income arising without British India, and second, the jurisdiction of a particular Income-tax Officer to make that assessment.3. The directly relevant provisions of the Income-tax Act, 1922-1939, are contained in Sections 3, 4, 4A and 64. These so far as it is necessary to state them are as follow:3. Where any Act of the Central Legislature enacts that income-tax shall be charged for...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »