Mumbai Court November 1949 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. Kisan Narayan
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-30-1949
Reported in: AIR1951Bom186; (1950)52BOMLR280; 1952CriLJ41
Chainani, J.1. This is an appeal by the Government of Bombay against the acquittal of two accused persons who had been charged with having committed offences punishable under Clauses (a), (b) and (h) of Section 43 (1) of the Bombay Abkari Act. The facts of the case briefly are that on 7th July 1948, Sub-Inspector D'Souza was on patrol duty at Dharavi Creek along with two Police Constables. He noticed smoke from a distance, got into a toney and went to the place from which smoke was coming. He then saw accused 2 attending to a still. Accused 1 was sitting about 20 feet away from the still. Both the accused tried to run away, but they were chased and arrested. The still and other articles used for manufacturing liquor were seized. The two accused were then sent for trial. The prosecution examined the Sub-Inspector, D'Souza, and a Police Constable, Gangaram, who had accompanied him in order to prove the above facts. Both the accused pleaded not guilty. They stated that they were fishermen...
Premchand Roychand and Sons Vs. Moti Lall Agarwala
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-30-1949
Reported in: AIR1951Bom249; (1950)52BOMLR643
Bhagwati, J.1. His Lordship, after stating facts, proceeded:] Before I proceed to discuss the merits of the case, I shall first deal with what could have been urged as a preliminary objection or could have been asked to be tried as a preliminary issue, viz., whether this Court has jurisdiction to entertain this suit. The contention of the defendant in this behalf has been that he was residing in and carrying on business in Delhi that the contract was made by the acceptance by him of the offer of the plaintiffs in Delhi, that the performance of the contract was to be made and was in fact offered by the plaintiffs to him in Delhi, that the breach of the contract, if any, took place in Delhi and that therefore the whole cause of action having arisen in Delhi, this Court has no jurisdiction to try this suit in spite of the leave under Clause 12, Letters Patent having been granted. It is clear on the correspondence which has been put in before me that the offer to sell the 110 shares, thoug...
Ghulam HussaIn Vs. the King
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-30-1949
Reported in: (1950)52BOMLR508
Lionel Leach, J.1. This is an appeal, by special leave, from an order of the Chief Court of Sind, made in the exercise of its appellate criminal jurisdiction, summarily dismissing an appeal by the appellant from his conviction on charges of kidnapping a girl named Jasoda, aged eleven years, with intent to force her to illicit intercourse, and of raping her. The appellant was tried at the Chief Court Sessions jointly with his servant, Fatehsing, who was accused of having taken part in the kidnapping and of abetment of the rape. By a majority of 7 to 2 the jury found both the accused guilty of the offences charged against them. The learned Judge (Constantine J.) accepted the verdict and sentenced the appellant to two years rigorous imprisonment under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code on the charge of kidnapping and to eight years rigorous imprisonment under Section 376 on the charge of rape, the sentences to run concurrently. He sentenced Fatehsing to two years rigorous imprisonment u...
Laxmanrao Kristrao Vs. Provincial Government of Bombay and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-30-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Bom334; (1950)52BOMLR316
Chagla, C.J.1. This second appeal arises out of a suit filed by the plaintiff for recovering non-agricultural assessment levied on the land in suit. The Provincial Government of Bombay is defendant 1 to the suit and the District Local Board of Dharwar is defendant 2. Both the Courts below have dismissed the plaintiff's suit.2. It would appear that the plaintiff is the inamdar of a moiety of the village of Hole Alur in Ron Taluka, and the land in suit, survey No. 161B, forms part of the moiety belonging to the plaintiff. On 16th April 1923, the Government of Bombay passed a resolution deciding to acquire this land for a public purpose, the purpose being the erection of a school to be run by the District Local Board. Acquisition proceedings were started and they ultimately terminated in an award being made on 2nd October 1923. Under this award, a sum of Rs. 1368-80 was paid to one Angadi whose predecessor-in-title became a permanent tenant, the land having been leased to him by a predece...
Lumbhardar Zutshi Vs. the King
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-28-1949
Reported in: (1950)52BOMLR480
Reid, J.1. On June 19, 1946, the appellants were convicted and sentenced by the Chief Presidency Magistrate, Bombay. The charge against appellant No. 1 was that he, being a public servant, accepted a sum of Rs. 15,000 for forbearing to prosecute a metal merchant named Vakharia and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code. Appellant No. 2 was charged with abetting that offence. An appeal by appellant No. 1 to the High Court at Bombay was dismissed on March 20, 1947. It appears from the judgment of Stone C.JK that there were two grounds of appeal: first, that the whole proceedings were invalid because' no sanction had been given under Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code, and, secondly, an appeal on the facts. Appellant No. 2 did not appeal to the High Court, but notice of enhancement of sentence was given to him and his sentence was increased on March 20, 1947.2. On April 21, 1947, a petition for special leave to appeal was lodged by appel...
Kishori Shetty Vs. the King
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-25-1949
Reported in: (1950)52BOMLR591
Patanjali Sastri, J.1. This is an appeal from a judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay dismissing an appeal from a conviction and sentence by the Presidency Magistrate, Fifth Court, Bombay, for an offence under the Bombay Abkari Act (V of 1878).2. The appellant was charged with having in her possession, in contravention of the Act, a quantity of foreign liquor (While Label Scotch Whisky) in excess of the limit permitted under a Government notification dated July 20, 1948, issued under the Act, and she was convicted and sentenced to a term of three months' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500, or in default to a further term of six weeks' rigorous imprisonment. On appeal to the High Court her main contention was that the Provincial Legislature had no power under the Government of India Act, 1935, to-legislate with respect to the possession of foreign liquors, and that Section 14-B of the Bombay Abkari Act, as amended by the Bombay Abkari (Amendment) Act (XXIX of 1947)...
Narayan Vs. Padmanabh
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-25-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Bom319; (1950)52BOMLR313
Chagla, C.J.1. One Vishweshwar who died in 1928 made a will prior thereto dated 17th January 1926. By this will he gave a life-estate to his wife, defendant 1, and gave the absolute interest to the plaintiff. Defendant 1 adopted defendant 3 to her husband on 3lst December 1945. On 10th December 1944, defendant 1 executed a mortgage in favour of defendant 2 and the plaintiff filed the suit out of which this appeal arises for a declaration that his interest was not bound either by the adoption of defendants by defendant l, or by the mortgage executed by defendant l in favour of defendant 2. The trial Court gave the declaration to the plaintiff which he sought.2. In this appeal only two contentions have been urged by Mr. Murdeshwar and they relate to the validity of the will and the binding character of the mortgage executed by defendant 1. It is contended by Mr. Murdeshwar that on the adoption of defendant 3 by defendant 1 the doctrine of relation back comes into play and in the eye of t...
The Governor General in Council Vs. Constance Zena Wells
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-24-1949
Reported in: (1950)52BOMLR448
MacDermott, J.1. The suit out of which this appeal arises was brought in forma pauperis by the respondent against the appellant under the Fatal Accidents Act, 1885, for damages for the death of her husband, Ronald Duncan Wells. He had died on December 14, 1937, as the result of injuries received a few days earlier when the engine on which he was serving as a firem n in the employment of the North Western Railway was involved in a collision within the limits of the railway station at Mirpur Mathelo. The respondent alleged that the collision was caused by the. negligence of the railway's employees and claimed on behalf of her two children and herself. At the date of the accident the North Western Railway was owned by the Government of India and administered by the Secretary of State for India in Council acting through the North Western (State) Railway Administration. The deceased was then serving on the railway pursuant to a contract of service made by him with the Secretary of State on ...
Misri Lal Nayak Vs. Surji
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-22-1949
Reported in: (1950)52BOMLR477
John Beaumont, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave from a judgment and decree of the High Court of Judicature at Patna dated May 15, 1945, reversing in second appeal the judgment and decree in first appeal of the Additional Subordinate Judge of Darbhanga dated August 14, 1943, and dismissing the appellant's suit.2. The contention of the appellant is that the learned Judge who heard the second appeal in the High Court reversed decisions of fact arrived at by the lower appellate Court, and that in so doing he acted contrary to the provisions of Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure. It is settled law that in view of that section a High Court has no power in second appeal to question findings of fact reached by the first appellate Court which there was evidence to support.3. The property in suit originally belonged to one Bihan Paswan, who, on February, 24, 1908, by a sale deed, ex. A, sold the property to Mukh Lal. The deed provided that part of the purchase money should be appl...
C.S. Nataraja Pillai Vs. C.S. Subbaraya Chettiar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-22-1949
Reported in: (1950)52BOMLR474
Greene, J.1. This is a re-hearing of an appeal by the appellants from a. decree dated November 15, 1938, of the High Court of Madras in its appellate civil jurisdiction dismissing the appellants' appeal from a decree dated December 1, 1936, of the High Court in its original civil jurisdiction. The present appeal was dismissed by Order in Council dated June 22, 1948, which gave effect to the humble advice given in the judgment of the Board delivered on June 17, 1948. The appellants subsequently presented a petition asking that the Order in Council should be recalled and leave be granted for the appeal to be re-heard, alleging in support of the petition that their Lordships in coming to their conclusions had been misled with regard to a certain matter to which reference will presently be made. The prayer of the petition was granted and this re-hearing was ordered.2. In the suit out of which the appeal arises the respondent (plaintiff) obtained a declaration that he was entitled to the pr...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »