Mumbai Court April 1949 Judgments
The Corporation of Calcutta Vs. the Governors of St. Thomas School
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-20-1949
Reported in: (1950)52BOMLR25
Harilal Kania, Kt., C.J.1. This is an appeal from a judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Fort William in West Bengal. The material facts are these.2. Premises No. 4, Diamond Harbour Road, which is within the municipal limits of Calcutta, comprise 69 bighas, 10 cottas, 8 chittacks and 18 square feet of land with buildings thereon. The respondents who are the Governors of St. Thomas' School are the owners of the land and of the buildings which were constructed thereon before April 1942. Those premises have been assessed to consolidated rates under Section 127(6) of the Calcutta Municipal Act. An assessment at the general six yearly re-valuation was made in 1938-39. Unless re-valued in the interval that would remain in operation till December 31, 1944.3. In April, 1942, the said premises were requisitioned, under Rule 70 (Rule 75-A of the Amended Rules) of the Rules made under the Dafence of India Act, for the purposes of the Government of the Federation, and possesion was taken by...
Tag this Judgment!Shaikh Ali Ahmed Vs. the Collector of Bombay
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-14-1949
Reported in: (1949)51BOMLR589
Chainani, J.1. This is an application under Section 491, Criminal Procedure Code, for directions of the nature of habeas corpus. The applicant was carrying on business in Bombay in the name of Interseas Corporation as the sole proprietor thereof. In 1946 he also promoted a private limited company under the name of Allied Agencies Ltd. and became a director thereof. He was assessed to income-tax, super-tax and surcharge, including penalties, at Rs. 10, 17, 259-3-0 for the year 1943-44. A notice calling upon him to pay this amount was issued by the Income-tax authorities. He, however, did not pay it. The Income-tax authorities, therefore, wrote to the Collector of Bombay and asked him to recover the amount in the manner provided in Section 46 of the Indian Income-tax Act. Sub-section (2) of this section empowers the Collector to recover the amount as if it was an arrear of land-revenue, or as if a decree for that amount had been passed by a civil Court. On May 17, 1948, the Collector att...
Tag this Judgment!Ali Ahmed Vs. the Collector of Bombay
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-14-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Bom33
Chainani, J.1. This is an application under Section 491, Criminal P. C., for directions of the nature of habeas corpus. The applicant was carrying on business in Bombay in the name of Interseas Corporation as the sole proprietor thereof. In 1946 he also promoted a private limited company under the name of Allied Agencies Ltd., and became a director thereof. He was assessed to income-tax, super-tax and surcharge, including penalties, at Rs. 10,17,259-3-0 for the year 1943-44. A notice calling upon him to pay this amount was issued by the Income-tax authorities. He, however, did not pay it. The Income-tax authorities, therefore, wrote to the Collector of Bombay and asked him to recover the amount in the manner provided in Section 46, Income-tax Act. Sub-section (2) of this section empowers the Collector to recover the amount as if it was an arrear of land revenue, or as if a decree for that amount had been passed by a civil Court. On 17th May 1948, the Collector attached two bank account...
Tag this Judgment!Udhavji Anandji Ladha and ors. Vs. Bapudas Ramdas Darbar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-13-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Bom94
Chagla, C.J.1. This is an appeal from a decree passed by the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Belgaum, in a partnership action, and the facts leading up to this litigation may be briefly stated.2. A partnership was started between the plaintiff's father and defendant 1 in 1904 and the plaintiff's father died on 30th April 1927. The plaintiff filed the suit from which this appeal arises for dissolution of partnership and for accounts alleging that even after the death of his father the partnership continued. On 23rd August 1935, the plaintiff applied for amending the plaint for alleging an alternative cause of action, and the alternative cause of action was that in the event of its being held that there was no subsisting partnership after the death of the plaintiff's father, accounts should be taken on the footing that the partnership stood dissolved on the death of the plaintiff's father. That application was rejected by the trial Court, and the trial Court holding that there was no...
Tag this Judgment!NuruddIn AbdulhuseIn Vs. Abu Ahmed Abdul Jalli
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-12-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Bom127; (1949)51BOMLR1020
ORDERTendolkar, J.1. This is a notice of motion for stay of the suit on the ground that there is a valid agreement for reference to arbitration. It is resisted on the plea that the defendant has taken a step in the proceedings in that he has filed an unconditional appearance in Court. The question for decision, therefore, is whether filing of an unconditional appearance is a step in the proceedings.2. Such a question has not arisen for determination either in England or in India for the simple reason that both under Section 4, English Arbitration Act, and under Section 19, Arbitration Act of 1899, a step in the proceedings taken 'at any time after appearance' disqualifies the defendant from applying for stay, with the result that, whether or not filing of an appearance was a step in the proceedings, it was manifestly inarguable that it prevented the defendant from applying for a stay of the suit. Section 34, Arbitration Act of 1940, which takes the place of Section 19 of the Act of 189...
Tag this Judgment!Santasingh Musafa Singh Vs. the Crown
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-12-1949
Reported in: 1950CriLJ474
ORDERHemeon, J.1. The appellant Santasingh, who was prosecuted Under Section 307, Penal Code, for having stabbed Prannath (P.W. 6) in the loin with his sword on the night of the 17th December 1947 at Jubbulpore, was tried by the Sessions Judge, Jubbulpore, with a jury; and after they had been charged by him, they returned a majority verdict of guilty against the appellant. After the verdict, the defence raised the contention that as the offence of attempted murder was punishable with death in the Jubbulpore district, in virtue of Section 16, Central Provinces and Berar Publio Safety Act, 1944, the trial should have been held with the aid of assessors. The Sessions Judge held, however, that the trial by jury was a valid trial and that it was not necessary foe him to disagree with the verdict of the jury and to submit the case to this Court. He accordingly convicted and sentenced the appellant to undergo 5 years rigorous imprisonment Under Section 807, Penal Code.2. The appellant, who is...
Tag this Judgment!Bhagwandas Vs. the King
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-06-1949
Reported in: (1949)51BOMLR970
Oaksey, J.1. Special leave to appeal was granted in this case without their Lordships being acquainted with the necessary documents, which were no doubt not available. Leave was granted limited to the question of whether or not the proceedings were valid having regard to the fact that the appeal was signed and filed in the High Court by the Advocate General and not by the Public Prosecutor.2. The relevant documents have now been produced before their Lordships, and the facts are as follows.3. By the Government of India Act, 1935, it was provided by Section 55 that every Province was to have an Advocate-General. On April 1, 1987, the Government of India Act came into force. On April 3, 1937, a notification in the Gazette provided that in exercise of the powers conferred on him by Section 492 of the Code of Criminal Procedure) 1898, the Governor of the Punjab is pleased to appoint the Advocate General of the Punjab to be a Public Prosecutor generally for the Punjab. On April 5, 1937, two...
Tag this Judgment!Provincial Government, C.P. and Berar Vs. Ganeshlal Rekhchand
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-06-1949
Reported in: 1950CriLJ491
ORDERV.R. Sen, J.1. This is an appeal by the Provincial Government against the judgment of acquittal of the respondent Ganeshlal, son of Rekhchand, passed by the Magistrate First Class, Buldana, on 1st December 1948 in criminal case NO. 156 Of 1948.2. The respondent is a resident of Akola. He held a licence for dealing in foodgrains as a wholesale dealer in the Akola district under the Foodgrains Control Order, 1945. He did not hold a similar licence for the Buldana district. Damodar Das (P.W. 2) has a licence for the Buldana district in the name of his shop 'Rambax Ram-niwas' of Malkapur. He purchased 400 bags of mung on 8th January 1947, 200 bags of mung on 24th January 1947, 254 maunds of tur, E0 bags of gram on behalf of the respondent at Malkapur, a place within the Buldana district. Damodar Das acted as an adatiya of the respondent in respect of these transactions and received his commission. The bags were later sold by P.W. 3 at Malkapur and Khamgaon. The respondent was prosecut...
Tag this Judgment!Bahinabai Shravan Patil Vs. Kisanlal Kunjilal Shet and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-05-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Bom47
Chagla, C.J.1. This appeal raises an interesting question as to the rights of a Hindu son in his natural family on his adoption. One Fakira Shravan mortgaged certain lands to defendant 1 on 18th April 1925, and he was given in adoption on 9th December 1927. Defendant 1 obtained a decree on his mortgage in special Suit No. 987 of 1931 against Fakira and in execution proceedings defendant 1 purchased the property. Bahinabai then filed a suit from which this appeal arises for a declaration that the decree passed in the mortgage suit was not binding on her and that she was entitled to the mortgaged property and that defendant 1 had no right, title and interest in that property. Bahinabai's contention was that on Fakira's adoption the equity of redemption in the mortgaged property was divestad from Fakira and became vested in her, and as she was not a party to the suit, the mortgage decree could not be binding on her; and the question that arises for our determination is whether on the adop...
Tag this Judgment!Govindram Bros. Ltd. Vs. Official Assignee
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-05-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Bom49
Chagla, C.J.1. This is an appeal from a judgment of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Thana, in a suit filed by the plaintiff under Section 15D, Dekkhan Agriculturists' Relief Act, 1879. The plaintiff had executed two mortgages in favour of the defendant, one on 16th September 1943, for the amount of Rs. 3,00,000 and another on 18th December 1943, for the amount of Rs. 60,000. Some of the properties were situate in Bombay and some in the istrict of Thana. Both these mortgages were in the English form and conferred on the mortgagee the right to sell the property in the event of there being a default on the part of the mortgagor to pay the amount on the due date and also if ertain amount of interest remained in arrears. The defendant, as the mortgagor was in default, threatened to sell the mortgaged properties under his power of sale and advertised the sale in the papers. Thereupon the plaintiff filed a suit n the Thana Court under Section 15D claiming an account under the mortgage and a...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »