Mumbai Court July 1949 Judgments
Ghulam Sarwar Khan Vs. Abdul Wahab Khan
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-28-1949
Reported in: (1950)52BOMLR166
Simonds, J.1. In this appeal, which is brought from a judgment and decree of the Judicial Commissioner, North West Frontier Province, dated July 28, 1948, a large number of questions have been debated upon which their Lordships think it unnecessary to express any opinion. The question which is decisive of the matters in dispute is a simple one and the relevant facts can be shortly stated.2. Respondent No. 1 to this appeal, Abdul Wahab Khan, claiming that under and by virtue of a deed of August 23, 1939, he had acquired from one K.B. Muqarrab Khan, since deceased, all the rights which the latter enjoyed under a certain mortgage dated May 25, 1921, brought the suit out of which this appeal arises to enforce his rights as mortgagee under that mortgage. His suit was dismissed on various grounds by the Additional Subordinate Judge, Peshawar, on November 24, 1942, but his appeal from that decision was substantially allowed by the Court of the Judicial Commissioner.3. It appears to their Lord...
Tag this Judgment!Mohanlal Hargovind Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, C.P. Berar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-28-1949
Reported in: (1950)52BOMLR169
Greene, J.1. This appeal raises a short question as to the application of Section 10(5) para, xii of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, as amended by the Indian Income-tax (Amendment) Act, 1939, in respect of assessments on the appellants for the years 1940-41 and 1941-42. That paragraph provides that in computing profits or gains of a business for the purpose of Income-tax an allowance is to be made for 'any expenditure (not being in the nature of capital expenditure or personal expenses of the assessee) laid out or expended wholly or exclusively for the purpose of such business.' Certain expenditure claimed by the assessee to be a permissible deduction under this paragraph and admitted to have been made 'wholly and exclusively for the purpose' of the business of the appllants was disallowed by the Income-tax Officer. His order was confirmed successively by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Nagpur, and by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay. Application was made ...
Tag this Judgment!Durga Prosad Chamaria Vs. Sewakishendas
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-28-1949
Reported in: (1950)52BOMLR171
Radcliffe, J.1. The purpose of this appeal is to secure the setting aside of an interim award made on January 9, 1941, by Sir Manmatha Nath Mukherjee, sitting as sole arbitrator appointed by agreement of the parties to a partnership suit. An application by appellant No. 1 to set aside, remit or modify the award was dismissed by the High Court at Calcutta on March 7, 19-11, and on March 10, 1941, the same Court made a decree that the award should be carried into effect. An appeal was taken to the High Court in its appellate jurisdiction, and on May 28, 1946, that appeal was dismissed. It is from the judgment and orders made on that appeal that the present appeal reaches this Board.2. It is necessary to make some reference to the facts that led up to the arbitration in order to appreciate what it is of which the appellants complain. The arbitration concerned the affairs of a partnership business known as Hurdutroy Chamaria or Hurdutroy Chamaria & Co. The business seems to have been origi...
Tag this Judgment!Gopal Anant Prabhu Vs. Anandrao Vishnu Phanse
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-26-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Bom120
ORDERShah, J.1. This is an application in revision under Section 115, Civil P. C. 1908. The petitioner is one Gopal Anant Prabhu who says that he was a sub-tenant of certain premises, being rooms Nos. 14 and 15 and shops Nos. 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 on the ground floor of a property known as No. 11 Phanse Building situate at Tulsirampada, Kalachowki, Bombay. The respondent, Anandrao Vishnu, is the owner of the property; and he let out the premises in dispute in the present application to one Hanumanta Naik as a monthly tenant. Sometime after the tenancy commenced, it is stated, Hanumanta Naik, the tenant, assigned or sub-let the premises to the petitioner, Gopal Anant Prabhu, in February 1946. Thereafter the respondent took out a summons, which was numbered as Suit No. 191/ 2987 of 1947 in the Court of Small Causes at Bombay, for an order requiring the tenant Hanumanta Naik to deliver possession of the premises in his occupation as a tenant, on the allegation that he had served a notice termi...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Sir Harilal Nemchand Gosalia
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-25-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Bom74
Chagla, C.J.1. This is a reference under S. 5, Court-fees Act, 1870, and the very narrow question that calls for our determination is the meaning to be given to the expression appearing in Schedule III, in, Court-fees Act in Annexure B of that schedule, 'amount of debts due and owing from the deceased, payable by law out of the estate.' Now, under Section 19-I, Court fees Act,'no order entitling the petitioner to the grant of probate or letters of administration shall be made upon an application for such grant until the petitioner has filed in the Court a valuation of the property in the form set forth in the third schedule.'and the third schedule sets out the form and in that form in Annexure A has to be set out the value of the moveable and immoveable properties of the deceased and in Annexure B a schedule of debts has got to be set out and the first item in the schedule of debts is amount of debts due and owing from the deceased, payable by law out of the estate. The petitioner in t...
Tag this Judgment!A.W. Khan Vs. Mt. Zaitunbi and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-22-1949
Reported in: 1950CriLJ451
ORDERV.R. Sen, J.1. The applicant A. W. Khan is the husband of Zaitunbi and father of Mt. Nur Jahan, aged 3 years. According to the applicant an application Under Section 488, Criminal P.C. was made by Mt. Zaitunbi for maintenance of herself and her child (Miscellaneous criminal Case no. so of 1947). After some evidence had been recorded, the application was dismissed for default of appearance of Zaitunbi on 8th January 1949. tihe filed a second application under B. 488 on practically the same facts (Miscellaneous criminal case No. 216 of 1948).2. The applicant raised an objection to the maintainability of the application. The objec. tion was overruled by Bhri N. P. Bharadwaj, Magistrate, First Class, Raipur, by his order dated 18th February 1919. In his view the application was not barred as the previous application had been dismissed for default and there was no adjudication on merits. The applicant filed criminal Revision No. 120 of 1949 in the Court of the Sessions Judge, Raipur, w...
Tag this Judgment!Zena Gladys Freemantle Vs. Herbert Charles Freemantle
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-20-1949
Reported in: (1950)52BOMLR641
Tendolkar, J.1. This suit is filed by a wife against her husband for a declaration that the defendant, not having been heard of since February 1937, into be deemed to be dead. When the plaint was presented to me in Chambers, as leave under Clause 12 of the Letters Patent had to be obtained, it appeared to me that it was doubtful whether such a suit could lie. Thereafter, counsel appeared before me and requested me to admit the plaint and have it numbered for the purpose of enabling me to determine in the suit whether such a suit lies before issuing any process. I acceded to that request and the matter has now come on before me for argument as to whether such a suit is competent.2. It appears that a similar suit was filed in this Court being suit No. 1998 of 1945 and in that suit a decree was passed by my learned brother Coyajee J. in the following words :Declare that the defendant not having been heard of since the day of he is deemed to be dead.It appears that my learned brother's att...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Sri Shiba Prasad Singh Vs. Maharaja Srish Chandra Nandi
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-18-1949
Reported in: (1950)52BOMLR17
Reid, J.1. The appellant is the owner of the Jharia estate. In 1898 his predecessor granted a mining lease of a part of that estate to the predecessor of respondent No. 1. The terms of that lease are set out in a kabuliyat of October 22, 1898, which begins: 'This kabuliyat regarding Mourushi Mukarrari, i.e. permanent settlement on commission of coal land is executed to the following effect.' The provision, the meaning of which is in dispute in the present litigation, is as follows :1. That for the quantity of coal which I shall raise from the leasehold entire 1103 bighas 18 kathas of coal land of Ekra I shall pay commission, i.e., royalty on steam coal, rubble coal, hard coke and soft coke at the rate of 3 annas per ton and for rubble and dust for burning bricks at 1 anna 6 pies per ton. Be it stated that I shall pay royalty at the present fixed rate for the coals, which will be despatched by the East Indian Railway line, But in future if the Bengal Nagpur. Railway line is constructed ...
Tag this Judgment!Damji Javerchand and ors. Vs. Province of Bombay
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-14-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Bom227; (1950)52BOMLR138
Shah, J.1. The plaintiffs appellants filed Suit no. 396 of 1940 in the Court of the First Glass Subordinate Judge of Thana against the Province of Bombay seeking to obtain a declaration that the levy of non-agricultural assessment at full rate on the entire area of the plaintiffs' survey NOS. 219, 220 and 281 of Ghatkopar ad-measuring 14,883 square yards was illegal and that the proper amount of assessment leviable should be calculated on the area actually built upon by structures and that it should be levied at concession rates. The plaintiffs prayed for a refund of the amount of RS. 72-6-3 alleged to be wrongfully and illegally recovered 'from him and also prayed for an injunction restraining the defendant from charging or recovering anything more than RS. 74-13-0 per year as non-agricultural assessment.2. The plaintiffs alleged that they were occupants of survey Nos. 219, 220 and 22l of Ghatkopar and that those lands were originally agricultural lands; that under the permission obta...
Tag this Judgment!The Bank of India Ltd. Vs. the Official Liquidator
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-14-1949
Reported in: AIR1950Bom375; (1950)52BOMLR587
ORDERTendolkar J.1. This is a summons taken out by the Bank of India Ltd., (hereinafter called the claimants) for an order against the Official Liquidator as the liquidator of the National Security Bank Ltd., (hereinafter called the bank) to pay to the claimants an aggregate sum of Rs. 5,000 on the ground that such sum was held by the bank in trust for the claimants. The amount represents the proceeds of three cheques for RS. 1000, Rs. 2,000 and Rs. 2,000 respectively drawn on the Talod branch of the bank, which the claimants sent to the head office of the bank in Bombay for collection. The cheques were duly forwarded by the bank to their branch at Talod. The Talod branch debited the amounts to the account of its customer and credited them to the account of the head office and forwarded two credit notes in respect thereof to the head office. These credit notes are dated 15th and 21st February 1947, respectively; but they did not reach the head office until after they suspended payment ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »