Mumbai Court November 1950 Judgments
In Re: Shantabai Rani Benoor
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-28-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Bom337; (1951)53BOMLR142; ILR1951Bom621
Chagla, C.J.1. By this petn. an order made under Section 9(1), Bombay Prevention of Prostitution Act, 1923, by the Addl. Dist. Mag. of Poona, is being challenged. The order served upon the petnr. stated that whereas it had been brought to the notice of the Addl. Dist. Mag. that the petnr. resided in or used or frequented in POONa City house No. 402 Budhwar Peth in which the business of a common prostitute was carried on, the Addl. Dist. Mag. directed the petnr. to remove herself from Poona City to a place beyond the radius of five miles from Poona City before 30-9-1950. The order is dated 11.8-1950.2. Mr. Daundkar contends that Section 9(1) of the Act is void inasmuch as it places an unreasonable restriction upon the right of the citizen conferred upon him by Article 19(d) & (e) of the Constitution. Section 9(l) confers upon the Comr. of Police, Greater Bombay, & upon the Dist. Mag- outside Greater Bombay, power to cause a notice to be served upon any person who occupies or manages or ...
Tag this Judgment!Bhaguji Pandu and ors. Vs. Shripat Raghuji
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-23-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Bom389; (1951)53BOMLR306; ILR1951Bom314
Chagla, C.J. 1. A very interesting question arises in this revn. appln. as to whether a debtor can avail himself of insolvency proceedings after the award has been made. In this case an award was made on 29-11-1946, & the award fixed the debts of the debtor at Rs. 4,236 payable by annual instalments of Rs. 400. As there was failure to pay the instalments under the award, the opponent who is a creditor applied for execution & while the appln. was pending the debtor applied to the Debt Adjustment Ct. to be adjudicated insolvent. The learned Judge below dismissed the appln. 2. Now, Section 47 (1), Bombay Agricultural Debtors' Relief Act, provides : 'If at any stage of the proceedings under Chap. II the Court finds that the income of the debtor & his moveable property are not sufficient to allow his debts to be liquidated by annual instalments not exceeding twelve in number, the Ct. shall make an order adjudicating the debtor insolvent.' Mr. Tarkunde for the debtor emphasises the provision...
Tag this Judgment!Paragouda Sanagouda and anr. Vs. Shyamu Pandurang Waman
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-22-1950
Reported in: AIR1952Bom54; (1951)53BOMLR752; ILR1951Bom572
ORDER[1] This revision application raises an interesting question as to whether a decision by the Debt Adjustment Court that the applicant is a debtor and that the total amount of his debts do not exceed Rs.16,000 is subject to appeal to the District Court.[2] The provision with regard to appeal is to be found is Section 43 of the B.A.D.K. Act and Section 43 (1)(ii) provides that an appeal shall lie from every order passed under Section 17. The very ingenious argument advanced before me is that this provision only applies to an order passed under Section 17 (2)and not to a decision given under Section 17 (1). Section 17 (a) provides that it the Court finds that a person is not a debtor or that the total amount of his debts is more than Rs. 16,000, then the Court shall dismiss the application. Therefore, what is contended is that it is only when an order is made dismissing the debtor's application that an appeal lies under Section 43. It is further pointed out that Section 20 provides f...
Tag this Judgment!Manilal Gangaram Sindore Vs. Nasik-deolali Electric Supply Co. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-21-1950
Reported in: AIR1952Bom33; (1951)53BOMLR706; ILR1951Bom756
Vyas, J. (1) These second appeals arise out of the appellate decision of the District Judge, Nasik, dismissing Suits Nos. 418 and 420 of 1949 which were filed in the Court of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nasik. In Suit No. 418 the plaintiff is one Rao Saheb Manilal Gangaram Shindore who owns an old house bearing Municipal No. 3200 in Kazipura locality and has built a new bungalow bearing C. T. S. No. 617/1-A on the Agra Road. In the othersuit (No. 420) the plaintiff is Mahadeo Deoman Kalal who owns an old house bearing Municipal No. 2719/1 in Kazipura locality and has built a new house bearing No. 617/B-2 on the Agra Road. After building the new houses, the plaintiffs in both suits wrote letters (exhibits 20 and 52) on July 19, 1949, to the manager of the defendant company, the Nasik-Deolali Electric Supply Co., Ltd., requesting him to transfer their electrical connections from their old houses to their new buildings situated on the Agra Road. They mentioned in their applications ...
Tag this Judgment!The State of Bombay Vs. the Maharashtra Sugar Mills Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-21-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Bom68; (1951)53BOMLR263; (1951)ILLJ137Bom
Chagla, C.J.1. By a notfn. dated 1-4-1949, the Govt. of Bombay referred an industrial dispute that had arisen between the Maharashtra Sugar Mills, Ltd., who are regp. 1 before us, & its employees in respect of payment of six months' wages as bonus for the year 1947-48 to all employees including the seasonal & contract labour. This dispute was referred under Section 73, Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1946. The company contended before the Tribunal that it had no jurisdiction to arbitrate with reference to the contract labour employed in the industry. That contention was overruled by the Industrial Tribunal. Thereupon a petn. was presented by the company for a writ of certiorari to quash the award made by the Tribunal to the extent that it awarded bonus to contract labour. This petn. came before Bhagwati J. who upheld the contention of the petnr-company & ordered a writ to issue in favour of the company. The State of Bombay has now come in appeal before us from that decision of the lea...
Tag this Judgment!Venkanna Narasinha Vs. Laxmi Sannappa
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-20-1950
Reported in: AIR1951Bom57; (1951)53BOMLR192; ILR1951Bom576
Bhagwati, J. 1. These three appeals raise a common question of law whether the Hindu residents of the North Kanara pistrict are governed by the Madras school of Hindu law or the Bombay school of Hindu law.2. One Narayan, a haveek Brahmin of North Kanara district, died leaving him surviving two SODS Narasinha & Putta. Narasinha, & Putta effected a severance of joint status inter $e. Putta had three grandsons, Timmanna, Shankar & Venkappa, & in 1915 there was a partition between Venkappa on the one hand & Timmanna & Shankar on the other. Timmanna & Shankar contitued joint inter se and Shankar died leaving him surviving his widow Kamali. Timmannft thereafter became the sole surviving coparcener of the joint family & he died in 1936 leaving behind him no nearest heir but the widow Kamali, of his brother Shankar. After the death of Timmanna. aa aforesaid the name of Kamali was entered in the record of rights as his heir & she took possession of all the properties, Kamali continued to enjoy ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›