Mumbai Court August 1952 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.
Walchandnagar Industries, Ltd. Vs. State of Bombay
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-04-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Bom195; (1953)55BOMLR77; ILR1953Bom614
Chagla, C.J.[1] This is a petition to challenge the constitutionality of the Bombay Sugarcane Cess Act, 1948, being Act 82 of 1949. The Act was passed on 17-2-1949, and it came into force on 23-2-1949. The petitioner, which is the Walchandnagar Industries, Ltd., has been paying the cess or tax tinder the Act since 1949, and this petition has been presented on 16-4-1952, alleging that the tax is illegal and offends against Article 265 of the Constitution, in that it is a tax levied by the State of Bombay otherwise than by authority of law.[2] The Advocate-General has raised certain preliminary objections to the maintainability of this petition. His first objection is that the constitutionality of an Act cannot be challenged by a petition, and in support of that contention he has relied on a judgment of the Nagpur High Court in Sheoshankar v. M. P. State Govt. A. I. R. 1951 Nag. 58. That judgment was mainly concerned with pointing out that a Court will not grant a merely declaratory decr...
Sambhaji Baloji Solankar Vs. the Mamlatdar of Baramati and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-04-1952
Reported in: AIR1953Bom300; (1953)55BOMLR281; ILR1953Bom606
Chagla, C.J. (1) The petitioner was given survey Nos. 167 and 163 which were formerly unoccupied Government waste lands for cultivation as a tenant from the year 1943 on an annual tenancy. He then applied for a 'sanad' as an occupant. Rule 37, Bombay Land Revenue Code Rules provides that any unoccupied survey number not assigned for any special purpose, may, at the Collector's discretion, be granted for agricultural purposes to such person as the Collector deems fit, either upon payment of a price fixed by the Collector, or without charge, or may be put up to public auction and sold subject to his confirmation to the highest bidder, and Sub-clause (4) provides that when the land is granted on impartible tenure, an agreement in Form F(1), and, when it is also granted on inalienable tenure, an agreement in Form I(1), shall ordinarily be taken from the person intending to become the occupant. In this case the land was granted on impartible tenure to the petitioner and an agreement in Form...
The Dharwar Bank Ltd. Vs. Vasudeorao Madhavrao Deshpande
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-01-1952
Reported in: AIR1954Bom525; (1954)56BOMLR907; ILR1954Bom1266
Rajadhyaksha, J. 1. These are four applications for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court. They arise out of the decisions of this Court in certain Letters Patent Appeals, namely, 45, 46, 47 and 48 of 1949. These Letters Patent Appeals arose out of the orders made in two Darkhasts Nos. 6 and 9 of 1947 in the Court of the Civil Judge (S. D.) Dharwar. Prom Darkhast No. 6 of 1947 the two First Appeals were F. A. Nos. 131 of 1948 and 505 of 1948 and from Darkhast No. 9 of 1947 the First Appeals were F. A. Nos. 130 of 1S48 and 507 of 1948. All these four appeals were disposed of by Mr. Justce Gajendragadkar and Letters Patent Appeals from the judgment of the learned Judge were disposed of by Mr. Justice Dixit and myself on 7-3-1951, by one common judgment. Letters Patent Appeals Nos. 48 and 46 of 1949 were from Darkhast No. 6 of 1947 and Letters Patent Appeals Nos. 45 and 47 of 1949 were in respect of Darkhast No. 9 of 1947. After these appeals were disposed of on 7-3-1951, the present appli...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›