Mumbai Court November 1954 Judgments
Sawaldas Madhavdas Vs. Arati Cotton Mills Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-24-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Bom332; (1955)57BOMLR394
Chagla, C.J. 1. These are two applications which claim a refund of court-fees paid on appeals filed on the Original Side of this Court and the refund is claimed under Section 151, Civil P. C. on the ground that the higher court-fees were paid by mistake or inadvertence. It is also stated in these applications that the applicants were not liable in law to pay the higher court-fees which in fact they have paid.2. Now, the suits from which these appeals arise were filed before 1-4-1954. In both cases the appeals are by the defendants and the court-fees which the appellants paid were the court-fees regulated by the amendment to the Court-fees Act which came into force on 1-4-1954. As it is well known, on that date the whole system of charging court-fees in the High Court on the Original Side was altered and instead of a fixed fee to be payable on the plaint 'ad valorem' fees became leviable as in the districts.The contention of the applicants is that at the date when the suits were filed t...
Tag this Judgment!Keshavlal Kalidas Chawan Vs. the State of Bombay
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-22-1954
Reported in: (1955)57BOMLR220; (1955)IILLJ199Bom
M.C. Chagla, C.J.1. The petitioner is employed as a worker in a textile mill at Ahmedabad. He is also a member of opponent No. 4 which is the Ahmedabad Majoor Sahkari Bank Ltd. Under by-law 4 of this society all the textile workers residing in the city of Ahmedabad or the district of Ahmedabad were entitled to become members. An amendment was moved to this by-law at the general meeting of the society and by this amendment the right to join the society was limited only to those textile workers who were members of the Majoor Mahajan Sangh, a trade union functioning in Ahmedabad. This resolution was passed on September 28, 1952, and the amendment was sanctioned by the Registrar on July 18, 1953, The petitioner appealed to Government against the order of the Registrar sanctioning this amendment and the appeal was dismissed on October 15, 1953, and the petitioner has come before us, and the relief which he seeks is to quash the order passed by the Registrar sanctioning the amendment, or in ...
Tag this Judgment!Sakharam Alias Bapusaheb Narayan Sanas Vs. Manikchand Motichand Shah
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-22-1954
Reported in: (1955)57BOMLR223
Shah J.1. The plaintiff filed suit No. 86 of 1950 in the Court of the Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, at Poona, against four defendants for a decree for possession of certain agricultural lands and for future mesne profits and costs of the suit. The defendants by their written statement contended inter alia that the Court had no jurisdiction to try the suit in view of the provisions of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act.2. The learned trial Judge held that the Court had jurisdiction to try the suit. He held that the lands which were the subject-matter of the suit being within the limits of the Municipal Corporation of Poona, the provisions of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act of 1948 did not apply. The learned trial Judge considered the other contentions raised by the defendants and passed a decree in favour of the plaintiff for possession and future mesne profits and costs of the suit.3. Against the decree passed by the trial Court, the defendants preferred ...
Tag this Judgment!State Vs. Vishwas Shambhurao Datar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-18-1954
Reported in: (1955)57BOMLR169
Dixit, J.1. These are two references made by the Second Additional Sessions Judge, Poona, in a case arising under the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949. As the question raised is of some importance, it would be necessary to mention some relevant facts.2. A house in Poona, bearing No. 78, Budhwar Peth, belongs to one Vishwas Shamburao Datar. A portion of the house is in the occupation of his sister, Mrs. Kusum Krishna- rao Joglekar and another room in the remaining portion of the house has been let out to one B.D. Inamdar. It appears that there is a common bath room in that house which is meant for the use of the tenants and there is also a separate bath room which is available for use in respect of the block occupied by Mrs. Joglekar. It seems that Inamdar was allowed the use of that bath room for some time but in course of time he was prevented from using the same upon the ground that by keeping it open Mrs. Joglekar had lost some of her pots in the bath room. Accordi...
Tag this Judgment!Mahomedali Mahomed Ebrahim Querashi Vs. Hazrabai
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-17-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Bom265; (1955)57BOMLR215
Chagla, C.J.1. This is an appeal against a decree for dissolution of marriage passed by the learned City Civil Court Judge in a suit filed by the wife against her husband and the ground on which the dissolution has been decreed is that the husband made a false and frivolous allegation of adultery against the plaintiff.2. The ground on which the appeal is preferred is that the husband before the end of the trial retracted the charge made against his wife and-admitted that it was a false charge and Mr. Jethmalani says that the effect of that retraction under the Mahomedan law is to disentitle the wife to a decree for dissolution. .The attitude of the husband can only be characterised as disgraceful. He treated his wife with cruelty. She left him as far back as 1947. She applied to the Presidency Magistrate for maintenance under Section 488, Criminal P. C. The Magistrate made an order of maintenance awarding her Rs. 15 per month arid we are told by Mr. Taraporewala, her counsel, that the ...
Tag this Judgment!Gokulprasad Poddar Vs. Ramrikhdas Parasrampuria and Co.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-17-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Bom276; (1955)57BOMLR402; ILR1955Bom507
Chagla, C.J.1. This is an appeal against a decree passed by a Judge of file City Civil Court on a summary suit. A summons for judgment was taken out' by' the plaintiffs and conditional leave to defend was granted to the defendant, who is the appellant before us. The appellant failed to comply with the conditions on which he could defend the suit. Therefore the suit was placed on hoard for a decree and a decree was passed. It is against that decree that this appeal is preferred.2. The first contention of Mr. Nain on behalf, of the appellant is that the suit is based on three oral agreements and therefore it was not maintainable as a summary suit.Now, the two agreements are referred 'to in the plaint and these two agreements are that the defendant saw Ramrikhdas a partner of the plaintiffs at Muttra and it was then agreed between the parties that the plaintiffs should accept and honour 'hundis' drawn by the defendant against the plaintiffs and that the defendant should pay to the plainti...
Tag this Judgment!Mansata Film Distributors Vs. Sorab Merwanji Modi
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-16-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Bom266; (1955)57BOMLR228; ILR1955Bom99
Chiagla, C.J. 1. This is an appeal against an order passed by Coyajee J- by which he restrained the appellants from proceeding with a suit filed by them in the Calcutta High Court, and that suit came to be, filed under the following circumstances. It appears that on 12-12-1953, the respondent, who is a cinema producer and actor of repute, advertised in the newspapers that he was going to produce three films in the near future. One was an epic starring the plaintiff in the lead and produced and directed by him, the second was a musical extravaganza produced and directed also by him, and the third reflecting the laughter and tears of today's society, whatever that may mean, also produced and directed by the respondent.Subsequent to this advertisement an agreement was entered into between the appellants and the respondent on 21-12-1953, by which the appellants were to distribute these three films to be produced by the plaintiff, and there were various terms asto the payments that the appe...
Tag this Judgment!Piraji Chandaji and anr. Vs. Shankarappa Ayyappa Goudar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-12-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Bom337; (1955)57BOMLR218; ILR1955Bom649
ORDER1. The petitioner obtained a decree for Rs. 1,050 on 22-8-1934, against the opponent. In 1937 he filed a darkhast for execution of the decree and prayed that three houses belonging to his judgment debtor and also his life interest in certain Watan lands in Survey No. 19/1 should be sold. The execution of the decree was transferred to the Collector under Section 68 and the Collector effected the sale on 2-1-1948. Instead of selling the life interest of the Watandar the Collector sold the absolute interest of the Watandar to another Watandar.On 19-1-1948, the judgment-debtor applied to set aside the sale 011 various grounds. The executing Court made an order on that application setting aside the sale. The judgment-creditor appealed against that decision and the lower appellate, Court partly varied the order of the executing Court setting aside the sale only with regard to the sale by the Collector of the absolute interest of the Watandar and confirming the sale with regard to the th...
Tag this Judgment!Jagjivan Dhondiram Kirad Vs. Gopal Vinayak Joshi
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-08-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Bom397; (1955)57BOMLR517
Gajendragadkar, J.1. Who is entitled to make an application for setting aside the attachment levied in execution proceedings; that is the short question which arises in this second appeal. Its decision would depend upon the construction of the provisions contained in Rules 58 and 59 of Order 21, Civil P. C. This question arises in this way.The property in suit is a land. It originally belonged to three brothers -- Vishwanath, Vamam and Vinayak. In 1903 a partition took place between the brothers as a result of which Vishwanath separated from the family. Though at this partition the sheres of all the three brothers were determined and divided, it appears that two brothers --Vaman and Vinayak -- continued to remain joint. At this partition the property in suit was kept joint.It is common ground that in this property the family was entitled to a 1/3rd share; so that the three brothers would be entitled to a 1/9th share each. In 1905 Vaman died. Vaman's share devolved upon Vinayak, since t...
Tag this Judgment!M.M. Nandgaonkar Vs. the Collector
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-03-1954
Reported in: (1955)57BOMLR212
M.C. Chagla, C.J.1. The order made by the Collector of Thana which is challenged by this petition is, in our opinion, entirely unsupportable. The petitioner has been an elected member of the Thana Municipality since 1942. He was last elected in the general election held in June 1952 and after the election he was elected Vice-president of the municipality, and when the order complained of was made he was the Vice-president.2. Now, the employees of the Thana Municipality have formed a union which is known as 'the Thana Municipal Kamgar Sangh'. This was formed in 1943 and it was registered under the Trade Unions Act. The petitioner has been the President of this union ever since its inception. As the President he has been fighting the cause of the municipal employees. He has been pressing demands on their behalf upon the municipality and he has been responsible for raising industrial disputes which have been referred to the Industrial Tribunal. In respect of these disputes an award was ma...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›