Mumbai Court February 1954 Judgments
The Union of India Vs. Hasanali Mahamed HusseIn Shariff
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-26-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Bom505; (1954)56BOMLR552; ILR1954Bom1367
Chagla, C. J. 1. This appeal arises out of a suit filed by the plaintiff to challenge an order dated October 22, 1951, issued by the Union of India. The order is issued under Sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the Foreigners Act and it calls upon the plaintiff not to remain in India after the expiry of one month from the date on which the order was served on Him, and it also calls upon him to depart from India by the Port of Bombay and not thereafter to re-enter India. Various contentions were urged before the learned Judge below. The learned Judge held that, the plaintiff was a citizen of India by reason of the fact that he was domiciled in India and he-had been ordinarily resident in the territory of India for not less than five years immediately preceding the commencement of the Constitution. It was urged by the plaintiff that he was born in the territory of India. That contention was rejected by the learned Judge. Having held that the plaintiff was a citizen as defined by Article 5 of...
Tag this Judgment!Sanwaldas Govindram Vs. State of Bombay and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-25-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Bom192; (1954)56BOMLR970
ORDER1. This is a petition for an appropriate ' writ, direction or order against the State of Bombay and the Collector of Bombay and Bombay Suburban District restraining them from enforcing an order made under Section 4(1), Bombay Displaced Persons Premises Control and Regulation Act, 1952, ordering the petitioner to vacate certain premises of which he was in occupation.2. It is the case of the petitioner that he is a displaced person and since about April 1948 he has been residing in the Chembur Relief Camp. According to him a barrack in the said camp being barrack No. T 283 was allotted to him for his residence & business and he was running a ration shop being ration shop No. C-6 in a part of the said barrack. On 21-6-1952, the petitioner was served with an order under Section 7, Bombay Refugee Act, 1948, directing the petitioner to leave the Chembur colony within a period of 3 days and not to re-enter the said colony.Against this order the petitioner filed Miscellaneous Application ...
Tag this Judgment!Dominion of India Vs. Eversharp Agency
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-24-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Bom98a; (1954)56BOMLR532
Chagla, C.J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit filed by the plaintiffs claiming damages for loss of three boxes containing Eversharp fountain pens and pencils which were consigned by railway from Bombay to Lahore. The damages are sought from the Dominion of India representing the Railway authority.The facts briefly are that on 24-2-1948, the plaintiffs, a firm carrying on business in Bombay, received a telephone message from Lahore to consign three boxes of Eversharp fountain pens and pencils, and on 25-2-1948, these three boxes were packed and plaintiff No. 2 Louis D'Souza, who is an employee of the first plaintiff firm, was asked to take these boxes to Lahore. Louis D'Souza got into a second class compartment and put these three boxes in the luggage van and obtained a luggage ticket in respect of these three boxes. He got out at Delhi as he had to change the train for going to Lahore.At Delhi he made inquiries at the luggage van whether these boxes had been brought. He could not get...
Tag this Judgment!Dwarkadas Jivraj Vs. State of Bombay
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-24-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Bom110; (1954)56BOMLR968
Tendolkar, J.1. This is a petition for an appropriate writ, direction or order in respect of an order of requisition dated 1-10-1953. Some preliminary objections have been raised on behalf of the respondent to this petition but they have not been pressed at the hearing.2. The main ground and indeed the only ground urged before me on which the petition is based is that intimation of vacancy was received by the Accommodation Officer on 31-8-1953, and the order of requisition is not made within a month from the date of receipt of such intimation and is therefore not valid. This is a pure question of law and depends for its determination on a proper construction to be put on the provisions of Section 6(3) and (4), Bombay Land Requisition Act, 1948, which are in the following terms :'(3) A landlord shall not, without the permission of the State Government, let, occupy, or permit to be occupied such premises before giving the intimation and for a period of one month from the date on which th...
Tag this Judgment!Jehangirji Jamshedji Vs. Nariman Burjorji and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-24-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Bom136; (1954)56BOMLR615; ILR1954Bom1212
1. This appeal arises from a suit for partition and separate possession of a half share in the suit property. The plaintiff also claimed an injunction restraining defendant No. 1 from executing a decree by darkhast No. 159 of 1944. The plaintiff also prayed for other reliefs.2. The parties belong to a family of the name of Keravala. Their common ancestor was one Jamshedji who had two sons, Jehangirji and Burjorji. Jehangirji is defendant No. 1 in the suit, while plaintiffs Nos. 1 to 4 and defendant No. 3 are the sons of Burjorji. Defendant No. 2 is the son of defendant No. 1. On October 17, 1909, Jamshedji made a will of which a probate was obtained by his widow Bai Dhanbai.On December 7, 1923, a partition took place between the two branches represented by Jehangirji and Burjorji and at the partition the family property was divided. At that partition certain property which is now in dispute was kept undivided for a common passage. As a good deal of controversy turns upon the language o...
Tag this Judgment!Mehersingh Sethi Vs. Khurshed Nadirshaw Satarawalla
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-24-1954
Reported in: (1954)56BOMLR540
Desai, J.1. The plaintiff seeks a declaration and enforcement of a charge on certain property belonging to the defendant and known as The Orient Hotel situated in Bombay. The suit is before me for the trial of certain preliminary issues affecting the jurisdiction of this Court.2. The plaintiff is the son of Nadirshaw Satarawala who died in April 1952. The decased was the owner of certain leasehold premises situated at Mahableshwar in which he carried on business as a hotelier under the name of Rippon & Connaught Hotel. By a writing described as a 'Lease' and made between the deceased and the defendant on May 8, 1948, the deceased demised in favour of the defendant those premises together with the furniture, fixtures and other articles lying in that hotel for a period of 3 years from May 1, 1948, to be used as a hotel under the name of Rippon & Connaught Hotel. By that writing the defendant further agreed that in the event of any instalment of rent remaining unpaid for one month after t...
Tag this Judgment!Lakhama Pesha Vs. Venkatrao Swamirao Nazare
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-16-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Bom103; (1954)56BOMLR824; 1955CriLJ351; ILR1954Bom1362
Chagla, C.J.1. This seems to be a very gross case in which the assistance of this Court is sought. It seems that a notice, was served upon the landlord of a building situated at Bohra Street in Colaba under Section 354, Municipal Act, and the landlord was called upon to repair the building as it appeared to be in a dilapidated state. In October 1948 the landlord filed an application under Section 507 and an order was made by the Chief Judge, Small Causes Court, Bombay, under that section on 17-11-1918, and the order was to the following effect: The petitioners in the two petitions, who are the tenants of the landlord, were ordered to give to the landlord all reasonable facilities to enable him to carry out work in accordance with the Municipal requisition dated 23-6-1948.In particular, the petitioners were ordered to vacate as a temporary measure the premises in their occupation by 31-12-1948, and to give leave and licence to the landlord to enter upon the premises for the purpose of c...
Tag this Judgment!Bombay Education Society Vs. State of Bombay
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-15-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Bom468; (1954)56BOMLR643; ILR1954Bom1333
Chagla, C.J.1. These three petitions raise very important questions, first, as to the right of an Anelo-Indian school to admit non-Anglo-Indian students, and second, the right of non-Anglo-Indian students to be admitted to an Anglo-Indian school. The school with which we are concerned is the Barnes School which was founded in 1925. In December 1953 it had on its roll 415 students of whom 203 were non-Anglo-Indians and 212 were Anglo-Indians. It appears that in the whole State of Bombay there are 30 Anglo-Indian schools and the percentage of non-Anglo-Indian students studying in these schools Is 63 per cent, and the percentage of Anglo-Indian students studying in these schools'is 37 per cent.It may also be mentioned that in the whole State of Bombay there are in all 1403 schools out of which 1285 teach through mediums other than English and 118 teach through the medium of English, As far as this school is concerned it has got 17 teachers of whom only one teacher is in a position to teac...
Tag this Judgment!Rajesab Wallad Imamsab Bagwan Vs. Harishchandra Honnawar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-15-1954
Reported in: (1954)56BOMLR638
Shah, J.1. The plaintiff filed Special Suit No. 13 of 1946 in the Court of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, at Dharwar, for a decree for possession of certain property from the defendants alleging that the right of the defendants to continue in possession thereof as tenants was determined. The trial Court passed a decree against the defendants. Against the decree passed by the trial Court, First Appeal No. 244 of 1947 was preferred to this Court. The appeal came up for hearing before this Court in October 1949. This Court granted relief against forfeiture to the defendants on certain terms which are not material for the decision of this appeal. A decree was passed on October 18, 1949, requiring the defendants to make certain payments as a condition precedent to the relief being granted to them from forfeiture. As the defendants did not carry out the conditions imposed upon them under the decree, the decree was modified on January 15, 1951, and the appeal was dismissed. In the meanwhil...
Tag this Judgment!Malvan Co-operative Urban Bank Ltd. Vs. Kamalakar Narayan Zantye and o ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-10-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Bom101; (1954)56BOMLR629; ILR1954Bom1187
Chagla, C.J.1. This is an application against an order of the Bombay Co-operative Tribunal. The petitioner is the Malvan Co-operative Urban Bank Ltd., situated at Malvan, and it appears that the President of the bank discovered that a, sum of Rs. 50,000 was shown in the books of account of the bank as having been advanced to opponent No. 1 on 6-5-1948. This amount was shown credited on 30-6-1948, although in fact that amount had not been repaid.The case of the bank further was that this transaction was effected in collusion with the manager and the accountant of the bank. The bank made an application for payment of this amount against opponent No. 1 and the manager and the accountant, and the matter was referred to arbitration under the Bombay Co-operative Societies Act and the arbitrators held that opponent No. 1 and the manager and the accountant were liable to pay to the bank the sum of Rs. 50,000 with interest. Against this award opponent No. 1 went in revision to the Co-operative ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »