Mumbai Court March 1954 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.
Jorawarkhanji Latifkhanji Vs. State of Bombay
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-09-1954
Reported in: AIR1954Bom515; (1954)56BOMLR662; ILR1954Bom1235
Chagla, C.J.1. This is a petition challenging a notification issued by Government on October 29, 1953, Under Section 8(2) of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948. The petitioner is a tuluqdar of several villages in the Dliolka taluka in the Ahme-dabad District, including the village of Varna. Oil 1-11-1952, Government issued a notification under Section 6 (2) of the Act and it fixed the maximum rent-at one-sixth of the crop value instead of one-third as provided by Section 6 (1). On 1-11-1952, Government issued a notification under Section 8 (1) of the Act declaring that the rents payable wholly or partly as a crop share in the villages specified in column 3 of the Schedule appended to that notification, which included the village of Varna, shall, with effect from 1-8-1953, be commuted into cash rent.On the same date Government issued a circular drawing the attention of the Collector of Ahmedabad to the notification which it had issued with regard to the commutation of c...
Krishnaji Ramji Vinarkar Vs. Shamsunder Jagannath Shukla
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-08-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Bom166; (1954)56BOMLR896; ILR1954Bom1217
ORDER1. The opponent in this revision application filed ejectment proceedings against the petitioner in the Court of Small Causes, Bombay, under Chapter VII of the Presidency Small Cause Courts Act. It was the case of the opponent that the petitioner was his licensee, and that eventhough possession was demanded the petitioner failed to vacate and deliver possession of room No. 17 In the Bandulwala Chawl No. 3, Sayani Road, Bombay; and hence the proceedings.2. The petitioner was duly served with the process of the Court of Small Causes, but he did not file any defences on the date fixed for hearing and applied for an adjournment. No adjournment was however granted, and the ejectment proceedings were heard by the Court. On consideration of the evidence the Court came to the conclusion that the petitioner was a licensee of the opponent and that the license was revoked, and the Court passed an order against the petitioner directing him to vacate and deliver possesion within six months from...
Bombay Dyeing and Manufacturing Co. Ltd. Vs. M.K. Venkatachalam
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-05-1954
Reported in: AIR1955Bom80; (1954)56BOMLR714; ILR1954Bom971; [1954]26ITR298(Bom)
Chagla, C.J.1. This petition raises a very short and a very important point as to the construction of the Indian Income-tax (Amendment) Act, 1953. The petitioner is the Bombay Dyeing and Manufacturing Co. and the assessment on the petitioner for the year 1952-53 was completed on 9th October, 1952, and an assessment order was made. In that assessment order credit for the sum of Rs. 50,603-15-0 was given to the petitioner. This credit represented interest at 2 per cent. on the advance payment made by the petitioner and the credit was given pursuant to the provisions of Section 18A(5) of the main Act. On 24th May, 1953, the Indian Income-tax (Amendment) Act, which is the Amendment Act, was passed and Section 13 of this Amendment Act amended Section 18A(5) of the main Act and the effect of the amendment was that instead of an assessee getting interest at 2 per cent. on the whole amount of the advance payment, the assessee was only to get interest on the difference between the payment, the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›