Mumbai Court November 1955 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.
State Vs. Vidyanand Govind Kangale and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-11-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Bom265; 1956CriLJ503
ORDER1. This is a reference made to this Court by the learned Sessions Judge, Sholapur to quash a conviction of the two accused persons who had been convicted of an offence under S. 182 when read with S. 109 if necessary.2. The prosecution case was that the Mamlat-dar of Mohol received an application complaining that one Soudagar who was a tenant of land belonging to accused No. 2 had received tagai loan through the influence of Talati and Sub-Inspector and the Talati had not given an extract from the Record of Rights to the applicant even though he had gone to the Talati 1 or 8 times.This application was actually made by accused No. 2 and was written by accused No. 1. It was false inasmuch as Saudagar did not get the tagai because of the influence of the Talati or the Sub-Inspector and also because it was not true that accused No. 2 did not get extracts of the Record of Rights even though he had made 7 or 8 trips to the Talati for it.3. The defence of accused No. 2 was that he had not...
State Vs. Janakibai
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-11-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Bom432; 1956CriLJ731
1. This is a reference made to this Court by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, North Satara, for setting aside an order for enhancement of maintenance which has been made by the learned Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate First Class, Patan.2. The applicant before the learned trial Magistrate was the wife and she had been given maintenance at the rate of Rs. 6 per month in the year 1924. The wife did not ask for anything more thereafter till the year 1952 when she made an application for enhancement of the maintenance.The application principally appears to have been upon the footing that Rs. 6/- was not sufficient for the wife to maintain herself in the year 1952. The learned Magistrate accepted it as reasonable and increased the maintenance to Rs. 15/-per month taking into consideration the husband's income.3. The husband then went to the learned Sessions Judge in revision and the learned Sessions Judge said that before an order for enhancement of maintenance could be made under ...
Hariprasad Govindlal Vs. the State
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-11-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Bom579; 1956CriLJ986
ORDER1. This is an application for revision from the order of conviction passed by the learned Special Judicial Magistrate, First Class, (Municipal) Ahmedabad of an offence under Rule 19 (1) (a) read with Rule 3 (f) of Chapter 14 of Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949 in that he being the owner of a chawl allowed illthy matter to flow from there. 2. The prosecution case was that the applicant is the owner of the chawl and he has not provided with regard to this chawl either any drain or a cesspool for the disposal of the filthy or sullage water emerging from the chawl. In support of this contention the prosecution examined the inspector who deposed that there was no drain or cesspool provided in respect of this chawl. It does not appear that the applicant denied the truth of this allegation nor did he say that the cesspool had been provided by him, All that he said in defence was that it was the tenants who were responsible because it was they who had allowed the sullage...
State Vs. Bassappa Chalappa Bekwad and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-10-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Bom341; 1956CriLJ605
Shah, J.1. This is an appeal by the State of Bombay against an order of acquittal passed in Sessions Case No. 90 of 1954 by the Extra Additional Ses-sions Judge, Belgaum. The case was tried before the learned Sessions Judge with the aid of a Jury of five. The Jury brought in a majority verdict of 4 to 1 in favour of the accused. The learned Sessions Judge held that the verdict could not be regarded as perverse or unreasonable. He, therefore, accepted the verdict of the Jury and acquitted all the accused.The State had preferred an appeal against an the accused. When the appeal was placed for admission before this Court the appeal was admitted as against accused 1, 2 and 9 and was dismissed as against the remaining accused. We have, therefore, before us the appeal against accused 1, 9 and 9 only.2. Now, the case for the prosecution was that one Ramchandra Satwappa Wajantri had committed criminal breach of trust in respect of gold of considerable value. The quantity of gold entrusted to h...
State Vs. C.N. Raman
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-10-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Bom447; (1956)58BOMLR295; 1956CriLJ864
Shah, J.1. This is an appeal filed against an order dismissing an application for an order under Section 4 Press (Objectionable Matter) Act, 1951. The application was filed in the Court of Session, Greater Bombay by the Commissioner of Police, on 19-10-1954, under Section 16, Press (Objectionable Matter) Act, 1951, for an order demanding security from the respondent tinder Section 4 of the Act.'The learned principal Judge who tried the case held that impugned publications did not offend the terms of Section 3 of the Act. He Held that the publication was not 'grossly indecent or obscene' within the meaning of Section 3(vi) of the Act. The learned principal Judge therefore dismissed the application. An appeal has been filed against the order of dismissal of the application by the Commissioner of Police.2. On behalf of the respondent several preliminary objections have been raised against the maintainability of the appeal. Mr. Patwardhan contended that the Commissioner of Police was not c...
Maharu Bhika and anr. Vs. Daga Nathu
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-08-1955
Reported in: AIR1957Bom18; (1956)58BOMLR217; ILR1956Bom427
1. This revisional application arises from debt adjustment proceedings and it raises a short question of limitation. The property in suit consists of two Survey Nos. 186 and 187. The opponent alleged that these two fields had been conveyed to the two petitioners respectively by way of security for a loan borrowed by his grandfather Jairam. He Accordingly claimed adjustment of the said debt and asked for the possession of the two lands.The petitioners denied this allegation and claimed absolute tide to the properties. The evidence disclosed that there was no registered document in respect of either transfer. A mutation entry of the year 1911, which was produced however showed that Survey No, 186 had been sold by an oral sale by Jairam to the father of creditor 1 for Rs. 500/-. . The said entry similarly showed an oral sale to creditor 2 in respect of Survey No. 187.The entry did not indicate the amount of consideration for the said transaction. The opponent stated in his evidence that t...
State Vs. Bhogilal Gordhandas
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-08-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Bom180; 1956CriLJ386
Vyas, J. 1. The appellant in this appeal is Bhogilal Gordhandas who has been convicted by the learn-ed Sessions Judge, Kaira, at Nadlad, of an offence under Section 436 of the Penal Code and has been sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for one day and also to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- or in default to suffer three months' rigorous imprisonment. The appellant has appealed against this order of conviction and sentence passed upon him by the learned Sessions Judge.2. When this matter came up for admission before us, we ordered a notice of enhancement to issue against the appellant calling upon him to show cause why the sentence imposed upon him by the learned Sessions Judge, Kaira, should not be enhanced. It is in this manner that the abovementioned appeal and the review application have come up before us for hearing today.3. The facts of the case which gave rise to the prosecution of the appellant may now beshortly stated. The charge against the appellant is that on 28-11-1954, at Umre...
State Vs. Airarsing Raising
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-08-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Bom231
Shah, J.1. The accused Amarsing Raising was charged before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kaira, with having committed an offence under Section 302, I.P.C. The case was tried with the aid of Assessors. The Assessors were unanimously of the view that the accused was guilty of the offence charged. The learned Sessions Judge agreeing with the view of the Assessors convicted the accused of the offence under Section 302, I.P.C.The learned Sessions Judge was, however, of the view that 'considering the circumstances of the case it would meet the ends of justice if the accused was sentenced to transportation for life.' Against the order of conviction and sentence the accused preferred an appeal to this Court and that appeal was summarily dismissed.Thereafter the State has moved by Criminal Revision Application No. 978 of 1955 for enhancement of sentence and the application for enhancement of sentence is now placed for hearing before us. It is true that even though the appeal has been s...
Mangilal Chunilal Vs. Shivaram Tukaram
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-08-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Bom755
ORDER1. The short point which arises in this revisional application is whether the application made by the petitioners to set aside an ex parte order was competent. The application has in terms been made under Order 9, Rule 13. Both the Courts have held that the application as framed was incompetent. It is this finding which is challenged before me by Mr. Paranjape on behalf of the petitioners.2. This application arises from debt adjustment proceedings. The petitioners are creditors. On 24-2-1927 the transaction in question took place, The purchaser was Gulabchand and the petitioners are subsequent purchasers of the property. When an application was made by the debtors for adjustment of their debts, it was set down for hearing in the ordinary course.The preliminary issues were tried, the debtors were found to be debtors entitled to ask for adjustment, and under Section 24 the matter was set down for hearing again for determining the nature of the transaction. On this date the creditors...
Ranganath Kondaji Vs. Kisan and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-07-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Bom234
1. This is a revisional application in which Mr. Bhasme for the petitioner has attempted to challenge the finding recorded by the learned District Judge that the petitioner is not entitled to the benefit of the proviso to Section 10A of the Dekkhan Act on the allegation that the transaction of 29-1-1923 was a mortgage. It appears that the first transferee was defendant No. 1. Thereafter the property has been conveyed to defendants Nos. 2, 3 and 4 successively.Defendant No. 1 admitted that the transaction was a mortgage. Defendants Nos. 2 and 3 remained ex parte and defendant No. 4 who contested the suit did not enter the box. The trial Court found that the transaction was a mortgage. It however, came to the conclusion that defendant No. 4 was entitled to the benefit of the proviso to Section 10A. On appeal, the finding that the transaction was a mortgage has been confirmed, but the view that the proviso helped defendant No. 4 has been reversed; and Mr. Bhasme challenges the correctness...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »