Mumbai Court December 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.
Sakhubai Khandoba Kachare and ors. Vs. Laxmibai and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-19-1955
Reported in: AIR1957Bom29; (1956)58BOMLR395; ILR1956Bom738
ORDER1. This revisional application raises a short question Under Section 24, Sub-section (2) of the B. A. D. B. Act. The petitioners applied for adjustment of their debts under Section 4 of the Act. Their case was that they had executed two mortgages in favour of the opponents on 7-2-1935 and 7-6-1937 for Rs. 200/-and Rs. 125/- respectively. A repayment of Rs. 165-7-0 had been alleged in the petition and the adjustment of debts was claimed on that footing. Pending this application, the petitioner sought for leave to convert their petition into one under Section 24, Sub-section (2), B. A. D. R. Act. It is clear that they were unable to establish their status as debtors within the meaning of Section 2. Sub-section (5) of the Act and they sought to rely upon their status as agricultural labourers. The learned trial Judge allowed the original application to be converted into one under Section 24, Sub-section (2) and held that the petitioners as agricultural labourers were entitled to the ...
Bai Ghisabai Gomsing Vs. Rustom Jehangir Mills Company Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-16-1955
Reported in: (1956)IILLJ151Bom
Chagla, C.J. 1. The appellant is the widow of Gomsing Shivsing who was a workmen employed by the respondent mills. On 2 August, 1954 while he was working in the mills he had pain in the chest at about 8 a.m., a stimulant was given to him, he collapsed at 8-45 a.m. and he died while he was being taken to the hospital. The medical certificate is clear and that is that he died of right-sided heard failure. The doctor also deposed to the fact that exertion has adverse effect in cases of heart failure and that the heart disease must have been about ten years old. 2. On these facts it seems to us clear that the workmen died as a result of accident which in this case was the sudden collapse in the course of his employment and the only question which has to go to be considered is whether the accident caused the death was out of his employment. The Commissioner has taken the view that on the evidence he could not hold that the deceased worked on 2 August, 1954 and therefore, according to him, n...
Alphonso Ligori Pais Vs. State
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-16-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Bom350; 1956CriLJ608
Shah, J.1. As in this case we propose to direct a re-trial of the accused, we will mention such of the iacts as are absolutely necessary to explain our order.2. The accused Alphonso Ligori Pais was tried before the Additional Sessions Judge for Greater Bombay with the aid of a common Jury on three charges. The first charge was that on or about 17-1-1055, the accused voluntarily caused grievous hurt to one Prabhakar Dhondu by means of a dangerous weapon to wit, a knife and thereby committed an offence under Section 326, I. P. C.The second charge was that the accused at the same time and place voluntarily caused grievous hurt to one Ounvant Punaji by means of a dangerous weapon to wit, a knife and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 326, I. P. C. and the third charge was that the accused at the same time and place voluntarily caused grievous hurt to one Dhondu Sadashiv by means of a dangerous weapon to wit, a knife and thereby committed an offence punishable under Secti...
L.N. Gadodia and Sons Ltd. Vs. the State
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-16-1955
Reported in: (1956)58BOMLR392
Bavdekar, J. 1. This is an application for revision arising from the conviction of the applicant recorded under Section 381(1) (i)(d) of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act and the sentence of fine of Rs. 30 passed upon him by the learned Presidency Magistrate, 19th Court, Esplanade, Bombay.2. The applicant in this case is a company and owns godowns standing on some land in Zaoba's oart. The applicant stores cloth bales in them. It appears from the record that the Commissioner issued a notice purporting to be under Section 381(1) (ii) of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act calling upon it to abate what he considered the nuisance caused by storing the cloth bales and thread bobbin boxes in the godowns by removing them from the godowns. The applicant failed to comply with the terms of this notice and was thereupon prosecuted for the offence under Section 381 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act.3. The defence of the applicant was that enough precautions were taken to see that there ...
Govind Dipaji More Vs. State
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-15-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Bom353; 1956CriLJ700
Vyas, J.1. The appellant Govind Dipaji More has been convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay, of an offence under Section 392 read with Section 397 of the Penal Code and he has been sentenced to suffer seven years' rigorous imprisonment. He has appealed against this order of conviction and sentence.2. The prosecution story is very brief indeed. Umedmal, who is a prosecution witness in this case, is a servant in the shop known by the name of Lakhmichand Dhanrupji and Company. Witness Mangilal is a partner, in this Shop. The shop carries on business in utensils and gold and silver ornaments. It is situated at Chunabhatti, Swadeshi Mill Road, Kurla.The Incident, which is the subject-matter of the prosecution, occurred in the morning of 22-5-1955, at about 8 O'clock Umedmal and Mangilal were present in the shop. They were counting small cash. The cash box was lying nearby. At that time the appellant entered the shop. He had an open knife in his hand. At the point...
Diva Kaluji Vs. Silver Cotton Mills Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-15-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Bom424; (1956)ILLJ740Bom
1. This is an appeal against the decision of the Commissioner for Workmen's compensation rejecting the claim of the applicant to compensation as the widow of one Kaluji Shivaji who was a weaver in the empoly of the respondent. The evidence shows that Kaluji was wording on the first shift on 6-6-1953 which started at 7-30 a.m. and that he collapsed at about 3-30 p. m. in the weaving department where he was working. He was removed to the hospital, some stimulants were given to him, he became conscious, went home and on that very night at about 12 O'clock he died.Dr. Vaidya, who has given evidence on behalf of the applicant, gave his expert opinion that if a weaver works about 8 hours in a textile Mill in Ahmedabad in the weaving department in the month of June and collapses unconscious and dies within about 6 hours, it is likely that he must have died of heart failure. He further added that 'unconsciousness is a sign of a disease and work is likely to accelerate death of a person sufferi...
Shankar Narayan Mohite Vs. State of Bombay and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-15-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Bom582
ORDER1. In this petition the petitioner challenges the validity of an order of externment made by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Crime Branch, C.I.D. dated 6-5-1955 under which he ordered the petitioner to leave Greater Bombay and not to enter the limits of Greater Bombay for a period of 18 months. The order is made under Section 57 Bombay Police Act, 1951, which says that if a person has been convicted under Chapter XVII of the Indian Penal Code the Commissioner specially empowered by the State Government in this behalf, if he has reason to believe that such person is likely again to engage himself in the commission of an offence similar to that for which he was convicted, may direct such person to remove himself outside the area and not to enter or return to the area for a specified period.The powers of the Court to interfere with such an order are limited by Section 61 of the same Act, namely any order passed under Section 57 shall not be called in question in any Court except o...
C.R.H. Readymoney Ltd. and ors. Vs. State of Bombay
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-14-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Bom304
1. This a petition for the issue of a direction, writ or order restraining the State of Bombay from enforcing the provisions of the Bombay Prohibition Act and the Rules and Resolutions passed thereunder in respect of a preparation known as Hall's Wine. Petitioner are the sole agents of Hall's Wine in India and petitioner 2 is the Managing Director of Petitioners 1 who are private Limited Company, and petitioner 2 states in his petition that he buys, possesses and consumes tor the purposes of his Health Hall's Wine. 2. In order to appreciate the questions that arise for determination on this petition, it would be convenient at the outset to set out shortly the provisions of the prohibition law of the State, the challenge partially successful to that law in the Courts, subsequent amendments in the law designed to give effects to the decisions of the Courts and the Rules made and the Resolutions passed in pursuance of the law. Now, the Bombay Prohibition Act is a pre-Constitution Act and ...
Placido R.R. Dos Santos Vs. the State of Bombay
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-14-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Bom614
ORDER1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution and this is a petition of an exceptional nature. Being a petition of an exceptional nature instead of accepting it and issuing a rule I directed that notice be issued to the respondents before any further order was passed by me.2. The petition arises in the following circumstances. The petitioner claims that he is an allottee under the Bombay Land Requisition Act and the premises in question were allotted to him as he was the first informant in connection with a suppressed vacancy.The correspondence annexed to the petition shows that in the letter of 21-1-1955 the Accommodation Officer said and stated that they had come to the conclusion that there was a suppressed vacancy. Thereafter on the 11th of March he was informed that the assignment of this vacancy to him was under consideration and he was asked to fill up a certain questionnaire and also to pay a deposit of six months' rent which he did.Following on that on 22-4-...
Ganapati Nana Mokashi Vs. Anubai Abasaheb Mokashi
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-13-1955
Reported in: (1956)58BOMLR622
Bavdekar, J.1. [His Lordship, after dealing with points not material to this report, proceeded:] Then we come to the third point. Here the contention of the appellant was that inasmuch as he had given a charge on his immoveable property, unless the charged property was exhausted the decree-holder had no right to proceed against him personally by attachment and sale of his moveables. Now it is common ground that in this case there is not only a charge upon the property of the appellant; he is also personally liable under the bond. But there is no decree in favour of the respondent for bringing the charged property to sale. The respondent is really seeking to enforce the liability of the appellant under the bond which he has given by an application under Section 145 of the Code of Civil Procedure. It has application to cases in which the decree-holder is attempting to enforce the personal liability of the surety. The section provides how that liability is to be enforced. It says:-.the de...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »