Mumbai Court August 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.
Rana Harkishandas Lallubhai and ors. Vs. Rana Gulabdas Kalyandas and a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-19-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Bom513; (1956)58BOMLR167; ILR1956Bom193
Gajendragadkar, J. 1. The point of law which arises for decision as a preliminary point is concerned with the provisions of Order 21, Rule 50, Sub-rule (2), Civil P.C. The decree-holder had asked for leave to proceed in execution against the appellants and their brother under Order 21, Rule 50, Sub-rule (2), and since the appellants and their brother disputed their liability under the decree sought to be executed, it became necessary to consider what pleas it was open to them to raise in the proceedings under Order 21, Rule 50, Sub-rule (2). The learned Judge below has held that the pleas which the appellants wanted to raise could be raised by them in the present proceedings and so he proceeded to deal with the merits of the said pleas in the light of the evidence adduced before him. The finding of the learned Judge that the several pleas which the appellants purported to raise before him were competent is challenged before us by Mr. Shastri for the decree-holder. Mr. Shastri argues th...
Khetarpal Amarnath Vs. Madhukar Pictures
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-18-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Bom106; (1955)57BOMLR1122
Gajendragadkar, J. 1. Is the appellant's claim that the insolvency notice which has been served on him should be set aside on the ground that he has a counterclaim which exceeds the decretal amount ordered to be paid by him justified under Rule 52B(5)(b) of the Rules framed by this Court under the Presidency Towns Insolvency Act, 1909? That is the short question which arises in the present appeal. This question arises in this way. It appears that the appellant, the respondent and another were partners of Madhubar Pictures, which was a firm dealing in the business of film production. On 31-5-1950, the appellant retired from this partnership and a formal deed of dissolution was drawn up. Under this deed of dissolution the appellant promised to pay the continuing partners Rs. 30,000/- and agreed that the assets of the partnership should likewise remain with them. In consideration for this promise, the continuing partners undertook the liability to payall debts due by the partnership Inclu...
M.D. Thakar Vs. Labour Appellate Tribunal and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-18-1955
Reported in: AIR1957Bom46; (1955)57BOMLR1148; ILR1956Bom37
Chagla, C.J.1. This is a petition challenging an order passed by the Labour Appellate Tribunal granting permission to the second respondent to retrench 126 of their workmen. The few facts which lead up to this petition may be stated. On 27th May 1955 the second respondents made an application for retrenchment of 142 of their workmen to the Labour Appellate Tribunal under Section 22, and the ground put forward by them was that they wanted to shift their factory which was in Bombay to Chinchwad in Poona as they wanted to extend their factory.The Tribunal granted the application. A petition was presented against this order to this Court and this Court on the 30th June 1955 quashed the order. On the 4th July 1955 the second respondents applied to the Labour Appellate Tribunal that their application should be further heard and considered. The application was heard and permission was granted in respect of 126 workmen, and this is the order that is now sought to be challenged by this petition...
Melappa and anr. Vs. Guramma and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-17-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Bom129
Dixit, J.1. One Chanbasappa Sangappa Deshmukh, a wealthy inamdar, was a resident of Kesapur in the Muddebhihal taluka of the Bijapur District, In respect of a Deshmukh Vatan which is known as 'Talikote Paraganna Vatan' he was owner of two entire villages of Kesapur and Hagargund. He was also owner of lands known as 'Chavrat lands' in 43 villages in different taluks of the district. He was also the holder of a cash allowanceof Rs. 481/- which was received from differenttaluka treasuries. Besides these properties, hewas owner of the immoveable property consistingof Goudki (Patilki) lands, Government lands, Devasthan lands, wadas, houses and open sites. Likewise, he was owner of considerable moveable property. All this property was in his possession and enjoyment until his death in 1944. Chanbasappa was a much married man, having had no fewer than six wives. He died on 8-1-1944, sonless, leaving him surviving three widows, Nagamma, Guramma and Venkamma and two widowed daughters, Shivaling...
Jethalal C. Thakkar Vs. R.N. Kapur
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-12-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Bom74; (1955)57BOMLR1051; ILR1955Bom1083
Chagla, C.J.1. This appeal raises a short and interesting question as to the construction and legality of a contract. The respondent, who was the defendant in the suit, contended that the contract dated19-3-1948, on which the plaintiff filed the suit wasvoid by reason of the provisions of the Bombay Securities Contracts Control Act, Act 8 of 1925.The learned Judge accepted that contention anddismissed the suit.2. The inclination of every Court must be in favour of validating rather than avoiding a contract, and when a law makes a contract void the Court must strictly construe the provisions of that law. The contract came to be entered into under the following circumstances. One Pillani wanted to convert the International Bank of India, Ltd., into a finance corporation and he wanted the sanction of the District Court for the purpose, and he wanted the co-operation of the plaintiff in this behalf and the defendant was asked to approach the plaintiff to give his assistance.The plaintiff a...
Abehsang Jivabhai and ors. Vs. Dhirajlal Maneklal and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-12-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Bom215
1. This is an appeal by the plaintiffs and it arises out of a judgment and decree passed by the learned Assistant Judge of Kaira at Nadiad in Civil Appeal No. 125 of 1951 which arose out of Regular Civil suit No. 245 of 1950 which was filed in the Court of the Civil Judge J. D. at Umreth. 2. The suit of the plaintiffs was filed under the D. A. R. Act for taking accounts of a certain transaction dated 12-7-1912, which was an oral transaction and which according to the contention of the plaintiffs, was a transaction in the _ nature of a mortgage, This transaction was effected by one Ander Jaga, the father of the plaintiffs Nos. 3, 4 and 5 in favour of one Maneklal, the father of defendant No. 1. In the suit a prayer was also made for redemption of the suit property and for recovering possession thereof from the defendants. 3. The suit property in this case is survey No. 154 of Malvan Taluka Thasra. This property, along with certain other property, was mortgaged to the grand-father of def...
Baburao Nanaji Vs. Raghunath Nanaji
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-10-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Bom155
1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff and it arises out or a judgment and decree passed by the learned District Judge in Appeal No. 144 of 1950 which arose out of a Judgment and decree passed in suit No. 185 of 1949 which was filed in the Court of the Joint Civil Judge, junior Division, at Chalisgaon.2. The facts of the case which have led up to the present litigation may shortly be stated. The plaintiff and the defendant are brothers. In 1931 when they were members of jointand undivided Hindu family, they started a motor bus service between Chalisgaon and Pilkhed. A partition took place between the two brothers in 1937 and as the result of it each brother, i.e., the plaintiff and the defendant, got two motor buses as his share.After the partition, the plaintiff and the defendant each began to run his buses on alternate days. On 1-1-1941 the two brothers formed a Union and the name which was given to the Union was the Chalisgaon-Malegaon Motor Union. The affairs of the Union, however, ...
Kishore Rameshar Powar Vs. Labour Appellate Tribunal of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-10-1955
Reported in: (1957)ILLJ270Bom
Chagla, C.J.1. On 28 August 1950 Government of Bombay referred various disputes between several sugar mills and their employees to the industrial court under Section 73 of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act, 1948. One of the disputes was with regard to housing. The industrial court made its award on 15 October 1954 and with regard to housing it directed the employers that they should provide quarters for farm workers and also gave directions as to the nature of the quarters. Some mills appealed to the Labour Appellate Tribunal. On the question of housing their contention was that the industrial court had no jurisdiction to adjudicate upon that dispute. That contention was negatived by the Appellate Tribunal. The Appellate Tribunal then went into the merits of the decision of the industrial court with regard to housing and modified the directions given by the industrial court. The employees of some of the mills affected have come before us on this petition and the question raised by Mr...
Tarabai Tukaram Shelatkar Vs. Kamalakant Govind Dalal
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-09-1955
Reported in: (1955)57BOMLR1101
Bavdekar, J.1. This is an application for revision arising from an application for adjustment of debts made by the applicant, who claimed that she was a debtor. The debt sought to be adjusted was supposed to be due upon a transaction of mortgage couched in the form of a sale, and the sale deed was executed by the applicant and her two sons, and upon a question being raised before the learned trial Judge as to whether the applicant was a debtor, the learned trial Judge held that she was not. In order to prove the contention that she was a debtor, the applicant had to prove under the provisions of Section 2(5)(a)(ii), that she held the land for agricultural purposes, and under Clause (in) she had been cultivating land personally for the cultivating seasons in the two years immediately preceding the date of the coming into operation of the Act, The applicant said that she had got 15 cocoanut trees, 4 mango grafts, 12 betel nut trees and she used to water them and take their fruit. The lea...
State Vs. Nemchand Pashvir Patel and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-08-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Bom326; (1955)57BOMLR1056; 1956CriLJ603; ILR1955Bom1064; [1956]7STC404(Bom)
Shah, J.1. This is a reference made by the Additional Sessions Judge for Greater Bombay recommending that the committal of the three accused to the Court of Session to stand their trial for offences under Section 471 read with Section 467 and Section 34, I. P. C., and wider Section 420 read with Section 34, I. P. C., be quashed.2. The Presidency Magistrate, 16th Court, Bombay, committed the three accused to the Court of Session for Greater Bombay to stand their trial for two offences. The first offence according to the prosecution was committed by the three accused between 15-9-1933 and 27-11-1953 in that they in furtherance of the common intention of all fraudulently or dishonestly used as genuine a document to wit a declaration in proceedings before a Sales Tax Officer exercising powers of a Collector under the Bombay Sales Tax Act and thereby committed art offence under Section 471 read with Section 467 and Section 34 I. P. C.The second offence, according to the prosecution was that...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »