Mumbai Court September 1955 Judgments
State Vs. Mahadev Anand Vaidya and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-30-1955
Reported in: 1956CriLJ500
ORDER1. The learned Sessions Judge of North Satara, at Satara, has made a reference to this Court, recommending that the conviction of the two accused for an offence under Section 42(b), Electricity Act, 1910, in criminal case No. 513 of 1953 of the file of the Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Wai, be set aside. One Dr. Prabhakar Shankar Marathe of Wai filed a complaint against the two accused charging them with having cut off the electrical connection to his house on the 28th, 29th and 30th January 1953 on the ground of leakage in the wiring system jn his premises, and thereby having committed an offence under Section 42(b), Electricity Act.The complaint was filed in the Court of the Civil Judge and. Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Wai. The learned Magistrate issued notice to the two accused, and after a summary trial held the complaint proved, and convicted the two accused of an offence under Section 42(b), Electricity Act for discontinuing the supply of electrical e...
Tag this Judgment!Mulachand Samana Vs. Imus Miya Shaikh and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-30-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Bom245
ORDER1. The order against which the present revisional application has been made must, in my opinion, be set aside. The facts giving rise to this order are indeed very unusual. A suit was pending against the petitioner and when, it was set down for hearing on 9-10-1953 the petitioner asked for adjournment. Adjournment was granted on condition that the petitioner should deposit Rs. 10/- before the next date of hearing.The next date of hearing was 20-10-1953. The petitioner did not deposit the amount as directed and in consequence his defence was ordered to be struck off. Thereafter, on 30-10-1953, an ex parte decree was passed. The petitioner then applied (Misc. Appln. No. 22 Of 1953) for setting aside the ex parte decree and restoring the suit to file.On 21-6-1954 the ex parte decree was set aside and the suit was restored to file. The petitioner then applied to the learned Judge praying that the order striking off the defence should, be set aside and the learned Judge has refused to s...
Tag this Judgment!Narayan Vishwanath Vs. Malappa Kasappa
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-30-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Bom246
1. The order of remand against which the present revisional application has been preferred is wrong in form and unjustified in substance. This order came to be passed in these circumstances. The property in suit is Municipal House No. 267. This house was reconstruct-ed by the beginning of 1940 and it was let out to Madhavji Pragji. Thereafter Rambhau Dattoba became the tenant of this house and on I-9-I940 he was paying Rs. 550/- per annum as rent for this house.Rambhau vacated the premises and the present defendant then became the tenant of the house from 1945-46 onwards. The rent which the defendant agreed to pay was Rs. 450/- per year. It appears that in Civil Suit No. 12 of 1948 the present petitioner obtained a decree against the opponent for arrears of rent at the rate of Rs. 450/- per year upto 31-7-1949.Thereafter the tenant did not pay the rent and the present suit was filed on 9-7-1951 for recovery of rent. Pending this suit, an application was made by the tenant for fixation ...
Tag this Judgment!Shree Bajwa Ganesh Oil and Rice Pulse Mills and ors. Vs. Parikh Occhav ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-30-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Bom253
1. The only point which is rais-ed by Mr. Oza in the present revisional application is that the learned trial Judge was in error in calling upon his clients to pay court fees on an amount of Rs. 15,625/-. This order came to be passed in a suit against the petitioners. The opponents had made a claim for Rs. 27,965-3-0 against the petitioners. The petitioners contended that this amount was not due from them and that in fact there were other transactions between them and the opponents and it had been agreed between the parties that the amount due to the petitioners from the opponents in respect of those transactions should be taken into account and credit should be given to the petitioners in respect thereof before the opponents made their claim on the Khata. According to the petitioners, the amount which they are entitled to recover from the plaintiffs in respect of this other transaction is Rs. 15,625/-. After this plea was made by the defendants an issue was raised as to whether it was...
Tag this Judgment!Lodhi Jesharkhan Himatkhan Vs. Patel Keshavlal Gangaram and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-30-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Bom266
ORDER1. This revisional application arises from adjustment proceedings. The petitioner is a debtor where as opponent No. 1 is one of his creditors. It appears that between the debtor and his creditor a settlement took place during the pendency of the adjustment proceedings and when the settlement was submitted to the Court, the Court was satisfied that the settlement had been made by the debtor voluntarily and was for his benefit,On that view, an award was made in terms of this settlement. Thereafter the debtor applied under Section 37, B. A. D. R. Act, for re-opening of the award on the ground that one of the properties included in the award did not belong to him. This was item No. 3 Survey No. 851/1. The learned Judge .has found that this property has been included in the award, though it does not in fact belong to the debtor. He, however, came to the conclusion that the application for re-opening the award under Section 37 was incompetent.Even so, exercising his inherent jurisdictio...
Tag this Judgment!Tatuba Laxman Vs. the State
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-30-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Bom475; 1956CriLJ874
ORDER1. The accused Tatuba Laxman was charged with having committed an offence under Section 124, Bombay Police Act, 1951, in criminal case No. 106/P of 1955 in the Court of the Presidency Magistrate, Fifth Court, Dadar, Bombay. The learned trial Magistrate convicted the accused and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs. 10/- and in default of payment of fine to suffer simple imprisonment for five days. It was the case for the prosecution that on 23-10-1954 at about 12 noon the accused was found going in a suspicious manner along Elphinstone Road.The accused was stopped by the Police Naik No. 2606/F and was searched, and 'a tap and another piece' were found on the person of the accused. The accused took the police to an open place near the Dhan Mill compound and pointed out the place where he alleged he had found the articles. The police did not accept the explanation of the accused and, charge-sheeted him with having committed an offence under S. 124, Bombay Police Act, 1951.2. Now the ta...
Tag this Judgment!Laxmanrao Namdeorao Vs. the State and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-30-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Bom592; 1956CriLJ990
ORDER1. The accused Laxmanrao Namdeorao Somwanshi is the owner of a factory for casting metal at 32-33 Gul Tekadi, Poona. The Municipality of Poona has licensed the setting up of that factory for six bhattis for casting metal. It appears that thereafter the accused installed additional machinery such as pressing machines, grinding machines etc. without obtaining the permission of the Municipality. The Municipality thereupon prosecuted the accused for offences under Section 313 and Section 376 of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act of 1949. The learned trial Magistrate acquitted the accused of the offence under Section 376 as the requisite license was produced by the accused before him. The learned trial Magistrate however convicted the accused of an offence under Section 313 of Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act of 1949 because in his view the setting up or installing of machinery by the accused must be deemed to be an infringement of the provision of Section 313 o...
Tag this Judgment!Chimanlal Chhotalal Vs. Vajesang Chandabhai and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-29-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Bom209; (1956)58BOMLR249; ILR1956Bom291
Vyas, J. 1. These are references made by the District Judge of Ahmedabad and they raise an important question of construction of Section 57, Bombay Agricultural Debtors' Relief Act, 1947. The points which we have to consider in these references are whether the benefit of extended time under Sub-section (1) of Section 57 for making an application under Section 4 is available in cases where, upon the date on which the territory of a merged State merged with the State of Bombay, (a) the debtor and creditor both resided outside the merged territory and the debtor's property was also situated outside the merged territory; (b) the creditor resided in the merged territory, but the debtor resided outside the merged territory and his property was also situated outside the merged territory; (c) irrespective of where the debtor or the creditor resided (i) the debtor had property in the merged territory, but the creditor could not enforce his remedy against that property for the recovery of the de...
Tag this Judgment!Pirgonda Hongonda Vs. Vishwanath Ganesh and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-29-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Bom251
1. In a suit for damages, the plaintiff applied that a summons should be issued to the defendants as his witness and that, certain interrogatories should be addressed to them. The learned trial Judge rejected his prayer for addressing interrogatories to the defendants, but has ordered that summons should be issued against the defendants. It is this order which has given rise to the present revisional application. 2. Mr. Datar concedes that ordinarily an in-terlocutory order of this kind would not be sub-ject to the revisionfll jurisdiction of this Court, particularly when the order appears to have been issued by the learned Judge in the exercise of his discretion. But he contends that the order is inconsistent with the practice generally prevailing in our Courts and seeks to introduce a practice which has been condemned by the Privy Council in very strong terms. Mr. Datar has also relied upon Circular No. 161 of the Circulars issued by this Court in the Civil Manual. This circular has ...
Tag this Judgment!Mishrilal Kesharchand Vs. Jaywanta Chandrabhan and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-28-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Bom192
1. This revisional application raises a short question as to the competence of the appeal preferred by the petitioner before the learned District Judge. It appears that in adjustment proceedings a transaction which took place between the parties on 7-5-1931 was alleged to be a mortgage. The petitioner before me is one of the creditors. On the date of hearing, the creditor was absent and on the evidence led the learned Judge held that it was a mortgage.Thereupon an award followed. Against this award, the petitioner preferred an' appeal in the District Court. The learned District Judge has held that, after it was found by the trial Court that the transaction in question was a mortgage, it was necessary that the petitioner should nave preferred an appeal against that order, and since the petitioner had failed to prefer an appeal it was not open to him to prefer an appeal against the final award. It is on this view that the appeal was rejected as being incompetent.2. In my opinion, the lea...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »