Mumbai Court December 1957 Judgments
Sitaram Bindraban Vs. Chiranjilal Brijlal and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-20-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Bom291; (1958)60BOMLR689; ILR1958Bom775
J.R. Mudholkar, J. 1. This appeal arises out of the suit instituted by the plaintiff, a partnership firm, for recovery of damages from the respondents for breach of contract to deliver 790 bales of jarila cotton on 14-9-1948. The undisputed facts are as follows: 2. Several individuals and firms doing the business of forward delivery transactions in cotton formed an association known as the Cotton Dealers Association of Khamgaon. All the members of the Association had subscribed to the Memorandum of Association which, among other things, provided that the parties to a forward delivery transaction will pay and receive clearing money in respect of that transaction. These clearing rates were to be fixed by the Appeal Committee of the Association consisting of five members. On several dates between 3-6-1948 and 27-8-1948 clearing rates were declared by this Committee in pursuance of which mutual adjustments between the parties to the appeal took place on 27-8-1948. As a result of these adju...
Tag this Judgment!RamnaraIn Ramgopal Chamediya Vs. Ramchandra Jagoba Kadu
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-20-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Bom325; (1958)60BOMLR770; ILR1958Bom58
Y.S. Tambe, J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 116A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (No. XLIII of 1951), hereinafter called the Act of 1951.2. The appellant Ramnarain is the defeated candidate. Ramnarain and respondent Ramchandra were two rival candidates for election to the Bombay Legislative Assembly from the Yeotmal Assembly constituency.3. Facts material for the purposes of this appeal, which are not in dispute, in brief are: Respondent's name appeared at two places in the electoral roll of the Yeotmal Assembly constituency. It appeared once at No. 572 in village Gharfal and second time at No. 816 in Yeotmal town. Both Gharfal and Yeotmal fall within the area comprising Yeotmal Assembly constituency. In the nomination paper submitted bythe respondent, he had mentioned his electoral roll No. as 572 of Gharfal. No objection was taken to his nomination paper. Elections were held on 6-3-1957. Respondent cast his vote at Yeotmal and obtained the ballot paper on the elec...
Tag this Judgment!Krishna Awaji Ghadge Vs. Bapu Kalu Ghadge and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-20-1957
Reported in: AIR1959Bom490; (1958)60BOMLR487; ILR1958Bom786
ORDER1. This is an application for stay of a degree and the application has been referred to me by the Registrar because a question of law on which there is no authority has been raised on behalf of the opponents. 2. The facts are that one Awaji died leaving the respondents as his illegitimate heirs and the plaintiff as his legitimate heir. The trial Court held that Awaji was a Kshatriya and as the respondents were illegitimate they could not succeed as a legitimate heir was available, and he, therefore, decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiff. In pursuance of this decree the plaintiff-appellant obtained possession of the immovable property from the respondents who were then in possession. Upon appeal the Assistant Judge of Satara held that Awaji was a Shudra and, therefore, illegitimate children could inherit along with the legitimate children. He, therefore, allowed the appeal and dismissed the applicant's suit. It is against the dismissal of the suit by the Assistant Judge, Sata...
Tag this Judgment!Patel Hirji Vithal Vs. Rana Dungarsinhji Ladhubha
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-20-1957
Reported in: (1958)60BOMLR1200
Vyas, J.1. This is a Letters Patent Appeal from a decision of Mr. Justice Chhatpar by which decision Mr. Justice Chhatpar set aside the order of the Revenue Tribunal. The Revenue Tribunal had confirmed the order passed by the Deputy Collector, pursuant to which order, the order passed by the Mam-latdar was set aside and the tenant was directed to be put in possession.2. A few facts leading upto this appeal may be briefly stated. Patel Hirji, the present appellant, was a tenant of the girasdars. The girasdars are the respondents before this Court. Patel Hirji was a tenant of certain lands admeasuring 56 acres and 32 gunthas. He committed a default in the payment of rent for Samvat year 2009 corresponding to the year 1953. Thereupon the girasdars filed an application under Section 13 of the Saurashtra Land Reforms Act for the ejectment of the tenant. A notice wag issued to the tenant on April 11, 1953, to show cause why he should not be ejected from the lands. After hearing the parties o...
Tag this Judgment!State Vs. Parshottam Kanaiyalal and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-18-1957
Reported in: (1958)60BOMLR441; 1960CriLJ805
Datar, J.(1) Criminal Appeal No. 1159 of 1957 has been preferred by the State of Bombay against the order pased by the learned Sessions Judge of Baroda in Criminal Appeal No. 33 of 1957 on his file.(2) The case of the prosecution was that the respondent, who was t he accused in the trial Court, owned a milk shop within the Municipal limits of the City of Baroda. The Food Inspector of the Baroda Municipality visited the milk shop of the accused on 9-7-1956 at about 8-30 a.m and purchased 1 1/2 lb. of milk for analysis, after giving him the necessary notice in that behalf, as required by the provisions of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act 1954. The quantity of the milk purchased by the Inspector was filled in three bottles in equal parts, and the bottles were duly closed, saled and labelled in the presence of some panchas. One bottle was given into the possession of the accused and one was sent to the public analyst for analysis of its contents. On 30-7-1956 the public analyst sent...
Tag this Judgment!Bhagwanji Haridas Vs. Premji Parashotam and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-13-1957
Reported in: AIR1959Bom47; (1958)60BOMLR1197; ILR1958Bom1115
D.V. Vyas, J.1. This first appeal, which raises a short but important point oflaw under the Provincial Insolvency Act, is filed by the originalapplicant who filed Insolvency Petition No. 3 of 1955. The appealis from an order made by the learned Assistant Judge at Porbandaron 24-9-1956 in the said petition. By the said order, the learnedAssistant Judge directed that Shri Erda, a clerk of his Court,be appointed as a receiver to take over possession of the accountbooks and the properties which may be in the possession of theapplicant. As to the properties, which may not be in the actualpossession of the applicant, but which may be in the possessioneither of the opponent No. 1 or of any other relations of theapplicant, those properties were not to be taken by the receiverfrom the possession of those persons.2. It is not necessary for us to go into the merits of thisappeal, because, upon the point of law we take the view that theappellant ought to have filed this appeal, not before the High...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: the Eastern Wollen Mills Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-13-1957
Reported in: (1958)60BOMLR1121
Shlat, J.1. This is an application for confirmation of a proposed alteration in Clause 8 of the memorandum of association of the petitioner-company.2. The company was incorporated in Lahore on April 6, 1944. On April 30, 1948, the company obtained an order whereby permission was given to it to shift its registered office from Lahore to Bombay. In 1946-47 the capital of the company was allowed to be reduced by 30 per cent. by an order obtained by the company from the High Court at Lahore. After the company had shifted its registered office to Bombay, the company made another application to this Court and on March 20, 1953, an order was passed allowing the company to still reduce its capital by 10 per cent. The result, therefore, was that on and after March 20, 1953, the total paid-up capital of the company was reduced to 60 per cent, of the original paid up capital and that paid up capital then came to about eight lacs of rupees. There was, however, the power with the company to call 40...
Tag this Judgment!Jadeja Habhubha Vs. the State of Bombay and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-12-1957
Reported in: AIR1959Bom43; (1958)60BOMLR1191; ILR1959Bom41
D.V. Vyas, J.1. This is an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India and it is filed by one Jadeja Habhubha Viraji of Kalawad. The reliefs which the Petitioner has prayed for are declarations (i) that 'extinguishment' of his Mulgiras rights by Section 39 of the Saurashtra Land Reforms Act 1951 is void, and (ii) that the lands held by the Petitioner are not liable to any assessment, tax or cess. A further prayer made by the Petitioner is that it should be declared that Sub-sections (2) and (3) of Section 7 of the Saurashtra Local Development Fund Act, 1956, are ultra vires the legislative competence of the Saurashtra State Legislature and that the notice dated 14-4-1957 issued upon the Petitioner by the Mamlatdar for the levy of cess in pursuance of the Saurashtra Local Development Fund Act, 1956, is void and illegal and should therefore be quashed. It is contended by the petitioner that the levy of cess from him at the rate of three annas on the amount of full...
Tag this Judgment!Bari and ors. Vs. Tukaram Lahanu Teli
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-12-1957
Reported in: AIR1959Bom54; (1958)60BOMLR1041; ILR1959Bom730
1. This is a second appeal by the plaintiff and arises out of a suit instituted by them for a declaration that they have a right to take earth from field No. 111 of Mauza Shegaon Buzruk belonging to the respondent for preparing earthen pots and for a permanent injunction restraining the respondent from obstructing them from taking earth from this field. 2. It is common ground that this field was the banjar land of the lambardar and was purchased from him by the respondent on 13-12-1948. The appellants claim is that the kumbhars of the village have a customary right to remove the earth from the western side of this field and that there is actually in existence a pit on that side. The existence of this pit is admitted by the respondent, according to whom, its dimensions are 25' x 20' x 4'. The sole question to be determined in this case is whether the appellants have acquired a customary right to take earth from the aforesaid pit. Whether this customs exists or not is a mixed question of...
Tag this Judgment!Chhotalal Kalidas Vs. Laxmidas Mayaram and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-12-1957
Reported in: AIR1959Bom517; (1958)60BOMLR587; ILR1958Bom902
Shah J. 1. The plaintiffs filed Suit No. 2435 of 1954 in the City Civil Court at Bombay claiming the following reliefs:- '(a) That it may be declared that the alleged sale by the 1st defendant in favour of the 2nd defendant purported to have been effected at the auction held on the 11th October 1954 is illegal, void, invalid, ineffective, bad in law and not binding up-on the plaintiffs by reason of the premises mentioned in the plaint and that the same be set aside. (b) That the 1st defendant be permanently restrained by an Order and Injunction of this Honourable Court from proceeding further with the completion of the alleged sale and conveying the said properties in favour of the 2nd defendant and that the 2nd defendant be also restrained by an Order and Injunction of this Honourable Court from completing the alleged sale and having the said properties conveyed in his favour.' The plaintiffs value the claim for Court-fee and jurisdiction at Rs. 420. The defendants contended that the...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »