Mumbai Court July 1957 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.
Raddulal Bhurmal and ors. Vs. Mahabirprasad Bisesar Kalwar and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-19-1957
Reported in: AIR1959Bom384
Mudholkar, J. 1. This is a plaintiff's appeal from a final decree dismissing their suit for foreclosure.2. The relevant fact are as follows: one Ghasilal had obtained a mortgage of the property in suit from the defendant No. 1 Mahabir Prasad, who is now dead, and is represented before us by his legal representatives, respondents 1(a) to 1(f). Ghasilal was indebted to the plaintiffs and therefore he transferred his mortgagee rights in their favour. The plaintiffs thereupon instituted a suit in the year 1941 in the Court of the Sub-Judge First Class, Bhandara, for enforcement of their mortgage. The claim of the plaintiffs was decreed in full and a preliminary decree for Rs. 11396/8/- inclusive of costs was passed in their favour. The time for redemption expired on 12th February 1943, thereupon the plaintiff made an application for passing a final decree for foreclosure. Along with the application was made by Jagdish Prasad, one of the original plaintiffs, stating that the original plaint...
Sitabai Sadasheo Vs. Vithabai Namdeo and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-19-1957
Reported in: AIR1959Bom508
1. This is a second appeal by a plaintiff whose suit was dismissed by the lower appellate Court. The trial Court had granted the plaintiff a decree for possession of the suit properties.2. The plaintiff sued the defendants alleging that she (the plaintiff) was the wife of Sadasheo belonging to her late husband. There was no dispute as to the other allegations in the plaint, but the defendants had denied that she was the wife of Sadasheo and they put the plaintiff to the proof of the marriage.3. Now, both the Courts below came to a finding that the plaintiff was the legally married wife of Sadasheo and that the marriage took place about 3 1/2 years before the date of the suit. But, notwithstanding that finding the lower appellate Court held that the marriage was invalid in law.4. The point which the lower appellate Court made was that the second defendant as D.W. 2 had stated that the couple took only 'five rounds around' the nuptial fire during the marriage ceremony. Therefore to quote...
K.R. Joshi Vs. State of Bombay
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-18-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Bom90; (1958)60BOMLR56; ILR1958Bom247; (1958)IILLJ384Bom
Mudholkar, J.1. The petitioner who was an officiating Deputy Superintendent of Police and an Assistant Commandant, Special Armed Force, Battalion Kamptee, was served by the former Government of Madhya Pradesh with a notice terminating his services three months after the date of receipt of the notice. That notice is dated 4th October 1956, and is said to have been served on the petitioner on 9th October 1956. The notice is in the following terms:'Whereas you have completed 30 years qualifying service for pension under Government.And whereas the State Government have decided to retire you from service by giving you three months in pursuance of the provisions contained in Rule 2(2) of the Madhya Pradesh New Pension Rules, 1951.Now, therefore, please take notice that you shall be retired after a period of three months from the date of receipt of this notice by you.'On 7th January 1957, the following order was made by the Government of Bombay:'In pursuance of the notice No. 6420-5420-IV, da...
Dhusabhai Polabhai and ors. Vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer, Ahme ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-18-1957
Reported in: AIR1959Bom520; (1958)60BOMLR532; ILR1958Bom810
Vyas, J.1. These six appeals arise out of the proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act. The acquired lands are situated within the area encircled by a dark blue dotted line on the sketch Exhibit 28. The survey numbers concerned in First Appeal No. 95 of 1953 are 222/1-2-3 and 223/1 of Vastrapur. The lands which are the subject-matter of First Appeals Nos. 96 and 253 of 1953 are Survey Nos. 167 and 113/1 respectively of Kochrab. Survey numbers in respect of which First Appeal No. 299 of 1953 is filed are 212 and 224/3 of Vastrapur. The survey numbers relating to First Appeals Nos. 335 and 439 of 1953 are 225 and 114 respectively of Vastrapur and Kochrab. 2. A large number of lands have been acquired for the Ahmedabad Education Society and those lands are situated within the limits of Vastrapur, Sheikhpur, Kanpur and Kochrab villages of the Ahmedabad District. The lands been acquired for the purpose of constructing the University buildings,engineering college and other buildings. Notif...
Hindustan Steel Metal Works Vs. Walter S. Guggenheim and Co.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-16-1957
Reported in: (1958)60BOMLR869
Mody, J.1. The plaintiffs apply that I should direct the repayment of 2/3rd a of the institution fees to the plaintiffs under item No. (3) of the Schedule annexed to the Bombay Government Notification No. 1123/7 dated March 26, 1954, issued under Section 31(2) of the Court-fees Act, 1870.2. The plaintiffs filed the suit as a long cause and thereafter served the writ of summons on the defendants. The defendants did not file any written statement as called for. Ultimately the suit was set down on my board as an undefended long cause. The suit reached hearing on June 18, 1957, when both the parties being absent the suit was dismissed. On that day, the plaintiffs being absent, no application was made for repayment of any part of the institution fees. A few days later, however, an application was made before me on behalf of the plaintiffs for repayment of 2/3rds of the institution fees under the said item No. (3). Such applications for repayment or refund of such part of the institution fee...
Lallubhai Dayaram Bhatt Vs. Karimbhai Dattekhan and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-15-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Bom276; (1957)59BOMLR942; 1958CriLJ862; ILR1958Bom224
Chainani, J.1. In this case there was a dispute between the petitioner and opponent No. 2 with regard to possession of certain lands. As it was apprehended that the dispute might result in breach of peace, proceedings under Section 145, Criminal Procedure Code were held by the Sub-divisional Magistrate, Himatnagar. He came to the conclusion that opponent No. 2 was in actual possession of lands. Therefore, under Sub-section (6) of Section 145, Criminal Procedure Code, he directed that opponent No. 2 should continue in possession until evicted therefrom in due course of law, and that till then his possession should not be disturbed. The petitioner applied, in revision, to the Sessions Court. The Extra Additional Sessions Judge, who heard his application, held-that he had no jurisdiction to entertain it under Section 435, Cr. P.C. He, therefore, dismissed the application. Against this order, the petitioner has come in revision to this Court. 2. The principal question, which we have to dec...
Pokhardas Meghraj Vs. the State of Bombay and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-15-1957
Reported in: (1957)59BOMLR1104; [1957]8STC758(Bom)
Tendolkar, J.1. These are a group of rules in which a common question of law relating to sales tax arises for determination. The petitioners are dealers within the meaning of the sales tax law and they have all been assessed to general tax for the period 1st November, 1952, to 31st March, 1953, and 1st April, 1953, to 31st March 1954. The assessment for the first of these two periods is governed by the Sales Tax Ordinance No. 3 of 1952 and the Bombay Sales Tax Rules, 1952, made thereunder. The assessment for the second period is governed by the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953. The provisions of the Ordinance, in so far as they are relevant for the purpose of disposing of these petitions, have been reproduced verbatim in the 1953 Act; and the Bombay Sales Tax Rules, 1952, were continued in force by section 49 of the Act of 1953. Therefore, it is unnecessary to refer separately to the provisions of the Ordinance and the Rules made thereunder and the provisions of the Act of 1953 and the Rules...
Madhav Nanaji Gore Vs. Badrinarayan Mohanlal
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-12-1957
Reported in: (1957)59BOMLR1026
Shelat, J.1. This application by a judgment-debtor raises a somewhat important question of construction, A decree was passed on December 31, 1953, whereunder the petitioner was directed to pay a sum of Rs. 22,684 to the decree-holders. Before the decree was passed and while the suit was still pending, the plaintiff applied for an order of attachment before judgment and that order was granted. Under that order certain lands belonging to the judgment-debtor were attached. The order for attachment before judgment was thereafter confirmed and continued after the passing of the decree. The decree-holders thereafter filed an application to recover the decretal amount by sale of the lands attached. The trial Court passed an order directing that the property attached should be sold and a proclamation for the sale thereof should be issued.2. The petitioner filed an application in the Court of the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ahmednagar, contending that the Bombay Prevention of Fragment...
Dadarao Shegoji Tidke Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-11-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Bom204; (1957)59BOMLR1236; ILR1958Bom343
1. This is an appeal under the Letters Patent from an order of Mr. Justice Bhutt, in Miscellaneous Petition No. 252 of 1954, dismissing the appellant's Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. 2. The appellant was a probationary Naito Tahsildar in the service of the State of Madhya Pradesh. On 29-2-1955 he was served with a copy of certain charges against him and was asked to show cause why disciplinary action should not be taken against him. He submitted his explanation in writing and he also asked for a hearing in person. 3. A departmental enquiry was then held against the appellant by the Deputy Commissioner, Amraoti. During the course of that enquiry, the appellant asked for inspection of certain records to which reference had been made in the charge sheet. He was allowed inspection of all the records except two. Further according to him, he was not given a hearing in person even though he had asked for and was entitled to it under Rule 55 of the Civil Services (Classificati...
N.J. Chavan and ors. Vs. P.D. Sawarkar and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-10-1957
Reported in: AIR1958Bom133; (1957)59BOMLR993; ILR1958Bom209
Tendolkar, J. 1. This petition raises an important question of law relating to industrial relations. The petitioners before us were employed in the Nishat Talkies, Poona. These Talkies were started about 15 years ago and were originally owned by one Mr. Kakde. Kakde sold it to one Mr. Bhole. Mr. Bhole could not pay the whole of the purchase price and he therefore mortgaged it to Kakde. Upon this mortgage Kakde obtained a decree for the sale of the mortgaged property. There was also a mortgage held by the Bank of Maharashtra on the same property and the Bank obtained a decree against both Kakde and Bhole. The property was sold in execution of the decree and Kakde purchased the property at the auction. The Bank filed an execution application against the judgment-debtors and got one Shri Gowaikar appointed a Receiver. The Receiver took possession on the 22nd of February, 1954. On the 11th of October, 1954 one Sapal M. Tata entered into an agreement with the Receiver for the supply of film...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »