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.
Kashiram Kadtu Burkule Vs. Rajaram Daulat Korde
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-02-1957
Reported in: (1957)59BOMLR1073
J.C. Shah, J.1. This second appeal raises a question of limitation. One Kashiram filed Civil Suit No. 96-A of 1941 in the Court of the Second Subordinate Judge, Class II, Khamgaon, to enforce a mortgage executed by one Saburabai in respect of fields S. Nos. 2/2 and 1/1 Mouza Pimpri Korde, taluq Khamgaon. The suit was filed against the heirs and legal representatives of Saburabai, Saburabai having died before the institution of the suit. A preliminary mortgage decree was passed in 'the suit. Thereafter there was a compromise between Kashiram and the mortgagors. Pursuant to the terms of the compromise the mortgagors executed a sale deed of the mortgaged land in favour of Kashiram on June 28, 1941, for a consideration of Rs. 799. Kashiram being unable to obtain possession of the land, he filed Civil Suit No. 64-A of 1942 against one Baliramsa for possession of the land. The suit was dis-missed by the trial Court, but it was decreed in appeal by the Nagpur High Court on October 22, 1948. I...
Damodhar Bapuji Karekar Vs. Bombay Revenue Tribunal
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-02-1957
Reported in: (1958)60BOMLR69
Mudholkar, J.1. This order will govern Miscellaneous Petitions Nos. 512 of 1955, 75 of 1956 and 105 of 1956.2. The common question involved in all these petitions tinder Article 226 of the Constitution is whether an order made by a revenue officer rejecting an application of an ex-proprietor made under Rule 1 of the Rules for the reservation of land to ex-proprietors recorded as Bir, Chhota ghas, etc. vesting in the State, framed under Section 91(1) of the Madhya Pradesh Abolition of Proprietary Rights Act, 1950, is appealable before the Board of Revenue under Section 84 of the Madhya Pradesh Abolition Act.3. In Gulab Bai v. State (1955) N.L.J. 624 the Madhya Pradesh Board of Revenue took the view that no appeal lay to it on the ground that the rules aforementioned could not have been framed under Section 91(1) of the Madhya Pradesh Abolition of Proprietary Eights Act, that they have no force of law but amount only to executive instructions and that, therefore, the order made under tho...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›