Mumbai Court April 1961 Judgments
State Vs. Shantaram Govind Dolas
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-29-1961
Reported in: (1962)IILLJ328Bom
Per Badkas, J.1. Respondent Shantaram Govind Dolas has been acquitted by the Chief Presidency Magistrate, Bombay, of the offence under S. 22A of the Bombay Minimum Wages Act (Act 30 of 1957) read with rules 22, 26(1), 26(5), 26A and 26B of the Bombay Minimum Wages Rules, 1951. The State has filed this appeal against the said acquittal. 2. The accused has got a bidi shop. The premises of the accused were visited on 4 March, 1959 by the complainant, Minimum Wages Act inspector, Bombay. The premises were found to be manufactory for manufacturing bidis. The complainant found at the time of the visit seven workers, whose names have been mentioned in the complainant, and that they were preparing bidis for the accused. The manufacturing process was being carried on under the supervisions of one Gajanan Mahadeo Satvilkar who appears to be a manger for looking after the preparation of bidis on behalf of the accused. The complainant, who is a Government labour officer and also an inspector under...
Tag this Judgment!Nilkantha Sidramappa Ningashetti Vs. Kashinath Somanna Ningashetti
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-28-1961
Reported in: (1962)64BOMLR412
Raghubar Dayal, J.1. This is an appeal on certificate under Article 133(1)(c) of the Constitution, granted by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay.2. A suit for partition was filed against, defendants Nos. 1 to 10 and 12, members of a joint family. Defendant No. 1 was father of the appellant, who was then a minor, defendant No. 12. Defendant No. 11 was an outsider, he being a partner in the partnership shop of the family. Parties other than defendant No. 11 referred the matters in difference to an arbitrator. The arbitrator filed the, award in Court on February 18, 1948. On February 21, 1948, the Civil Judge adjourned the matter 'for parties' say to the arbitrator's report', to March 22, 1948. On March 16, 1948, an application was presented on behalf of defendant No. 1 praying that certain papers and documents be called for from the arbitrator. On March 22, 1948, an application was presented on behalf of defendant No. 1 praying for fifteen days' time for going through the papers and ...
Tag this Judgment!Consolidated Foods Corporation Vs. Brandon and Company Private Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-26-1961
Reported in: AIR1965Bom35; (1964)66BOMLR612
(1) This is a petition by way of appeal filed by consolidated Foods Corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Mary land in the United States of America and having its principal place of business at San Francisco, California, against the order and judgment of Mr. C.D.V. Raman, the Joint Registrar of Trade Marks, Bombay, dismissing its oppositions to the three applications being application No. 178155, application No. 178158 and application No. 178159 filed by the respondents Messrs. Brandon and Co. Private Limited for registration of the mark 'Monarch' in respect of certain fruits and vegetables preparations.(2) On 23rd January 1957, the respondent company filed the three applications aforesaid for registration of the mark consisting of the word 'Monarch' (per se) in classes 29, 30 and 32 respectively. Application No. 178155 was in respect of 'preserved, dried, and cooked fruits and vegetables; jellies and jams, preserves and pickles, ' all being goods included in Class 29...
Tag this Judgment!The City of Nagpur Corporation Vs. Bhalchandra Ramrao Sonone
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-25-1961
Reported in: (1961)63BOMLR765
Abhyankar, J.1. This judgment will also dispose of Civil Revision Applications Nos. 57, 58, 93, 194, 195, 199, 202, 210, 221, 222, 237, 238 and 242, all of 1960. All these revision applications are filed by the Corporation of the City of Nagpur through the Municipal Commissioner, against the opponents in each case who are landlords and owners of certain premises within the Corporation area of the City of Nagpur. The revision application in each case is directed against the appellate order of the Extra Assistant Judge, Nagpur, by which the appellate Judge set aside the orders of the Objection Officer in respect of assessment of property tax leviable under Section 114(1) (a) of the City of Nagpur Corporation Act, 1948. , The Objection Officer in each case determined the objections of the opponents and passed orders on such objection in exercise of the powers under Section 129(3) of the Corporation Act. Against such orders an appeal is provided under Section 130 of the Act and such appeal...
Tag this Judgment!Janardhan Chaitu Khapre Vs. Guna Balkrishna and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-22-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Bom33; (1961)63BOMLR717; ILR1961Bom989
ORDER(1) This revision application was filed by Janardan who was a complainant in the trial Court. He complained of an offence under section 494, Indian Penal Code, read with section 17 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The complainant is the father of one Chandrabhaga who is a minor girl. Chandrabhaga is alleged to have been married to opponent Guna while she was a minor, in about 1953. The complaint was that in spite of a valid marriage subsisting between Chandrabhaga and Guna, Guna again married opponent No. 2 Milibai. The marriage was alleged to have been brought about by parents of Guna, one of whom i.e., father Balkrishna is opponent No. 3 in this Court. Opponent No. 4 Laxman in this Court is the father of Milibai who is alleged to have contracted the second marriage with opponent Guna. As many as 10 persons were impleaded as accused in the original complaint. The complaint was filed by Janardan before the First Class Magistrate, Saoner, and was presented on 25-7-1957. In paragraph 10 o...
Tag this Judgment!Shah Bhojraj Kuverji Oil Mills and Ginning Factory Vs. Subbash Chandra ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-21-1961
Reported in: (1962)64BOMLR407
M. Hidayatullah, J.1. This is & tenants' appeal, with the special leave of this Court, against an order of Naik J. of the High Court of Bombay in Civil Revision Application No. 320 of 1959, by which he disallowed certain pleas raised by the appellants. The respondent is the landlord.2. On September 11, 1942, the appellants had executed a rent note, under which they were in occupation of the premises in dispute. The period of the tenancy was fifteen years, and it expired by efflux of time on March 14, 1957. The landlord thereupon filed a suit on April 25, 1957, for possession of the premises, in the Court of the Joint Civil Judge (Junior Division), Brandol. Meanwhile, under Section 6 of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947, (to be called the Act, in this judgment), a notification was issued, applying Part II of the Act to the area where the property is situated. The appellants claimed protection of Section 12 in Part II of the Act, which deprived the landlor...
Tag this Judgment!National Machinery Manufacturers, Ltd. Vs. Vyas (P.D.) and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-20-1961
Reported in: (1961)IILLJ274Bom
Mody, J.1. This is a petition for a writ of certiorari or a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction or order under Article 226 of the Constitution against respondent who is the industrial tribunal under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), calling for the records of the case relating to the award dated 25 August 1960 and for quashing the said award. The-petitioner is a company which manufactures machinery required for the textile Industry. Respondent 2 was in the employment of the petitioner as a watchman ac the petitioner's factory.2. On or about 5 December 1959 the petitioner served upon respondent 2 a chargesheet charging him with misconduct under model standing Order 22(d) which reads as follows:theft, fraud or dishonesty in connexion with the employer's business or property.The works manager of the petitioner, one J. W. Small, thereafter held an inquiry in respect of the said charge against respondent 2. The...
Tag this Judgment!Bashir Oil Mills Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-19-1961
Reported in: (1961)63BOMLR751
Abhyankar, J.1. This judgment will dispose of Criminal Revision Applications Nos. 596, 601 and 613 of 1960.2. Criminal Revision Application No. 596 of 1960 is filed by Bashir Oil Mills through their proprietor Abbas Kasam Haji Dada who was prosecuted in Criminal Case No. 45 of 1959 in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Warora, and convicted on May 31, 1960, of a breach of bye-law No. 1 read with bye law No. 7 framed by the Warora Municipal Committee in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 178(5), under Clause (cc) of Sub-section (1) of Section 179 read with Clause (e) of Sub-section (1) and Sub-section (3) of Section 133 of the C. P. and Berar Municipalities Act, 1922. The conviction was confirmed by the Sessions Judge, Chanda, in Criminal Revision No. 25 of 1960 decided on October 8, 1960.3. Criminal Revision Application No. 601 of 1960 is filed by Ramakant Oil Mill, through its proprietor Bapurao Vithoba Padamawar against conviction of a similar offence in Crimi...
Tag this Judgment!Tatya Lagamanna Desai and ors. Vs. Yogabai
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-19-1961
Reported in: AIR1962Bom191; (1961)63BOMLR975; ILR1961Bom977
(1) Survey No. 110 situate at Takli originally belonged to one Girgouda Rayagonda Patil. On 5-3-1924,. Girgouda executed a simple mortgage in respect of the said land in favour of one Appaji Payangonda Patil. Appaji Payangonda Patil will hereafter be described as the first mortgagee. Thereafter, Girgouda executed a possessory mortgage in respect of the same land, first on 2-7-1924 and later on 26-11-1928, in favour of Yogabai, the present plaintiff. Yogabai will hereafter be described as the second mortgagee.(2) The first mortgagee's son Babagouda instituted suit No. 276 of 1931 against the mortgagor for recovery of the mortgage money due under the mortgaged property. To this suit the second mortgagee was not made a party. A final decree for sale of the mortgaged property in this suit was passed on 18th June 1933.(3) The second mortgagee filed a similar suit being suit No. 718 of 1931 against her mortgagor. Although her mortgages were possessory mortgages, it appears that she was entit...
Tag this Judgment!Municipal Corporation of the City of Poona Vs. Dattatraya Nagesh Deodh ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Apr-19-1961
Reported in: (1962)64BOMLR29
Gokhale, J.1. [His Lordship after setting out the facts, proceeded.] Mr. Gokhale has argued that since the matter was one of considerable importance to the Corporation, we should give our decision on both the points raised by him. We shall, therefore, first deal with the question of the alleged breach of the provisions of Standing Order No. 13(1) and then deal with the question as to the maintainability of the suit.2. In order to examine the rival contentions regarding the refund of octroi and the procedure to be followed in connection with the same, it is necessary to refer to some of the relevant provisions of the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporations Act, 1949, to be hereafter referred to as the Act. Under Section 2(42), 'octroi' has been defined as a cess on the entry of goods into the limits of city for consumption, use or sale therein. Chapter XI of the Act deals with the subject of municipal taxation and amongst the several taxes which the Corporation can impose under the Act...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »