Mumbai Court August 1963 Judgments
Hasan Nurani Malak Vs. S.M. Ismail
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-09-1963
Reported in: (1963)65BOMLR873; 1964MhLJ71
Tambe, J.1. This is a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for the issue of a Writ of certiorari, or any other order or direction for quashing the order of the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Nagpur, respondent No. 1, made on September 6, 1962, wherein he has held that he has jurisdiction to enquire into an application made by respondents Nos. 2 to 5 under Section 19 of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950, hereinafter referred to as the new Act.2. The question that arises for consideration is whether the Assistant Charity Commissioner had jurisdiction to decide this application under Section 19 of the Bombay Act or whether the previous decision made by the Registrar under the Madhya Pradesh Public Trusts Act (Act XXX of 1951), holding that this particular trust is not a public trust takes away the jurisdiction of the Charity Commissioner to hold an enquiry under Section 19 of the Bombay Act in respect of the same trust? The question arises thus:3. The petitio...
Tag this Judgment!Abdulla Alimohamed and anr. Vs. Union of India, Through the Secretary ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-07-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Bom241; (1964)66BOMLR38; 1964MhLJ197
1. The suit giving rise to this appeal was filed by the appellants (who will hereafter be called the plaintiffs) against the Union of India, the Custodian of Evacuee Property and the Regional Settlement Commissioner (who will hereafter be called the defendants) for a declaration that the plaintiffs continued to be the tenants of two shop premises and for possession of the said shop premises, The facts underlying this litigation may be briefly stated as follows: The plaintiffs were carrying on business as partners in two shops; (1) M/s, M. Gani and Co., Mahomedali Road, Bombay, and (2) M/s. London Stores, Bori Bunder, Bombay. They were occupying the premises as tenants. On 15-6-1950 the Deputy Custodian of Evacuee Property issued a show cause notice in the joint names of the plaintiffs calling upon them to show cause as to why they should not be declared as evacuees and their property as evacuee property under Section 2(d)(i) of the Administration of Evacuee Property Act, 1950 (hereinaf...
Tag this Judgment!National Machinery Manufacturers Ltd. Vs. P.D. Vyas and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-06-1963
Reported in: AIR1964Bom184; (1964)66BOMLR169; 1964MhLJ331
Paul, J.1. This appeal is against the order of Mr. Justice Mody dismissing the Petitioner's Petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution.2. The short facts are that respondent No. 2 was employed as a watchman with the Petitioner Company. On 5th December 1959 he was charge-sheeted for an alleged misconduct, i.e. theft, fraud or dishonesty in connection with company's business or properly. The enquiry was proceeded with but thereafter on 2nd of January 1960 the charge sheet was cancelled and on 3rd January 1960 his services were terminated under Standing Order 21 (1) on the ground of loss of confidence with effect from that date. At this time, a dispute was pending before the Industrial Tribunal Bombay, between the workmen on the one hand and the Company on the other. Respondent No. 2 feeling himself aggrieved by this order, made a complaint to the Industrial Tribunal under Section 33A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, alleging that his services were terminated in breach o...
Tag this Judgment!State of Maharashtra Vs. Vijaysingh Dinkarrao Rajurkar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-02-1963
Reported in: (1964)66BOMLR42; 1964MhLJ273
Abhyankar, J.1. This order will govern the disposal of both these matters.2. Criminal Appeal No. 234 of 1962 filed by the State is against the order of acquittal of the respondent Shri Vijaysingh Rajurkar by the Sessions Judge, Akola, in respect of the offence under Section 66(1)(b) of the Bombay Prohibition Act in Criminal Appeal No. 117 of 1962. Criminal Revision Application No. 224 of 1962 is filed by accused Vijaysingh against his conviction under Section 85(1)(1), (2) and (3) of the Bombay Prohibition Act and sentence of 7 days' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 25 or in default rigorous imprisonment for 7 days more, passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, and confirmed by the Sessions Judge, Akola, in the above appeal.3. The accused Vijaysingh was charge-sheeted before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Akola, on the allegation, that the accused along with one Namdeo Shinde, was found to have consumed liquor and in a state of intoxication in ii public place and u...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›