Mumbai Court November 1964 Judgments
Madhya Pradesh State Co-operative Bank Ltd., Jabalpur Vs. P.D. Dalal
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-30-1964
Reported in: AIR1967Bom279; (1966)68BOMLR500
(1) This is an appeal by way of a Judges' Summons taken out by Madhya Pradesh State Co-operative Bank Ltd. (Hereinafter referred to as 'the Co-operative Bank') against the Official Liquidator as Liquidator of the Laxmi Bank Ltd. (in Liquidation), praying that the Co-operative Bank be declared as' a preferential creditor with a trust claim of Rs. 11,031.87' against the Laxmi Bank and that the decision of the Official Liquidator disallowing the claim as a trust claim be modified.(2) The Co-operative Bank had at all material times a Pay Office at Harda and a branch at Betulganj but no office or Branch in Bombay. The Laxmi Bank at all material times had Branches at Yeotmal, Khandwa, Chhindwara and Bombay.(3) On the 17th May 1960 the Co-operative Bank's Pay Office at Harda sent to the Laxmi Bank's Branch at Yeotmal a Bill for Rs. 5,000/- for collection at Yeotmal with instructions inter alia, 'to remit the proceeds by Demand Draft on Bombay'. The Laxmi Bank's Yeotmal Branch collected the pr...
Tag this Judgment!Gangabai Tokarsy Vs. Gaurishankar Chhintarmal Gupta
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-27-1964
Reported in: AIR1966Bom34; (1965)67BOMLR231; ILR1965Bom895
Patel, J.(1) The present application arises out of suit filed by the a petitioners against the Respondent for eviction on three grounds - (a) arrears of rent for more than six months, (2) alterations in the premises without the permission of the landlord and (3)- for non = payment of water charges. The case is governed by the Bombay Rent Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act 1947 to which we will refer as the Rent Act. The Defendants - Opponent resisted the eviction and one of the contentions was that the notice to quit was bad in law. The learned trial judge dismissed the suit holding that the notice was bad in law. He also rejected the other contentions of the plaintiff. The plaintiff appealed under S,. 29 of the Act. The learned appealed under S. 29 of under O. 41 R. 11 of the civil Procedure Code Summarily without assigning any reasons whatsoever for rejecting the appeal. This revision application comes before the against this order.(2) It is very regrettable that a revision ap...
Tag this Judgment!The Society of Servants of God Vs. Major Hanmantrao Narayanrao Jagtap
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-26-1964
Reported in: (1965)67BOMLR210
V.S. Desai, J.1. The petitioners, who are the plaintiffs in the trial Court, filed Civil Suit No. 3500 of 1963 in the- Small Causes Court at Poona for a declaration against respondent No. 1 that the petitioners are the lawfully protected sub-tenants of the suit property and for a further injunction that respondent No. 1 be restrained from executing the decree for eviction, which he had obtained against respondent No. 2, who was the tenant of respondent No. 1. The petitioners valued the claim in suit at Rs. 300 and paid a Court-fee stamp of Bs. 30 on the plaint. Respondent No. 1 by his application exh. 10 complained that the valuation made by the plaintiffs for the purpose of Court-fees and jurisdiction was wrong and the Court-fees paid by the plaintiffs on. the plaint was not proper. It was prayed by respondent No. 1 in the said application that the Court should make an enquiry with regard to the valuation of the subject-matter of the suit for the purposes of Court-fees and jurisdictio...
Tag this Judgment!Aninha D'Costa Vs. Parvatibai M. Thakur
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-25-1964
Reported in: AIR1966Bom113; (1965)67BOMLR452; ILR1965Bom873; 1966MhLJ74
Patel, J. (1) This is an appeal by the defendant who has failed in both the courts is a suit which arose out the occupation of the suit premises by the defendants apparently as licensee. The plaintiff is the owner of the flat in suit situate in the Churchgate Co - operative Housing Society Ltd. On the 15th of the November 1959, the defendants was let in the possession of the her agreeing to execute a document of leave and license and the document was actually executed between the parties on the 6th November 1959. The documents is at exhibit a. It purported to be for a period of 11 months. In terms of the document an attempt was made to obtain forcible possession without resort to court, but the plaintiff did nonsuccess, with the result that the present suit was filed in the city civil court at the Bombay as short causes suit for recovery of the possession from the defendants on the basis of that the license was ended to terminated. The relieves claimed were endear to the terminated. Th...
Tag this Judgment!Kala Bhika Baria Vs. the State
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-16-1964
Reported in: AIR1966Bom13; (1965)67BOMLR223; 1966CriLJ7; ILR1965Bom519
ORDER(1) This is revision application against the order of the learned presidency Magistrate - 25th Court. Girgaon Bombay convicting the petitioner - accursed for having committed an offence under S. 336 I.P.C. and sentencing him to pay a fine of Rs. 10 or in default to suffer S .I. For two days. The prosecution case is that the complainant Gangram Babu worked as a driver of refuse van No. BMS 7622 on the 15th of August 1963. That was the day on which the Municipal workers in Bombay had been on strike the complainant who had apparently not jointed the strike had taken the van near the Maywadi vidalaya in a lane on the backside of Opera. House about 12 p.m. A police party consisting of 3 or 4 policemen accompanied the van for its protection. In the van there were 6 sweepers and one Mukadam for collecting reuse. At the place where the van was stationed the sweepers were collecting refuse and loading it in the van. The police party were in the police van which was standing at a distance o...
Tag this Judgment!Jamnadas and anr. Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax, Bombay and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-13-1964
Reported in: [1965]56ITR648(Bom); 1965MhLJ55
K.K. Desai, J.1. In this petition under article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners who are the joint executors appointed by the last will and testament dated April 8, 1959, of one Sohadradevi N. Daga, have challenged the validity of the Wealth-tax assessment order dated March 25, 1963, the notice of demand also dated March 25, 1963, and the revisional order passed by the Commissioner of Wealth-tax dated September 13, 1963. 2. The main contention of the petitioners is that there is no provision in the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (27 of 1957), entitling the revenue to charge, assess and recover wealth-tax in respect of the wealth left by a deceased person from after the financial year next to the financial year in which such person dies. The relevant facts are as follows : Smt. Sohadradevi N. Daga died on October 5, 1959, prior thereto executing her last will dated April 8, 1959. The petitioners are the joint executors appointed under that will. The deceased left a large estate amounting ...
Tag this Judgment!Nagpur Hotel Owner's Association and Ors. Vs. State of Maharshtra and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-10-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Bom169; (1965)67BOMLR206; ILR1965Bom387; (1965)IILLJ482Bom; 1965MhLJ429
Paranjpe, J.(1) In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioners have prayed that two notifications under the Minimum Wages Act, as locally amended, should be quashed.(2) Acting under section 3 read with section 5(2) of the Minimum Wages Act, the State of Maharashtra issued a notification on the 9th of September 1963 whereby the minimum wages for skilled, semi-skilled and unskilled labourers employed in residential hotels, restaurant or eating house were fixed. On the 1st of October 1963, the State Government issued another notification under section 30(2)(c) of the Minimum Wages Act for determining the computation of the cash value of the wages which are permitted to be paid in kind to these works. The petitioner No. 1 is the Nagpur Hotel Owners' Association and the petitioners No. 2 and 3 are owners of hotels which are run at Nagpur. These three petitioners contend that the said notifications are ultra vires of the powers vested in the Government and, therefore...
Tag this Judgment!The Life Insurance Corporation of India Vs. the Bombay Municipal Corpo ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-10-1964
Reported in: AIR1965Bom263; (1965)67BOMLR202; ILR1965Bom512
Patel, J.(1) This appeal is brought by the Life Insurance Corporation of India who will be referred to as the Corporation against the judgment of the chief Judge of the small Causes Court, Bombay in a Valuation matter under the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act of 1888. Before the learned Judge there were several appellants and the questions that arose were common. The Corporation owns the Indian Globe Chambers at the junction of Hornby Road and Mangesh Shenoy street. It is occupied by the tenants of the Corporation. The rateable value for the years 1957-58 and 1958-59 was fixed by the Municipal Corporation at Rs.1,66,410/- In 1958 from the 1st April, an additional tax known as educational cess came to be imposed at 1 1/2 percent on the annual letting value. For the year 1959, therefore, an notice was sent to the Corporation of an increase in the rateable value from 1,66,410/- to Rs.1,68,585/-, This included the amount of permitted increase under the Rent Act which could be transferred ...
Tag this Judgment!Naresh Shridhar Mirajkar Vs. His Lordship the Honourable Mr. Justice T ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Nov-09-1964
Reported in: (1965)67BOMLR214; 1965MhLJ414
Kotval, J.1. Pursuant to the order passed by a Division Bench on October 28, 1964, we have heard the Advocate General amicus curiae on the question of competency and the jurisdiction of this Court to issue a rule or writ in the instant ease. This matter was originally presented to this Court as an appeal but it appear a that at the said hearing before Mody and Gokhale JJ., the memorandum of appeal was amended, and the petitioner now seeks to invoke our constitutional powers under Article 226. Though this is a matter which is merely placed before us for admission, it is necessary to pass a full order and indicate our reasons because it involves an important point and counsel were heard at length.2. The plaint in pending suit No. 319 of 1960 was presented on the Original-Side of this Court some time in 1960. In that suit, Krishnaraj M.D. Thac-kersey has claimed damages of Rs. 3,00,000 for publication of an alleged malicious libel in the weekly journal 'Blitz' from its editor and publishe...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›