Mumbai Court March 1965 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.
ishwara Bhau Sawant Vs. Pandurang Vasudeo Karmarkar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-19-1965
Reported in: (1965)67BOMLR558; 1965MhLJ893
H.K. Chainani, C.J.1. These two applications have been heard together as they raise a common question of law. The first application No. 1199 of 1964 relates to two lands, which originally belonged to one Pandurang and his two brothers Waman and Vinayak. In 1931 they mortgaged these lands by an ostensible sale-deed to Maruti Sawant alias Rede. The petitioners are the heirs and successors of Maruti. In 1951 Pandurang filed a suit for a declaration that the transaction of 1931 was really a mortgage and for taking accounts under, the Deccan Agriculturists Relief Act. A declaration was made in that suit in 1951 that the transaction was a mortgage and that the amount due on the mortgage was Rs. 2,800. This decision was confirmed in appeal by the District Judge. In 1956 Pandurang filed a suit for redemption of the mortgage and for obtaining possession of the lands. The petitioners contended in that suit that as they were lawfully cultivating1 the lands, under Section 2A of the Bombay Tenancy ...
The Lasalgaon Merchants Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs. Prabhudas Hathibhai ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-16-1965
Reported in: AIR1966Bom134; (1965)67BOMLR823; ILR1966Bom526
1. The suit giving rise to this appeal was filed by the plaintiff against ten defendants for recovery of a sum of the Rs. 3, 455-1-0 in the following circumstances. The plaintiff is the Lasalgaon Merchants Co-operative Bank Ltd., Lasalgaon Defendants Nos 1 and 2 were the constituents of the Bank should make advances to defendants Nos 1 and 2 on the security of agricultural produce such as grounds dnuts, jaggery. Tobacco etc. This agreements took place on 20th November 1952. The plaintiff was to make advances to defendants Nos 1 and 2 up to sixty at Rs. 5,000 certain advances were made the basis on this agreement. On 16th November 1953 the agreement was renewed and was to remain in force till 30th September 1954. In about December 1953 defendants No.1, which is the firm of which defendants No.2 is partner fir owner of the dues Defendants Nos 1 and 2 had kept certain packages tobacco in their own go down and handed over the key of he same to the plaintiff, thus giving the property in pos...
Seksaria Cotton Mills Ltd. Vs. A.E. Naik and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-15-1965
Reported in: [1967]37CompCas656(Bom)
1. This petition involves a question of some complexity relating to the scope and effect of section 391 of the Companies Act,1956. 2. The petitioners are a public limited company carrying on the business of manufacturing textiles. They will be referred to hereafter as the company. By 1958 the company had suffered huge losses and incurred large debts. A petition for winding up was filed in this court on 28th April,1958, and on the same day an order to wind up the company was passed. The official liquidator was appointed liquidator of the company. He took possession of all the company's properties and records. 3. Prior to the winding-up order, the company has submitted sales tax returns from time to time for the period between 1952 and 1958, and had also paid the amounts of sales tax that were due according to those returns. No assessment orders were, however, passed by the Sales Tax officer concerned. 4. After the winding-up order, the Sales Tax officer sent a letter, dated 8th August, ...
Sakinabi and ors. Vs. Salebhai Hasanali Engineer
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-15-1965
Reported in: AIR1967Bom9; (1965)67BOMLR571; ILR1966Bom100
K.K. Desai, J.(1) This is a revisional application be heirs and legal representatives of one Damji Lavji Damani, being the original Rspondent, hereinafter referred to as 'the licensee', in the ejectment Application No, 98/1232/E of 1960 filed by the Opponent (Original Applicant), hereinafter referred to as 'the licensor', in the Court of Small Causes at Bombay under Section 41 in Chapter VII of the Presidency Small Cause Courts Act, seeking to eject the licensee from the premises mentioned in the application. The licensee died intestate at Bombay on May 31, 1962, leaving him surviving as his only heirs and legal representatives the petitioners in this revisional application. By his application dated November 12, 1962, the licensor applied to the Court of Small Causes to set aside the abatement of his application and to condone delay in the making of the application and bring on the record of the ejectment application the names of the above petitioners as Defendants 1 to 8 as legal repr...
State Vs. Bhalchandra Waman Pethe
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-11-1965
Reported in: AIR1966Bom122; (1965)67BOMLR472; 1966CriLJ400
(1) The accused in this case was convicted under S. 304-A and S. 337 of the Indian Penal code and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000 and Rs. 200 in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment of six months and two months on each of these counts respectively. As it was felt that the sentences was inadequate, the case was directed to the be placed before the court dealing with criminal matter when the court a notice enhancement was issued by Palerkar, j. (2) On 15th February 1964., the accused was driving his motor car on the Marine Drive, now known as Netaji Subhash Road, from North to south. At abort 5 - 30 P.m. that day Kunda the deceased who aged about twenty = one years, and her younger sister, about Vidya, aged about ten were crossing, it is said the pedestrian crossing near 'B' Road, Churchgate, at which the accused car knocked of this kunda died and the vidya received some injuries. (3) There is a pedestrian crossing situated at the junction of 'B' Road and Netaji Subhash Road. The...
Dattu Bala Nikam Vs. Vinayakrao Shripatrao Patwardhan
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-11-1965
Reported in: (1965)67BOMLR465; 1965MhLJ625
H.K. Chainani, C.J.1. The petitioner's father was a tenant of two lands belonging to opponents Nos. 1 and 2 (hereinafter referred to as the opponents). As there were defaults in the payment of rent for the years 1951-52, 1952-53 and 1953-54, the opponents gave a notice terminating- the tenancy on December 27, 1954. This notice was served on the petitioner's father on December 29, 1954. It appears that there were further defaults in the payment of rent for the years 1954-55 and 1955-56. On March 23, 1957, the opponents made an application under Section 29 of the Tenancy Act for obtaining possession of the lands. The petitioner's father died during the pendency of the proceedings and the petitioner was brought on record as his heir. The Additional Tenancy Awal Karkun who heard the application came to the conclusion that there had been defaults for more than three yeans. He, therefore, directed that possession of the lands should be restored to the opponents. This order has been confirmed...
Maruti Gurappa and anr. Vs. Krishna Bala and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-11-1965
Reported in: AIR1967Bom34; (1965)67BOMLR767; ILR1966Bom291
(1) This appeal raises an interesting question of law namely whether the person who has obtained property on the basis of a contract of sale can maintain a suit against an auction purchaser of the same property. The material facts briefly stated are as follows;(2) The suit property (i.e survey Nos. 162 and 177) (half share) originally belonged to defendant No. 3 and two others. On 12-4-1949 defendant No. 3 and two others entered into an agreement for selling the said property to the plaintiff for a sum of Rs. 1,600/- Part of the sale price i.e. Rs. 585/- was paid on the date of agreement and the plaintiff was put in possession of the property. In the month of May, 1949, defendant No. 2 obtained a decree against defendant No. 3 In execution of the said decree, the land in suit was sold in auction and purchased by Deft. No. 1, Deft. No. 1 started proceedings for recovering possession of the property on the basis of the sale certificate. The plaintiff obstructed the delivery of possession...
Queen's Chemists Mfg. Department Vs. G. Koruthu and Anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-10-1965
Reported in: AIR1967Bom338; (1966)68BOMLR597
1. This petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution to challenge the validity of an order passed by the Collector of Central Excise Bombay, who is the first respondent to this petition, under the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The petitioners are a firm engaged in the manufacture of pharmaceutical products, including an ointment known as 'Grams Cutter' and a balm known as 'Queen's balm'. Their factory is situated at Tardeo in Bombay. By the Finance Act of 1961 an item was included in the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act. 1944. by which an valorem duty of 10 per cent, was imposed on certain types of patent and proprietary medicinal preparations. It is not disputed that the petitioner's said products, viz. Germs cutter and Queen's balm, were thus subjected to an ad valorem duty of 10 per cent. under the Central Excises and Salt Act 1944. The manner in which the value of the products is to be ascertained for the determination of the duty is laid do...
Kisan Bhaguji Burkle Vs. the Collector
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-10-1965
Reported in: (1965)67BOMLR715; 1965MhLJ681
Kotval, J.1. As the question arising in this petition is said to be a question which also arises in other petitions, we have heard M/s. Masodkar and Kukday as Intervenes, as they are interested in Special Civil Application No. 222/65 and Special Civil Application No. 77/65 in addition to Mr. Palshikar for the petitioner. The short question that arises for determination is as to the effect of Ordinance No. V of 1964 promulgated by the Governor of Maharashtra and Maharashtra Act No. XLII of 1964, These laws were passed in order to stay general elections of Municipalities in Maharashtra State and for making consequential provisions and the question that has to be determined is, what is the effect of their provisions so far as the office of President of a municipality is concerned.2. In the present petition, the facts in brief are as follows. We are concerned with the Nandura Municipal Committee. The general elections to that Municipal Committee were held in July 1959 and the notification ...
State Vs. Ismail Alisaheb Awate
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Mar-09-1965
Reported in: AIR1966Bom119; (1965)67BOMLR569; 1966CriLJ399; ILR1966Bom72
ORDER(1) This reference is made by the II Additional session of Judge, sholapur, recommending that the conviction of the accused under S. 123 of read with S. 42 (1) of the Motor vehicles Act and sentence of fine imposed upon him be set aside.(2) The accused was in charge of the private of motor car bearing No. BYE 2717. On 30-8-1963 has was driving it from Sholapur to pandharpur with passengers on hire. There were eight passengers in the motor car at the time and the evidence shoed that they were charged Rs. 2.20 per head per trip. He was therefore prosecuted under S. 123 of read with 42 (1) of the Motor Vehicles Act. The learned trial additional session judge recommends that this conviction of the sentence of bet set aside.(3) Two points were urged before the learned trial Magistrate, one was that is was only the owner of the vehicle who was liable only the and not the driver, and secondly in the any event of car, no motor car in the question was the a private of car on permits would ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »