Mumbai Court October 1967 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.
In the Matter Of: Seksaria Cotton Mills Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-31-1967
Reported in: [1969]39CompCas47(Bom)
Vimadalal, J.1. This is a petition for winding up the Seksaria Cotton Mills Ltd., inter alia, on the ground of non-compliance with the statutory notice that has been given by the petitioner under section 434(1)(a) of the Companies Act. Mr. Khambatta has sought to contend that the company is not commercially insolvent and that its financial position is not such as to be unable to pay its debts. The petitioner's debt is an undisputed debt and, as stated in Palmer's Company Law 20th edition, page 697, the court will not listen to such a deface where the debt is undisputed. In the judgment delivered by me in In re Advent Corporation Pvt. Ltd. [1969] 39 Com. Cas. 463 in Company Petition No. 80 of 1968 on 19th September, 1968. I have taken the view that once there is non-compliance with a statutory notice, and the court comes to the conclusion that there is no bona fide dispute in regard to the petitioner's debt, the creditor is entitled to a winding up order ex debito justitiae. This conten...
Sindhu-hochtief (India) (Private), Ltd. Vs. Pratap Dialdas and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-25-1967
Reported in: (1968)IILLJ515Bom
1. In pursuance of an order made by the Under Secretary, Ministry of Labour and Employment, Government of India, New Delhi dated 26 August, 1964, under Sub-section (3) of S. 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, the dispute arising out of the demands made by the workmen of the petitioner Sindhu Hochtief (India) (Private), Ltd., through their union - Kandla Port and Dock Mazdoor Sangh, Gandhidham, was referred to the sole arbitration of Sri Pratap Dialdas of Bombay. It appears that the workers' demand which was referred to the arbitration of Sri Pratap Dialdas was in respect of bonus for the years 1954-55, 1955-56 and 1956-57 and till the date of the closing down of the establishment of the petitioner. The arbitrator made and published his award on 2 November, 1964. While giving his award in respect of the demand for bonus for the said years made by the workers, the learned arbitrator also gave directions as regards the manner in which the distribution of bonus awarded was to be effected a...
Central Bank Executor and Trustee Co. Ltd. Vs. Hormusji Nusserwanji Ma ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-25-1967
Reported in: AIR1969Bom101; (1968)70BOMLR568; 1968MhLJ750
ORDER1. This is an Originating summons taken out by the plaintiff-Co. which is the present Trustee of the Deed of Settlement executed by one Maneckji Ratanji Bharucha on 22nd April 1942 for the determination of certain questions that have been framed in it.2. By clause 2 of the said Deed of Settlement dated 22nd April 1942, the settlor provided that the net income of the trust estate was to be paid by the Trustees to himself for life. By clause 4 thereof, it was provided that from and after the death of the Settlor, the Trustees were to pay the net income to the Settlor's sister Banubai, if she be then living, for the term of her natural life. Clause 5 of the said Deed provided that, from and after the death of the said Banubai, or in ease she predeceased the Settlor then, on the death of the Settlor, the Trustees were to divide the Trust premises into two equal parts and hold them upon certain trusts thereafter specified. Clause 6 provided that one of those parts was to be held in tru...
Shashikalabai Vs. Returning Officer, Gram Panchayat Election, Umri and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-25-1967
Reported in: AIR1968Bom445; (1968)70BOMLR310; 1968MhLJ391
Abhyankar, J.1. This petition raises an interesting question about the election of members to a village panchayat from a constituency where a seat is reserved for women in addition to a general seat. In our opinion, the rules framed require immediate reconsideration to avoid certain anomalous results which may follow if the intention of the Legislature is not to be defeated by the rules as they are.2. The petitioner Shashikalabai was nominated as a candidate from Ward No. 3 of village Umri Mamdabad in Daryapur taluq of Amravati district. In the panchayat elections held in 1967 for Ward No. 3, which was a multi-member constituency, one seat was reserved as a general seat and another seat was reserved for women. In the nomination paper filed by Shashikalabai, the petitioner, which was in form A as prescribed by Rule 8 of the Bombay Village Panchayats Election Rules, 1959, there was nothing to indicate whether the petitioner's nomination or candidature was for the reserved seat or the gen...
In Re: Bhimji Nanji and Co.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-25-1967
Reported in: (1969)71BOMLR638
Tulzapurkar, J.1. This is a creditor's petition whereby an adjudication order is sought against the four debtors viz. (1) Bhimji Nanji & Co., a partnership firm, (2) Mauji Arjan Patel, (3) Bhimji Nanji Patel and (4) Manji Mauji Patel, the last three being partners of Bhimji Nanji & Co, The petitioning-creditor has alleged that on February 22, 1962, a sum of Rs. 5,000 was borrowed by the debtors with interest at 8 annas per cent, per mensem, that in respect of the said borrowing a Khata writing was passed by the said firm of Bhimji Nanji & Co. in her favour on the same date and that under the said writing the said amount together -with interest thereon at the agreed rate was payable after 3 months i.e. on May 21, 1962 or earlier, if demanded. The petitioning-creditor has further alleged that the aforesaid debt together with the interest aggregating to Rs. 5,433.33 had become due and payable by the debtors to her at the time of presenting the petition but was not paid inspite of repeated...
Chatusshakhiya Brahmavrinda Gayaran Trust and ors. Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-23-1967
Reported in: AIR1970Bom18
Chitale, J.1. This is a group of appeals preferred by the claimants, as well as by the Union of India against the decision of the learned Arbitrator appointed under the provisions of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, (Central Act No. XXX of 1952), awarding compensation for several lands that were acquired by the Union of India.2. The lands that are acquired are out Of Survey Nos. 35, 44, 45, 46, 51, 52, 55, 56,58. 61. 62. 73 and 118 at Wadala, Taluka and District Nasik. These lands were requisitioned under Rule 75(a) of the Defence of India Rules, 1959 by notifications issued on 12-1-1943, 8th February 1943, on 2nd December 1943 and on 20th April 1944 for military purposes. By a notification dated 24-8-1955 published in the Government Gazette on 8-9-1955, these lands were acquired under Section 7 of the abovementioned Act. The owners of these lands were informed about the amounts of compensation offered by the Union of India, as per Rule 9(3) of the Rules fr...
Executors of the Estate of Late J.J. Kapadia Vs. Commissioner of Incom ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-19-1967
Reported in: [1968]67ITR590(Bom)
V.S. Desai, J.1. The assessee are the executors of the estate of the late J. J. Kapadia, a prominent share and stock-broker and the questions which we have to consider on this reference, arise out of the assessment of the said J. J. Kapadia for the assessment year 1947-48 and 1948-49. In the year 1942, J. J. Kapadia, who had four sons and five daughters, executed nine trust deeds for the benefit of his nine children. Under each of the court trust deeds for the benefit of the sons he transferred shares, debentures and securities of the value of Rs. 1,52,000. Under the other trust deeds for the benefit of the five daughters he transferred debentures of the value of Rs. 30,000 under each trust making a total of Rs. 1,50,000 for the five daughter. There were five trustees appointed for each trust and all the five persons were the same in respect of all the trusts. J. J. Kapadia being himself one of the trustees. The terms of the trusts in favour of the sons were identical and so were the t...
Wamanrao Motiramji Masodkar Vs. Amrutlal Gulabchand and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-18-1967
Reported in: AIR1968Bom336; (1968)70BOMLR274; 1968CriLJ1227; 1968MhLJ217
Abhyankar, J.(1) This appeal raises an interesting question regarding interpretation of Rule 33 of the rules framed under the C. P. and Berar Agricultural Produce Market Act. 1935 (Act No. XXIX of 1935).(2) The appellant is an Inspector in the employment of the Grain Market Committee, Amravati, which has been duly constituted under the provisions of the C. P. and Berar Agricultural Produce Market Act, 1935, Section 3 of this Act enables the provincial Government to declare by a notification any place or market as a market for sale or purchase of agricultural produce. Every such notification has to define the limits of the market. Accordingly, a notification was issued on 27th October 1956 for defining the limits of the market under Agricultural Produce Market Act at Amravati. The market yard is the area included within the defined limits stated in this notification and the second paragraph of the notification says that the market proper shall include market yard and land and buildings ...
E.D. Sassoon and Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-15-1967
Reported in: [1968]70ITR561(Bom)
Kotval, C.J.1. The following five question have been referred for our decision in this reference made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. Bombay Bench 'A' under section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act, '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee-company is entitled to claim exemption under section 25(3) of the Act 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstance of the case, the loss suffered on the sale of property in Shanghi was allowable as a revenue deduction out of profits of the year 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee-company is entitled to claim a sum of Rs. 3,70,943, the amount transferred to the superannuation fund, against income of the year 4. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, assessee-company is entitled to claim a sum of Rs. 2,92,672, transferred after the liquidation of the company, as against the profits of the company 5. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the...
Deviprasad Khandelwal and Sons Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-14-1967
Reported in: AIR1969Bom163; (1968)70BOMLR364
1. This is a petition under Sections 33 and 5 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, challenging the existence and, in the alternative, the validity of an arbitration agreement and, in case the existence and validity of the said arbitration agreement are established, to have the effect thereof determined, and for leave of the Court to revoke the authority of the arbitrator appointed under the said arbitration agreement. 2. The facts leading to this petition briefly stated are that on or about 4th of August 1958, the Regional Director (Food), Western Region, Bombay, Government of India, Ministry of Food, issued a tender notice on behalf of the President of India, inviting tenders for purchase of approximately 244 tons of used iron hoops (scrap released from gunny bales) lying in the Government of India godowns at Thana Street, Bombay 9 on the terms and conditions of sale set out in Appendix 'A' to the tender notice. The goods were described in Appendix 'C' to the said tender notice. On 18th Augu...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »