Mumbai Court October 1969 Judgments
Dnyanu Kondiba Kale Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-24-1969
Reported in: (1970)72BOMLR382; 1970MhLJ720
Abhyankar, J.1. This revision has been referred to a Division Bench by the Hon'ble the Chief Justice at the instance of the applicant who challenges his conviction under Section 85(1)(2) of the Bombay Prohibition Act under which he has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 1 month and to pay a fine of Rs. 100 or in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 weeks.2. The applicant was a police constable serving at Dhond. The prosecution case against him was that on September 8, 1967 at about (1 p.m. he entered a hotel called Hanuman Hotel in Gandhi Chowk and started abusing the hotel boys and beat one of them and also the son of the hotel-keeper. He was drunk. Finding the accused behaving in such a manner, the hotel owner Kisanlal contacted the police sub-inspector Shri Dodamani and reported the matter. The sub-inspector went to the spot and saw that the accused was behaving in a disorderly manner. He brought the accused to the police station, but on the way also the a...
Tag this Judgment!Dnyanu Kondiba Kale Vs. State
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-24-1969
Reported in: 1970CriLJ1684
Abhyankar, J. 1. This revision has been referred to a Division Bench by the Hon'ble the Chief Justice at the instance of the applicant who challenges his conviction under Section 85 (1)(2) of the Bombay Prohibition Act under which he has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 1 month and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- or in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 weeks.2. The applicant was a police constable serving at Dhond. The prosecution case against him was that on 3rd September 1967 at about 6 p. m he entered a hotel called Hanuman Hotel in Gandhi Chowk and started abusing the hotel boys and beat one of them and also the son of the hotel-keeper. He was drunk. Finding the accused behaving in such a manner, the hotel owner Kishanlal contacted the police sub-inspector Shri Dodamani and reported the matter. The sub-Inspector went to the spot and saw that the accused was behaving in a disorderly manner. He brought the accused to the police station, but on the way also ...
Tag this Judgment!Jamnadas Dharamdas Vs. Dr. John Joseph Ferreira
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-23-1969
Reported in: (1970)72BOMLR505
K.K. Desai, J.1. [His Lordship after stating the facts, proceeded]. It is convenient first to deal with the questions raised on behalf of the plaintiffs in the Civil Revisional Application. The first contention made by the plaintiffs is that the lower appellate Court has failed to exercise jurisdiction which it had under the Rent Act when it held against plaintiffs that it had no jurisdiction to grant the decree in ejectment in respect of the two buildings constructed by the defendant on plot No. 12. In that connection reference was made to Section 28I of the Act which inter alia provides.28. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in any law and notwithstanding that by reason of the amount of the claim or for any other reason, the suit or proceeding would not, but for this provision, be within its jurisdiction,(a) in Greater Bombay, the Court of Small Causes, Bombay,(aa) ...(b) ...shall have jurisdiction to entertain and try any suit or proceeding between a landlord and a tenant relati...
Tag this Judgment!State of Maharashtra Vs. Laxman Dashrath Garad
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-21-1969
Reported in: (1970)72BOMLR281
Abhyankar, J.1. The two appellants: (i) Laxman Dashrath Garad, aged 30 years, and (ii) his younger brother Mohan Dashrath Garad, aged 25 years, have been convicted by the Sessions Judge of Osmanabad for having killed their father, Dashrath Bali Garad, on the night of November 28, 1968 at village Jagaji by giving axe blows. Appellant Laxman has been sentenced to suffer the extreme penalty under the law i.e. death by hanging, and appellant Mohan has been sentenced to imprisonment for life for the same offence. The learned Sessions Judge has referred the sentence of death for confirmation, and the reference is registered as Confirmation Case No. 13 of 1969. Both the accused have also been convicted under Section 201, Indian Penal Code for having disposed of the dead body with a view to screen the offence of murder; but no separate sentence has been passed for this offence. Laxman's appeal is numbered as Criminal Appeal No. 1012 of 1969 and Mohan's appeal is Criminal Appeal No. 1048 of 196...
Tag this Judgment!Gill and Co. (P.) Ltd. Vs. Shri Madhav Mills Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-21-1969
Reported in: (1970)72BOMLR679
Vimadalal, J.1. This matter has come up for public examination of (1) Hari das Mundhra, (2) Daulat Singhi, (8) Nandlal More, (4) Shivbux Mohatta and (5) Herbert Hill, directors of Shri Madhav Mills Ltd., which is hi liquidation (hereinafter referred to as 'the company'), under Section 478 of the Companies Act, 1956. The last-named director is abroad, but it was decided to proceed with the public examination of the other four directors who were present. Before the public examination of the said directors could be proceeded with, Mr. J.C. Bhatt who appeared on behalf of the said Mundhra (respondent No. 1 to the Misfeasance Summons) raised certain preliminary objections which were argued at great length, and the present Order relates to those preliminary objections. The facts necessary for the purpose of the present Order are that, on August 5, 1959, the company was ordered to be wound up. It may, at this stage, be mentioned that, according to the Official Liquidator, Haridas Mundhra was ...
Tag this Judgment!Nandlal Shankarlal Tiwari and ors. Vs. Laxman Umakant Malkarjun and or ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-17-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Bom268; (1970)72BOMLR715; 1970MhLJ264
1. These are three applications for permission to file Letters Patent Appeal, All the three, second appeals were summarily dismissed by one-word order 'dismissed'. Leave is being refused in all the three applications to file an appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent as none of them involves any point of law which requires to be considered by Division Bench. However, Mr. Mandlekar has raised a technical question which he thinks, is an important point of law for which leave ought to be granted. Hence this order. 2. Mr. Mandlekar argued that Order 41, Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code applies to file further hearing of appeal before this Court and a judgment including reasons for the summary dismissal of the appeal must be made by this Court. The one-word order of dismissal is not a judgment according to law. The legal position in this behalf so far as this Court is concerned is already concluded by judgments as well as by long standing practice. However, since this question is ...
Tag this Judgment!Digamber Pandurang Sawant Vs. Ahmed Appa Khedekar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-17-1969
Reported in: (1970)72BOMLR303; 1970MhLJ456
K.K. Desai, J.1. [His Lordship after stating the facts, proceeded]. In support of the 1st contention, Mr. Patankar relied upon Sub-rule (2) of Rule 33 which we have already quoted above.')' Now, it is true that this sub-rule directly provides that the decision of the Returning Officer as to the validity of a ballot paper contained in a ballot box 'shall be final'. But in this connection it requires to be noticed that results of election declared by the Returning Officer can be canvassed in an election petition filed under Section 15 of the Act. That section provides:15. (1) If the validity of any election of a member of a panchayat is brought in question by any candidate at such election... such candidate... may, at any time within fifteen days after the date of the declaration of the result of the election, apply to the Civil Judge (Junior Division) having ordinary jurisdiction in the area within which the election has been or should have been held for the determination of such questi...
Tag this Judgment!Shrikant Vasantrao Deshpande Vs. Ahmadkhan Mandarkhan
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-17-1969
Reported in: (1971)73BOMLR170
Chandurkar, J.1. Both these petitions are filed against a common order passed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal rejecting two revision applications filed by the petitioners. Fields survey number 2, area 12 acres, '22 gunthas of Dattapur, survey number 129, area 5 acres, 12 gunthas, survey number 130, area 9 acres 18 gunthas, and field survey number 130/1, area 3 acres, of Kolwad, taluq Chikhali, originally belonged to one Devidas. Devidas died sometime in 1959 leaving behind him his son Dattatraya, members of his family and the members of the family of his another son Vasant, who had pre-deceased him. Petitioner No. 1 is the grandson of Devidas and petitioner No. 2 is the mother of petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 2 Dattatraya is the uncle of petitioner No. 1. After the death of Devidas, these fields came to be recorded in the names of the petitioners and respondent No. 2 and the Record-of-Rights showed that Dattatraya was the manager of the joint family left behind by Devidas. Da...
Tag this Judgment!The Rashtriya Mill Mazdoor Sangh, Bombay Vs. B.A. Ekbote and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-16-1969
Reported in: AIR1971Bom31; (1970)72BOMLR478; ILR1970Bom1058; (1970)IILLJ511Bom
K.K. Desai, J. 1. This petition under Art. 227 of the Constitution arises out of the petitioner -- Sangh's original application before the Payment of Wages Authority made on behalf of 176 employees of the 3rd respondent-Co. claiming in the aggregate a sum of about Rs. 1,10,245 in respect of illegal deductions for retrenchment compensation, leave with wages and notice pay. 2. The Authority under the Act ascertained that in all 20 employees had settled the claim made in the application and received payment of their dues under the settlement. Out of the remaining 156 employees, 43 had given to the Company what may for convenience be described as writing of settlement of their claims in the following words. 'I have agreed to receive my dues of compensation, leave with wages, notice pay, bonus, ex-gratia paymentsand all other claims including the claims mentioned in Application No. xx xx xx pending before the Court of the Payment of Wages Court at Bombay from Messrs. Amber Textile Mills dir...
Tag this Judgment!Rashtriya Mill Mazdoor Sangh Vs. B.A. Egbote
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Oct-16-1969
Reported in: (1970)IILLJ511Bom
K.K. Desai, J.1. The facts necessary to be noticed in connection with the second contention are as follows : In respect of the 43 employees who had given the above written agreements to the company, the total sum claimed in diverse small amounts aggregated to Rs. 23,994-04. In respect of this total claim, by the statement filed before the Authority, the company admitted diverse amounts aggregating to Rs. 15,792-49 being due to these employees. The difference between the aggregate claim made on behalf of these 43 employees and the claim admitted to be due by the company came to Rs. 8,201-55. It is therefore, clear that, between all of them, the 43 employees relinquished their claim to the extent to Rs. 8,01-55. The contention of the petitioner Sangh in respect of this small difference is that such relinquishment of claim is not permitted under S. 23 of the Act. 2. This section runs as follows : 'Any contract or agreement, whether made before or after the commencement of this Act whereby...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »