Mumbai Court December 1969 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.
Manubhai Kikabhai and Co. Vs. Babajee Rajaram
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-20-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Bom267; (1970)72BOMLR311
ORDER1. The grievance of the petitioners in this revisional application is that the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation wrongly held in favour of the opponent that she was entitled to continue the original application filed for compensation by her deceased husband, and in that connection the Commissioner wrongly rejected the contention made on behalf of the petitioners that the application for bringing the opponent on record was not made within the period of limitation prescribed.2. In the submission of Mr. Rele for the petitioners, the application for bringing the opponent on record was much after the application had abated and was barred by limitation. The application should have been rejected.3. Mr. Rele's attempt was to rely upon the provisions in Order 22, Rule 3, of the Code of Civil Procedure in support of his above submission. The contention was that the original applicant died on September 25, 1967, and the application for bringing the opponent, being the widow of the dece...
Express Newspapers Limited Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-19-1969
Reported in: (1970)72BOMLR385; 1970MhLJ809
Tulzapurkar, J.1. This is plaintiff's appeal against dismissal of its suit to recover back the aggregate sum of Rs. 19,39,337-13-0 paid by it (the plaintiff Company) as tax under the provisions of the Bombay Lotteries and Prize Competitions Control and Tax Act, 1948.2. The facts which led the plaintiff Company (Express Newspapers Ltd.) to file the suit may briefly be stated. : The plaintiff is a Company incorporated, under the Indian Companies Act, 1918 and carries on the business of printing and publishing of newspapers and magazines etc. The plaintiff Company also promoted cross-word prize competitions through its papers published in Bombay. Between October 1948 and July 20, 1954 the plaintiff ran a Marathi cross-word prize competition in its Marathi Daily called 'Lokasatta,' while from January 1951 till October 1952 it ran a cross-word prize competition called 'Squarewords' in its English weekly 'Sunday Standard.' The Bombay Lotteries and Prize Competitions Control and Tax Act, 1948...
K.J. Pathare Vs. S.J. Pathare
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-19-1969
Reported in: (1971)73BOMLR616
Vimadalal, J.1. This is a matter that has been forwarded to us by the Presidency Magistrate, 5th Court, Dadar, for taking action for contempt against the alleged contemnor. The facts necessary for the purpose of this judgment are that the applicant K, J. Pathare filed a complaint in the Court of the said Magistrate against the opponent S. J. Pathare and others for offences under Sections 406 and 380 of the Indian Penal Code. After some adjournments, when that ease came up for hearing before the said Magistrate, oil March 5, 1968, the parties came to terms and the opponent, who is now alleged to have committed the contempt, gave an undertaking to the Court that he would deposit Rs. 4,250 with interest thereon from January 27, 1967, at the rate of 9 per cent, per annum on or before July 10, 1968, with the Deecan Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. In view of that , the complainant stated that he did not want to proceed with the case and the learned Magistrate passed an order discharging th...
Maruti Vishnu Kshirsagar Vs. Bapu Keshav Jadhav
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-17-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Bom398; (1970)72BOMLR615; 1970MhLJ907
1. In this second appeal by the original decree-holder from the judgment of the Assistant Judge, Satara, dated. July 12,1966, the contention of the decree-holder is that the Assistant Judge was wrong in setting aside the order of the executing Court condoning delay on thepart of the decree-holder in depositing the purchase price by 9 days and that the Darkhast No. 124 of 1965 (which was for carrying out the sale of the property in suit by the judgment-debtor to the decree-holder) should proceed. 2. The facts leading to the above Darkhast No. 123 of 1965 are that in Suit No. 70 of 1960 decree for specific performance of agreement for sale of the suit property was passed in favour of the decree-holder on August 27, 1964. The trial Court had directed the decree-holder to deposit in Court Rs. 700/- within 3 months of the decree and that thereafter the defendant should execute the sale deed of the two properties in suit in favour of the decree-holder. The trial Court had given directions re...
The State of Maharashtra Vs. Rajkumar Kochhar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-16-1969
Reported in: (1970)72BOMLR797
Vimadalal, J.1. This case has had a long and chequered career in the course of which it has paid brief visits to the Supreme Court thrice. The facts of the prosecution case as well as the proceedings are somewhat complicated, but will have to be set out for the purpose of deciding the present application. The accused persons, who are seven in number, are alleged to have committed offences under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 167(81) of the Sea Customs Act, 1878 and Section 5 of the Imports and Exports Control Act, 1947, some time in 1959-60. The main brain and the principal party to the offences was one Nanda who died on September 15, 1960. There were several business concerns, the composition of which it is necessary to set out for the purpose of the present case. One was the Eastern Trading Corporation, whose proprietor was the said Nanda, and manager accused No. 1 who was a nephew of the said Nanda, but accused No. 2 held a power--of-attorney to operate the ...
Mahagu Vishwanath Huske Vs. Bhagirathibai Shrawan Husko
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-16-1969
Reported in: (1972)74BOMLR785
Bhole, J.1. This is an application in revision by the surviving plaintiffs and the legal representatives of deceased plaintiffs from an Order passed by the Second Extra Assistant Judge, Nagpur, disallowing the objections of the applicants here, that the appeal had abated because no legal representatives of respondent No. 1 (plaintiff No. 1) were brought on record within the period of limitation. Their prayer was that the appeal had abated in so far as deceased respondent No. 1 was concerned.2. Four plaintiffs had obtained a decree for possession of a house at Umrer on April 11, 1966 in the Court of the Civil Judge, Umrer. The defendants had filed an appeal against the decree in the District Court on May 5, 1966. The plaintiffs had filed cross-objections against the directions about the future mesne profits. The trial Court had not given any directions as to how the future mesne profit was to be recovered by the decree-holder. Pending the appeal respondent No. 1 (plaintiff No. 1) died l...
Jaikisan Biharilal Vs. Budhaji Nagoji
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-15-1969
Reported in: (1971)73BOMLR167; 1970MhLJ532
Chandurkar, J.1. The petitioner is the son of one Biharilal and claims to have become the owner of field survey number 24/2, area 21 acres, 26 gunthas of mouza Balkhed, Taluq Pusad, district Yeotmal, as a result of a partition which had taken place; on February 4, 1961. Long before this partition, the respondent who was a tenant of this field had served a notice on the original owner Biharilal exercising his right of purchase and making an offer to him for purchasing the land. Biharilal did not take any action under the proviso to Section 40 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region) Act, 1958, hereafter referred to as the Tenancy Act. Under this proviso a landlord could within 8 months from the date of the receipt of the offer made to him by the tenant under Section 43 of the Act select the land for cultivating personally and he had to give an intimation in writing to the tenant of his intention to terminate the tenancy. On August 22, 1960 the respondent applied to...
Manohar Shriniwas Mantri Vs. Adtarsingh Gangasingh
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-12-1969
Reported in: (1970)72BOMLR629; 1970MhLJ890
Chandrachud, J.1. A firm of which respondent No. 1 is a partner had taken a contract for the construction of the third floor of a building at Bandra. On April 6, 1968, Shirish, the 12-years-old son of the complainant was playing with a friend in the compound adjoining the building, when a worker engaged in the construction work threw down a brick. The brick fell on Shirish's head causing him grievous injuries. Respondent No. 1 was therefore charged in the Court of the Presidency Magistrate, 9th Court, Bandra, under Section 288 of the Indian Penal Code. He has been acquitted by the learned Magistrate and hence the complainant has filed this revision application.2. Section 288 has, in my opinion, no application to the facts of this case. It provides, in so far as is material, that whoever, in pulling down or repairing any building, knowingly or negligently omits to take such order with that building as is sufficient to guard against any probable danger to human life from the fall of that...
Roopchand Raghavji Phande and ors. Vs. Abhyankar and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-08-1969
Reported in: AIR1970Bom351
Vaidya, J.1. These two petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India raise an important question relating to assessment of a dissolved partnership firm under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953, and the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 11959. Miscellaneous Application 564 of 1965 is a petition filed on the Original Side of this Court which is directed, at the instance of the petitioners therein, to be heard along with the Special Civil Application No. 2050 of 1969 filed on the Appellate Side of this Court2. Miscellaneous Application No. 584 of 1965 is filed by M/s. Murarilal Maha-birprasad, petitioner No. 1, a dissolved firm, and its former partners, petitioners 2 to 5. The firm was constituted under a deed of partnership dated December 3, 1853. It carried on business as Importers, Commission Agents, Indenting Agents, del Credere Agents and Financiers, at 30 Commercial Chambers Masjid Bunder Road, Bombay 3, and also as wholesale dealers in colours, chemicals, dyes, spices, condiments and as...
Bhaskar Narayanrao Band Vs. Dr. Vishnu Bhikaji Kolte
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Dec-05-1969
Reported in: (1971)73BOMLR361
Madon, J.1. This is an appeal against the order of the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Chanda, vacating an ex parte ad interim injunction which was earlier granted by him, on an application made by the appellant in a suit filed by him against the respondent. The appellant is the Principal of a College known as the Janata Mahavidyalaya situate at Chanda, conducted by the Chanda Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Chanda, which is a society registered under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. It is also registered as a public charitable trust under the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950, The said college is affiliated to the Nagpur University. In 1964, the Charity Commissioner filed a suit in the Court of the District Judge at Chanda, being Civil Suit No. 2 of 1964, against the said Society. The fourteen members of its Managing Committee were also impleaded as defendants Nos. 2 to 15 to the said suit. In the said suit, the Charity Commissioner made allegations against the members o...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »