Mumbai Court February 1970 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.
Hasham Ismail Mamsa Vs. Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-13-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Bom215; ILR1971Bom626; 1971MhLJ684
1. This is an appeal against an order dated August 5, 1969 passed by His Honour Judge Guttal. in Suit No. 3161 of 1969 in Bombay City Civil Court, returning the plaint for presentation to the proper court and involves an interesting question of law with regard to the proper valuation of the above suit.2. The plaintiff is the owner of immovable properties bearing E Ward Nos. 3822(7), 3823 (1), 3823 (1A) and 3823 (IB) in street No. 97, Moreland Road, Bombay. On April 29, 1969, the plaintiff filed the above suit alleging that prior to 1953, the said properties and other properties were jointly owned by the plaintiff, his brother Azam Ismail Mamsa and sister-in law Srimati Rasulbibi, the wife of the elder brother of the plaintiff named Mahomed Ismail Mamsa. In a partition in the family the above properties were allotted to the share of the plaintiff. The taxes in respect of the said properties were being paid from time to time to the Bombay Municipal Corporation. Dispute started between th...
Rehaman and anr. Vs. the Corporation of the City of Nagpur and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-12-1970
Reported in: AIR1970Bom394; (1971)73BOMLR344; 1970CriLJ1436; 1970MhLJ618
ORDER1. The two accused who are aggrieved by an order passed by the special Judicial Magistrate First Class (Corporation) Nagpur and whose order is confirmed by the Additional. Sessions Judge, Nagpur, have come here in revision. 2. Accused No. 1 is a servant of accused No. 2. They are being prosecuted for an offence punishable under Section 7(i)read with Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Food- Adulteration Act'). It is alleged that they were stocking as well as selling adulterated oil on 19-2-1968. The complaint was filed by the Municipal Secretary against the two accused on 4-10-1968. It is the case of the accused that the Nagpur Corporation had been superseded under Section 408 (i) of the City of Nagpur Corporation Act, 1948 in 1965 and that an Administrator had been appointed. At the time when this offence is alleged to have been committed the Administrator was in charge of the. Administration of' the City of Nagpur Municipa...
Nabukhan Mohammed HusseIn Khan Vs. S. Ramamurthi
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-11-1970
Reported in: (1971)73BOMLR442; 1971MhLJ633
Tulzapurkar, J.1. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner is seeking to challenge the validity and/or legality of the externment order No. 307/C/43 of 1969 dated March 3, 1969 passed against him by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Zone II, Greater Bombay (respondent No. 1) under Section 56 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951.2. It appears that with a view to initiate externment proceedings- against the petitioner a notice under Section 59 of the said Act was served upon him on October 30, 1968 by the Assistant Commissioner of Police, 'D' Division, Bombay calling upon him to tender his explanation regarding the allegations detailed at the foot of the notice, and for receiving the same and hearing him and his evidence, if any, the Assistant Commissioner fixed the appointment on November 6, 1968 at 11 A.M. at Nagpada Police Station. The allegations detailed at the foot of the notice were as follows: Allegations :-I. Since April, 1968 in the localities of F...
Kaikhushru H. Bhivandiwalla and ors. Vs. Nargesh and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-10-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Bom225
ORDER1. The petitioners in this special Civil application filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India are Trustees o the estate of the late Khan Bahadur H.N. Bhiwandiwalla owning among other properties a building known as Churchill Chambers. One H. Henley was a tenant of flat No. 7 in the said building for many years prior to 1955. The trustees have appointed a constituted attorney and the said constituted attorney found that the said Henley was in arrears and gave a notice to Mr. Henley to pay rent and water charges due in respect of the said flat Henley sent a reply through his Solicitors raising various pleas denying his liability to pay rent and water charges. On May 23, 1958, the constituted attorney of the petitioners finally gave a notice to the said Henley determining his tenancy. It was stated in the notice that the said Henley was liable to pay arrears of rent from October 1, 1957 to April 30, 1958 for 7 months at the rate of Rs. 89.37 per month amounting to Rs. 625....
Ebrahim Aboobaker Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City-i
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-10-1970
Reported in: [1971]81ITR664(Bom)
Mody, Actg.C.J.1. This is a reference under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. 2. One Aboobaker Abdul Rehman was the owner of a cinema theatre in Bombay, known as the Imperial Cinema, and several other immovable properties. He also carried on the business of exhibiting pictures in the Imperial Cinema. Under an indenture dated the 22nd October, 1946, Aboobaker and his three sons, Ebrahim (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessee'), Hoosein and Alimahomed, formed a partnership to carry on that business of exhibiting picture in the Imperial Cinema. Aboobaker gave to this partnership firm a monthly tenancy of the building of the Imperial Cinema for carrying on that business. 3. In September, 1947, Hoosein and Alimahomed migrated to and settled in Pakistan. Some inquires were made by the Deputy Custodian of Evacuee Property, Bombay, in respect of Hoosein and Alimahomed, and, thereafter, on the 4th of August, 1949, Aboobaker expelled Hoosein and Alimahomed from the partnership...
Commissioner of Income-tax, Bombay City I Vs. Elphinstone Dye Works (P ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-10-1970
Reported in: [1971]82ITR634(Bom)
K.K. Desai, J.1. The assessee-respondent-company obtained a lease of a piece of land admeasuring 4,903 sq. yds. for 999 years in 1943. On a portion of the land the assessee-company constructed for its business of dye works certain structures. 2. der an indenture of lease dated April 30, 1952, the assessee-company leased out a portion of 439 sq. yds. of the above land for a period of five years to the Caddel Weaving Mills Co. Ltd., on the terms and conditions contained in the said indenture of lease. The consideration for the lease mentioned in clause 1 of the operative part is 'the expenses to be incurred by the tenants in the erection of a factory and of the rent and covenants hereinafter mentioned'. Under clause 2, the tenant-weaving mill agreed to pay and discharge all existing and future rates and taxed in respect of the demised land. It also agreed to construct at its own cost a building on the demised land in accordance with the plans, elevations, sections and specifications to b...
Ranbirsingh Shankarsingh Thakur Vs. Hindusthan General Electric Corpor ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-06-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Bom97; (1972)74BOMLR789; ILR1972Bom427; 1971MhLJ27
ORDER1. This is an application by the original plaintiff Ranbirsingh Shankarsingh Thakur whose suit was dismissed by the learned Small Cause Court Judge, Nagpur. The suit was to recover a sum of Rs. 674/- from the two defendants as refund of the price of a radio-set which he purchased from the defendants and which was not in working order at all.2. The defendant No. 1 is the manufacturing Corporation of radio-sets and other electrical goods. Defendant No. 2 is the distributor of defendant No. 1's products. The plaintiff purchased radio-set of a particular model by name HGEC (Saba) from the defendant No. 2 on 20-2-1962 on a hire-purchase basis. He had paid in advance Rupees 270/- on that date (20-2-1962) and agreed to pay the rest of the sum in six instalments at the rate of Rs. 60 per mensem. Along with the radio which he got on 20-2-1962, under this hire-purchase agreement, he also got a guarantee under which the defendants undertook to repair or exchange free of cost any components e...
Namdeo Amrut Gohane Vs. Narayan Shamrao Deshmukh and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-06-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Bom121; 1970MhLJ797
ORDER1. The defendant has filed this revision application being aggrieved by the judgment passed by the Extra Assistant Judge, Shri Wankhede, in a miscellaneous Civil Application, which was decided by him. He allowed that application of the plaintiffs ordering that the decree should be amended indicating that the decretal amount shall also be a charge on the suit field.2. The plaintiffs had filed a suit in the year 1963 for recovery of a sum of Rs. 6136 and also for a charge on the suit field for this sum. Their complaint was that they had sold a field to the defendant on 29-10-1958 for Rs. 5500/-. A sum of Rs. 300/- was paid on that day as earnest money by the defendant. Under the agreement, the defendant was to pay the balance consideration by instalments. He was to pay the first instalment of a sum of Rs. 1300/- on 15-2-1960 and to go on paying Rs. 1300/- every year till the last instalment on 15-2-1963. Because he has not paid any instalment, the plaintiffs had filed this suit for ...
Bhaskar Narayan Hardikar and anr. Vs. S.G. Daithankar and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-06-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Bom188; (1971)73BOMLR851; 1970MhLJ953
Padhye, J.1. In a general election held on 3-6-1967, 22 Councillors were elected to the Municipal Council, Bhandara. In the first meeting held thereafter on 2-7-1967 the petitioner No. 1 Bhaskar was elected as the President of the Municipal Council and one Fattu Meshram was elected as the Vice-President Two persons were co-opted to the Council and thus the total number of the Councillors in the Bhandara Municipal Council was 24 after the co-option of the two Councillors. The Vice-President Fattu Meshram died on 18-1-1969 and his seat as an elected Councillor became vacant with the result that on his death the Council actually consisted of 21 elected Councillors and two co-opted Councillors though the normal strength of the Council was 22 elected Councillors and two co-opted Councillors. 2. On 24-1-1969, 11 members of the said Council gave a requisition to the Collector for convening a meeting to pass a resolution to remove the President of the Council, the petitioner No. 1. Accordingly...
Sassoon J. David and Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-05-1970
Reported in: [1972]85ITR83(Bom)
K.K. Desai, J.1. In this reference under section 66 (2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, three questions of law raised at the instance of Sassoon J. David & Co. Private Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the assessee company') relating to the rejection of the claim for deduction of the expenditure of the aggregate sum of Rs. 1,64,899 under section 10 (2) (xv) for the assessment year 1957-58 arise for consideration. 2. The facts which require to be noticed are as follow : The assessee-company carried on business for a very large number of years prior to December 2, 1955. The management of the business of the assessee-company was on that date carried on with the assistance of managing director, Mr. R. Mathalone, a manager, one A. E. Joseph and 22 other employees in the office establishment of the company roughly consisting of 2 officers, 6 clerks, 9 peons, 2 drivers and one watchman. Though the fact is not on the record, we are informed by Mr. Palkhivala for the assessee-company that t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »