Mumbai Court June 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.
Shivnarayan Motilal Darak Vs. R.A. Zubairy
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-26-1970
Reported in: (1971)73BOMLR479; 1971MhLJ742
Chitale, J.1. By this petition the petitioners seek direction to the Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Maharashtra State, Poona, asking him to cancel the registration of respondent No. 2, the Rahuri Station Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. under Section 21 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The circumstances in which this petition is filed, briefly stated, are as follows: In 1049 there were heavy floods in the town of Rahuri and as the result thereof a substantial part of the township was washed away. Subsequently at the instance of the State Government, respondent No. 2, Rahuri Station Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. was formed. It received loan from the State Government. The Society was registered under the old Act (Bombay Act VII of 1925). Petitioners Nos. 1 to 9 and 11 to 13 are members of the said Society. Petitioners Nos. 10 and 14 are heirs of deceased members of the said Society. In spite of the laudable objects with which...
Madhukar Ganpatrao Somvanshi Vs. Sheshrao Narayanrao Biradar and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-24-1970
Reported in: AIR1972Bom129; (1971)73BOMLR720; ILR1971Bom1592; 1971MhLJ961
Chitale, J.1. The facts leading to this petition, briefly stated are as follows : Nilanga Taluqa Co-operative Supervising Union, Nilanga, District Osmanabad, Opponent No. 6, is a Federal Co-operative Society, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Federal Society'), deemed to have been registered under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). 124 Co-operative Societies are affiliated as members to the said Federal Society. The Managing Committee of the Federal Society consists of 8 members (including the Chairman), one of whom is nominated by the Government, one is nominated by Osmanabad District Central Co-operative Bank and the other six are elected. The election to the Managing Committee of the Federal Society was scheduled to be held on 16th September 1967, nominations were to be submitted on or before 2-9-1967, scrutiny the list of the candidates contesting the election was published on 8-9-1967. On 14-9-1967 i.e. two days prior to the date ...
Gajanan Mahadeo Yerekar and anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-18-1970
Reported in: AIR1971Bom357; ILR1971Bom964; 1971MhLJ193
Gatne, J. 1. The question which has been referred to us in this proceeding is whether a landlord who has dispossessed the tenant otherwise than in accordance with the provisions of the Tenancy Act and where the right of a tenant to restoration of tenancy is subsisting on the date of sale, a sale by a landlord to a stranger is not in violation of the provisions of Section 91 of the Tenancy Act. The circumstances leading to this reference are briefly these:--2. Survey No. 63/2 of mouza Kharwad, Tahsil Warora, District Chanda originally belonged to oneMukund Vithoba. On 17-8-1963 he sold the same to one Mahadeo Yerekar for a price of Rs. 700/-. On 4-5-1967 Mahadeo died leaving behind Ms son Gajanan, wife Shanti and father Ghularam. When this sale was effected the lease of this land granted in favour of one Nathu Narayan had not been validly terminated in accordance with the provisions of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands ( Vidarbha Region) Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'th...
Sahadu Bala Botra and anr. Vs. Namdeo Bapuji Karale and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-18-1970
Reported in: AIR1972Bom25; (1971)73BOMLR318; 1971MhLJ1014
ORDER1. An interesting point of law that arises in this case is whether the expression 'any person other than the tenant in actual possession' used in the second proviso to Section 84-A of the Tenancy Act would include a person other than a tenant jointly purchasing along with the tenant. The facts of this case which have led to this Special Civil Application are the following.2. S. No. 59 of Sudawadi measuring about 106 acres belonged to the family of Natus which consisted on three branches. On December 18, 1948, an agreement was executed by two of the three branches, viz. Shankar and Harihar, for transfer of their one third share in the joint property to petitioner No.1 and opponent No.1. In pursuance of the agreement to sell, deeds of sale were executed on July 15, 1949 by Shankar and Harihar. Even vendor transferred his one-third share jointly in favour of petitioner No. 2 and Opponents Nos. 2 to 4 in one-half shares. Instead of the purchase being effected in the names of petitione...
Jambu Anna and ors. Vs. Bapu and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-17-1970
Reported in: AIR1972Bom141; (1971)73BOMLR606; ILR1971Bom772; 1972MhLJ43
1. These two companion appeals raise a short point as to whether objection to the execution taken by the respondent - judgment - debtor on the ground of limitation is barred by constructive res judicata.2. Although the decree - holders in these two cases are different, the Respondent - Judgment - debtor is common to both. The facts on which the above question arises are almost similar. It would be enough therefore, if the facts in the case in which Second Appeal NO. 147 of 1962 arises are stated. They are as follows :-3. A money decree was obtained by the appellants against the respondent on 31-7-1939. The decree made the decretal amount payable by annual instalments and it contained a default clause to the effect that in default of payment of any two instalments, the entire balance due under the decree would be payable at once. The judgment - debtor having committed default in payment of the very first two instalments, the decree - holder filed an application for execution within thre...
P.R. Kokil Vs. the General Manager, South Central Railway
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-15-1970
Reported in: (1972)74BOMLR124
Chitale, J.1. The facts giving rise to this petition, briefly stated, are as follows: The petitioner, P.R. Kokil, is the Headmaster of Railway Boys' Primary School at Puma, District Parbhani. He joined Railway service under N.S. Railway as a teacher from April 1, 1936. We need not state here the details of his career. At the material time he was an employee of South Central Railway. It is not disputed on behalf of respondent No. 1, the General Manager, South Central Railway, that the petitioner is an employee of South Central Railway, his salary is paid by that Railway and he is under the administrative control of that Railway. In November 1966 election of the office-bearers of the South Central Railway Mazdoor Union (hereinafter referred to as the Union) took place and the petitioner was elected as the Divisional President of the said Union. By the letter dated November 22, 1966 the names of the newly elected office-bearers were communicated to the General Manager, South Central Railw...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›