Mumbai Court February 1971 Judgments
Kisan Sahakari Punarvasan Society Ltd. Vs. N.M. Gowaikar and Co.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-26-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Bom150; (1971)73BOMLR817; 1972MhLJ86
ORDER1. The only question that arises in this Revision Application is whether court - fees are payable in respect of an equitable set - off. The plaintiff has filed this suit as a building contractor for the recovery of over rupees one lakh, interest and costs. In paragraph 23 of the written statement filed on behalf of the defendant, a co - operative society which had entrusted the work of construction of certain buildings in Poona to the Plaintiff, it has been stated that the plaintiff had not done work according to the contract and that many of the items in the contract had been left undone, and in para 31 of that written statement it is pleaded that loss had been caused to the defendants by reason thereof. It is further pleaded in the said paragraph that, although the loss was much more, the defendants were restricting their claim 'by way of equitable set - off' to Rs. 50,000/-. The plaintiff thereafter filed an application dated 11th June 1968 (Ex. No. 11) in which in addition to ...
Tag this Judgment!Sassoon J. David and Co. P. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Bomba ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-26-1971
Reported in: [1975]98ITR50(Bom)
Chandrachud, J. 1. The assessee, Messrs. Sassoon J. David & Co. (Private) Ltd., which was formed in 1922, carried on business in shares and securities and in cotton yarn. 25 per cent. of its shares were held by Sir Percival Victor David and the remaining 75 per cent. were held by a trust of which he was the sole beneficiary. 2. Sir Alwyn Ezra, who joined the company in 1925, was appointed a director in 1931 and was in sole charge of the business of the company from 1937 till 1945. He held a general power of attorney from the company as also from Sir Percival who was the only other director of the company and who, at all material times, resided out of India. Sir Alwyn Ezra held one share as a nominee of Sir Percival. 3. Between 15th March, 1945, and 1st December, 1945, Sir Alwyn Ezra withdrew a sum of Rs. 27 1/2 lakhs from the company's account with the Bank of India Ltd., Bombay, and utilised that amount for purchasing two immovable properties for himself. In 1945, the disputes between...
Tag this Judgment!Berar Trading Company Ltd. Vs. Gajanan Gopalrao Dixit
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-25-1971
Reported in: [1972]42CompCas48(Bom)
1. The original defendants Nos. 1 and 3 being aggrieved by the judgment and decree passed by the assistant judge, Akola, in a miscellaneous civil appeal arising out of an order passed by the second joint civil judge, junior division, Akola, in a civil suit, have come here in revision. 2. The applicant No. 1 is a public limited company registered under the provisions of the Companies Act. Applicant No. 2 is now a director against whom the suit was filed by opponent No. 1. Opponent No. 2 was a chairman of the board of directors till January 24, 1970, on which date an annual general meeting of the company was held. The agenda included the election of a new director in place of opponent No. 2 who was retiring by rotation. The meeting was preside over by opponent No. 2. Opponent No. 1 was present in the meeting in person as well as by proxy for three other shareholders. There were two others, D. A. Bhalerao and D. R. Palsodkar, who were not shareholders but were present as proxies. In the s...
Tag this Judgment!Little Gibbs Co-op, Housing Society Ltd., Bombay and anr. Vs. the Stat ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-25-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Bom108; (1971)73BOMLR773; (1972)8CompLJ229(Bom)
Deshpande, J.1. The two petitioners in this Special Civil Application challenge the legality and validity of order passed by the Government of Maharashtra on 8th November 1970 in exercise of their revisional jurisdiction under Section 154 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'. Petitioner No. 1 is a Co-operative housing Society registered under the Act in or about the year 1960. Petitioner No. 2 is one of the 13 shareholders of the said society and also Honorary Secretary appointed as such at the General Body meeting held on 27-10-1968. The facts, which gave rise to this special Civil Application, briefly are that on 3rd September 1964 the Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, passed an order directing an inquiry in the affairs of this society under Section 83 of the Act. On 28-5-1968 the Inquiry Officer submitted his report and referred therein to several irregularities and malpractices. The Deputy Registrar then sent extracts ...
Tag this Judgment!The Charity Commissioner, (M.S.), Bombay Vs. Syed YasIn and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-23-1971
Reported in: AIR1971Bom314; 1971MhLJ611
ORDER1. Being aggrieved by the order passed by the Joint District Judge, Akola, in an appeal, the Charity Commissioner of the State of Maharashtra, has come here in revision.2. The plaintiffs Syed Yasin and Hussainkhan had filed a suit under Section 50 of the Bombay Public Trusts Act in the Court of the District Judge. Akola, with a prayer that some of the trustees of Naigaon Masjid Trust, Akola should be removed, and they also wanted a direction for appointment of new trustees. There were other incidental prayers. This suit was filed in the District Court and the District Judge transferred the suit for disposal to the Assistant Judge, Akola. The learned Assistant Judge dismissed the suit and, therefore the plaintiffs filed an appeal before the District Judge. A preliminary objection on behalf of the applicant here was raised as to the tenability of the appeal. The learned Joint District Judge rejected the preliminary objection and ordered the appeal to proceed. This revision was heard...
Tag this Judgment!AmIn Abdul Kadar Murtasa Vs. Jivraj Otmal Ratnagiri Bhagidari and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-22-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Bom88; (1971)73BOMLR715; 1971MhLJ956
Wagle, J.1. Special Civil Suit No. 3 of 1967 was filed by the respondent - firm for recovery of an amount of Rupees 22,717.12 and costs with interest at 12 per cent per annum from the date of suit till recovery. The defendant put in contentions disputing the claim on plaintiff. After filing the suit, an application for attachment before judgment under Order 38, Rule 5 of the Civil Procedure Code was made by the plaintiff. The property was attached but the attachment was removed as the defendant furnished security in the shape of a surety bond executed by the present appellant agreeing to hold himself liable for the decree to be passed to the extent of Rs. 25,000/-.2. Subsequently on November 14, 1968 a consent decree was made by the trial Court for Rs. 22,717.12, costs of the suit and interest at 12 per cent per annum but subject to a condition that if payments were made as detailed in the terms of compromise, the decree was to be entered as satisfied provided the amount of Rs. 20,000/...
Tag this Judgment!Kishinchand Chellaram Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-22-1971
Reported in: [1972]84ITR485(Bom)
Kotval, C.J.1. The assessee at whose instance this reference was called for under section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, is a firm known as Messrs. Kishinchand Chellaram carrying on business at Gazdar House, Dhobi Talao, Bombay. We are concerned with the assessment year 1947-48, the relevant previous year being the year ending 6th April, 1947. The question which has been posed for our decision is as follows : 'Whether there was any material evidence to justify the findings of the Tribunal that the amount remitted by an employee of the Madras branch to an employee of the Bombay branch was the income of the firm, Kishinchand Chellaram, from undisclosed sources ?' 2. The question relates to an amount of Rs. 1,07,350 which was remitted by telegraphic transfer from Madras to Bombay on 15th October, 1946, and was received at Bombay on 16th October, 1946. 3. Messrs. Kishinchand Chellaram were assessed under section 23 of the Indian Income-tax Act and their assessment completed for ...
Tag this Judgment!Sitabai Naruna Pujari Vs. Auto Engineers
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-22-1971
Reported in: (1971)73BOMLR749; [1972(24)FLR357]; (1972)ILLJ290Bom
K.K. Desai, J.1. In this petition under Art. 227 of the Constitution the petitioner, who is the widow of a deceased employee of Messrs. George Motors contests the legality of the order of the Second Labour Court dated October 9, 1970 whereby the petitioner's claim for computation instituted under S. 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act was dismissed. The finding against the petitioner was that under sub-s. (2) of S. 33C an application for computation could only be made by the workman himself. The necessary corollary was that the petitioner as the widow and only heir of the deceased workman had no cause of action to make any claim under sub-s. (2) of S. 33C. 2. At the outset it requires to be stated the above finding appears to us to be without any warrant in law. It is well established that all civil rights of every kind vested-in a deceased person and all causes of action in that connection, except those which are in the category of not capable of surviving after his death, survive t...
Tag this Judgment!State Vs. Jaikar Krishna Shetty
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-13-1971
Reported in: AIR1973Bom62; (1972)74BOMLR180; ILR1972Bom773; 1972MhLJ412
1. The respondent in this case was the Manager of an eating house and according to the prosecution, he had committed breach of certain conditions of the licence. The breach was noticed by the Inspector on 5th November 1968. The Inspector, therefore, filed his complaint in the lower Court on 14th November 1968. The Inspector, therefore, filed his complaint in the lower Court on 14th November 1968, alleging that the respondent had committed a breach of the conditions Nos. 8, 21, 26 (1) (2) (3) (4), 28 (general) and Nos. 3, 7, 8, 14, 18 and 27 (special ) of eating house licence No. 9706 of 1968-69. He, therefore, contended that the respondent had committed an offence publishable under Section 471 read with Section 394 (1) (e) (I) of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act. It appears from the record that there were other two accused persons against whom also this complaint was filed. But the learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr.Chitnis appearing on behalf of the appellant-State has inform...
Tag this Judgment!Durgadas Devidas Rathod Vs. Vithal Sidram Udate and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Feb-10-1971
Reported in: AIR1972Bom92; (1971)73BOMLR751; ILR1972Bom203; 1971MhLJ930
1. Issues Nos. 1 and 3 before the trial Court were :'(1) Whether the provisions of the Bombay Money - Lenders Act are applicable to the suit transactions ? (3) Whether the plaintiff proves compliance of Sections 18 and 19 of the Act ?'Though issue No. 1 was answered in affirmative, issue No. 3 was answered in the negative. Under the provisions of the above Act, the trial Court deprived the plaintiff - mortgagee of interest that accrued due on the mortgage till the date of the institution of the suit. In that connection, before the lower appellate Court, the contention that was raised on behalf of the appellant - plaintiff was that the mortgage in suit had been executed in connection with the loan advanced to traders. The trial Court was, therefore, wrong in its affirmative finding on issue No. 1 and in depriving the plaintiff of interest due till the date of the institution of the suit. The lower appellate Court held that loan would be to a trader when it was advanced for purposes of t...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »