Mumbai Court August 1972 Judgments
Manohar Narayan Joshi Vs. Ramu Mhatang Patel and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-31-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Bom105; (1973)75BOMLR305; ILR1973Bom764; 1972MhLJ973
ORDER(1)In this petition, issues Nos. 1 (a) and 1 (b) have been argued by the parties as preliminary issues. These issues are : -1(a). Is the affidavit filed by the petitioner defective? (b) If yes, is the petition liable to be dismissed?2. The facts, which are not required to be stated in detail, in this case are that the respondent No.1 Ramu son of Mhatang Patel, was elected from the Melghat (S.T.) Assembly Constituency No. 110 at the General Elections to the State Legislative Assembly held on 5th March 1972. The petitioner, who claims to be an elector in the said Constituency, has filed this election petition challenging the election of the respondent No.1 on the ground that the respondent No.1 was guilty of corrupt practices under Section 123(4) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). This election petition is filed under Section 80 of the Act . Section 83 of the Act deals with the contents of an election petition, and under the proviso t...
Tag this Judgment!Shakti Electro Mechanical Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs. F.N. Lala
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-30-1972
Reported in: (1974)76BOMLR42; [1974(29)FLR180]; (1974)IILLJ1Bom
1. In this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner-company has challenged the legality and correctness of the award dated August 21, 1967, made by the Industrial Tribunal in Reference (IT) No. 377 of 1966. 2. The relevant facts are as follows : The petitioner-company carries on business of manufacturing electrical and mechanical articles and appliances at its factory at Kalina, Santacruz (East), Bombay. Prior to May 22, 1966, the petitioner-company employed 110 permanent and 21 temporary workmen in its factory. The factory timings for all the workmen were then 8-30 A.M. to 5-30 P.M., with a lunch break from 12-30 P.M. to 1-00 P.M. on week days. By a letter dated May 17, 1966 addressed to the Chief Inspector of Factories the petitioner-company proposed alteration of the above working hours from 7-00 A.M. to 3-00 P.M., with a lunch break from 11-00 A.M. to 11-30 A.M. The petitioner-company made this proposal so as to begin working two shifts instead of one shift which...
Tag this Judgment!State Vs. Jagashi Lalji JaIn and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-29-1972
Reported in: 1974CriLJ413; 1973MhLJ662
Deshpande, J.1. This is an appeal against the acquittal of the two respondents for offence under Section 394(1)(a)(ii) r/w Section 471 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'. Junior Municipal Inspector 'G'/South Ward paid a visit on 13-11-69 to a shop of 'M/s. Bharat Chemical Works.' He learnt that both the respondents - father and son were partners of the said firm, and that the concern was dealing in liquid soap, white cleaning acid, bleaching powder and chemicals. In the course of search, he found 24 bottles of disinfectant liquid (essence of phenyle), each bottle containing 600 grams of phenyle, 24 bottles of hydrochloric acid each containing 6.50 kgs., 24 bottles of Acetic acid each containing 4 kgs., 2 kgs. of Petroleum jelly and insecticide powder, 10% BHC 72 Packets each of 100 Gms. Possession of these articles by the concern in excess of the quantity permitted under the Schedule 'M' without licence was in violation of Section 394(1)(a)(ii...
Tag this Judgment!Sanjay Cotton Co. Vs. Omprakash Shioprakash and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-25-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Bom40; (1973)75BOMLR318; ILR1973Bom1197; 1974MhLJ43
ORDER1. This revision is filed by the original defendant No.1 in a suit filed by one M/s. Omprakash Shioprakash, now pending in the Court of Civil Judge Senior Division Akola. It appears that the said plaintiff is seeking recovery of an amount of Rs. 13,489.82 on the allegation that the plaintiff had dealings with defendant No.1 and another defendant No.2 and the amount due is recoverable. He pleads as agreement that defendant No.1 was to clear off the liability of defendant No.2 and inter se between the parties, defendant No.1 was to recover the amount from defendant No.2 and pay the plaintiff. Thus, it appears that between defendants also some agreement is pleaded by the plaintiff. The facts are not very material for the purpose of decision of this revision.2. After the written statement was put in, in which defendant No.1 appears to have challenged the claim of the plaintiff on all counts, including the genuineness of the transaction, some documents were filed on behalf of the plain...
Tag this Judgment!P. Ratnam Yeshwantraj Mudliyar Vs. Vimalchandra Shiv Datta Grovar and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-25-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Bom111; 1973MhLJ72
1. This is a second appeal filed by the defendant-tenant against the judgment dated 9-8-1971 of the Third Extra Assistant Judge, Nagpur, in Civil Appeal No. 138 of 1971 dismissing the appeal filed by the defendant and confirming the judgment and decree passed by the Fourth Joint Civil Judge, Junior Division, Nagpur, in Regular Civil Suit No. 175 of 1970, decided on 31-3-1971, directing the defendant-tenant to vacate the suit premises and to deliver possession of the same to the plaintiffs. By this decree the defendant was further ordered to pay Rs. 1510/- and costs by the suit to the plaintiffs and an enquiry into the mesne profits in respect of the suit premises from 26-2-1970, the date of the institution of the suit, till delivery of possession was also ordered.2. Civil Suit No. 175 of 1970 was filed by the plaintiffs-landlord for ejectment and mesne profits regarding the suit premises, that is a bungalow, bearing Corporation House No. 64/0-4 situated in Ward No. 38 at Nagpur. It was...
Tag this Judgment!Ramkrishan Ganpat Futane and ors. Vs. Mohammad Kasam and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-21-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Bom242; (1974)76BOMLR104; 1973MhLJ511
Chandurkar, J.1. The defendants-appellants who are the transferees from the original defendants Nos. 1 to 4 have filed this appeal challenging the judgment and decree passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Amravati decreeing the suit for possession and mesne profits filed by the plaintiffs-respondent Nos. 1 and 2. The plaintiffs claimed the suit property as mutawallis appointed by a wake deed dated 4-7-1946 alleged to have been executed by deceased Sheikh Mehatab who died on 15-11-1946. By this wake deed Sheikh Mehatab purported to create a wake in respect of the properties specified therein, and according to the recitals in the wake deed Sheikh Mahatab was himself to be the mutawalli during his lifetime. The plaintiffs alleged that after Sheikh Mehatab died on 15-11-1946 defendant No. 1 Sheikh Gulab forcibly took possession of the property and alienated a large part of it. Sheikh Mehatab was the son of Sheikh Bawru and he had a brother by name Sheikh Chandu. Sheikh Chandu, had a ...
Tag this Judgment!Klim Plastic Products and ors. Vs. Paradise Industrial Corporation and ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-19-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Bom249; (1973)75BOMLR224
ORDER1. This is a tenant's petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging an ex parte decree passed by a Judge of the Small Causes Court on August 6, 1969 which was confirmed by an appellate Bench of that Court on October 27, 1969. The said decisions are challenged on the ground that the ex parte decree was passed contrary to law and without jurisdiction on the erroneous basis that an interim order passed under Section 11(4) of the Bombay Rents Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947, was not complied with by the tenants. The tenant has deposited by now all that was ordered to be deposited by now all that was ordered to be deposited and all the rent that is due up to date either in the small Causes Court or in this Court as ordered by this Court during the pendency of the above special civil application.2. The only question which arises in this petition is as to whether sub-s. (4) of Section 11 justified the Small Cause Court to pass an ex parte decree mere...
Tag this Judgment!Rama Ningappa Joshilkar Vs. Kirtikumar Pawatrao Desal and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-17-1972
Reported in: AIR1974Bom92; (1973)75BOMLR701; 1973MhLJ969
ORDER1. The petitioner are respondents Nos. 2 and 3 in the above special Civil application under Art. 227 of the Constitution of India are tenants of agricultural land bearing survey No. 66, measuring 2 acres 39 gunthas and assessed at Rs. 16.00 situate at village Hundalewadi in Taluka Chandgad. District Kolhapur. In an enquiry held under Section 32-G of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Acts, 1948, the Additional Mamlatdar and Agricultural Lands Tribunal, Chandgad, by his order dated November 20, 1963 declared that the statutory sale in favour of the tenants had become ineffective inasmuch as the land in question belonged to a minor landlord-respondent No.1 whose birth date is May, 20, 1942 and who attained majority on May 20, 1960. The Agricultural Lands Tribunal held that as the tenants failed to give notice under Section 32-F (1A) within one year's period, the sale had become ineffective. 2. The petitioner challenged the said decision before the Prant officer, Gadhinglaj Di...
Tag this Judgment!Maharashtra State Electricity Board, Bombay Vs. Union of India
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-16-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Bom44; ILR1973Bom843; 1972MhLJ865
ORDER1. These revision applications are being disposed of by a common judgment, for there is only one common question raised therein. In all these revisions Maharashtra State Electricity Board being consignee filed Civil Suits against the Union of India for the Central Railway for recovery of the claims on account of short deliveries of slack coal from various places to the Paras Railway Siding located in district Akola.2. It is found out in each case by the learned trial Court that there had been in fact short deliveries which are from the period of July 1962 to February 1963 in all these cases. It is also not disputed that the goods were so carried at the owner's risk and no special payment was made to the Railways. The learned trial Judge, however, took the view that the plaintiff failed to establish, as required by Section 74 (3) of the Indian Railways Act, that this short delivery was due to the negligence of any the servants of the Railways. In view of this finding, the learned J...
Tag this Judgment!Sheshrao Baliramji Kale and ors. Vs. the Collector, Buldana and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Aug-10-1972
Reported in: AIR1973Bom45; ILR1973Bom829; 1972MhLJ910
Masodkar, J.1. By this present petition yet another proceeding relating to the election of the Panchayat Samiti under the provisions of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis Act, 1961, is under challenge.2. The Mehkar Panchayat Samiti in district Buldana is being constituted and there are 8 members to be elected under Section 57 (1) (f) of the Act, two each from four electoral colleges, one being Dongaon. The primary members are the panchas elected or continued as such of the village Panchayats existing in each Electoral College. It is the complaint of the petitioners that there are elected panchas from Gohogaon Gram Panchayat. The process of new elections or the Gram Panchayat, Gohogaon, has started but yet is not complete because of the stay order issued by this Court, relating to the elections of Wards Nos. 2 and 3 of the said Gram Panchayat. It is stated that Gohogaon Gram Panchayat has been divided in 4 wards. The petitioner No.1 was holding the office of the Panch...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »