Mumbai Court July 1973 Judgments
Hajrat Pirane Chilla of Khwaja Trust, Akola Vs. the Manager, United Tr ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-18-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Bom178
1. The present petition has been filed admittedly by the landlord of the premises, which are given to United transport Motor Company (respondent No. 1) on a monthly rent of Rs. 81/-. It is no more in dispute that the tenancy between parties is month to month and is according to English Calendar.2. The present petitioner-landlord applied under clause 13 (3) (iii) of the C.P. and Berar Letting of Houses and Rent Control Order, 1949, hereafter called the Rent Control Order, for permission to give quit notice to the respondent-company on the ground that it has sublet a portion of the premises to other two respondents. Now this permission has been refused by the authorities under the Rent Control Order on the ground that this sub-letting is prior to the coming into force of the said Order.3. In this court it is not disputed on behalf of the respondent-tenant-company that there is a sub-letting and in the return the following averments appear:'.........It is denied that the respondent No. 1 ...
Tag this Judgment!Kumari Jethi T. Sipahimalani Vs. the Maharashtra State Co-operative Tr ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-18-1973
Reported in: (1974)76BOMLR179; 1974MhLJ550
Vaidya, J.1. The above petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against the proceedings under Section 88 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. It involves an important question as to whether in exercise of its powers under Section 72 of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960, the general meeting of a Co-operative Society can pass a resolution to pay honorarium to its member for services rendered by him to the Society.2. The few facts relevant to the case may be stated as follows:3. Respondent No, 6, the Navjivan Co-operative Housing Society Ltd., having its office at Lamington Road, was registered on December 12, 1955, under the Bombay Co-operative Societies Act, 1925. It is deemed to be registered under the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960. It is governed by its registered bye-laws. It is one of the largest Co-operative Housing Societies1 in the State of Maharashtra. It has a membership of 1800 members. It has provided re...
Tag this Judgment!Supdabai Badrinarayan Joshi Vs. Subhash Kashinath Shrawak
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-13-1973
Reported in: (1974)76BOMLR202
Bhole, J.1. The original defendant is the petitioner here and he has filed this petition under Article 227 against the order passed by the learned Extra Assistant Judge, Nasik in appeal. During the minority of the original plaintiff his mother Tarabai as the guardian had filed a suit against the petitioner for recovery of possession of the suit house. The petitioner was staying there for a long time. Because the plaintiff's suit was decreed, therefore the petitioner filed an appeal against the said decree. The decree was modified by the appellate Court and the petitioner was asked to vacate the suit house by March 16, 1966 in order to facilitate the plaintiff to start and finish the repair work. It was ordered that the petitioner shall be restored the possession of the premises after the repairs. It is in these circumstances that the original plaintiff obtained possession of the premises on March 17, 1966, and carried out the repairs. The unfortunate part of it was that the petitioner ...
Tag this Judgment!Kalyan Kumar Nag Vs. Dina Guha
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-13-1973
Reported in: (1974)76BOMLR815
Nain, J.1. This is an originating summons taken out by the executors of the last will and testament dated August 7, 1958 of one Dipendra Sankar Guha who died in Bombay on November 24, 1971. The query posed by the executors on this summons is whether the said will and testament stands revoked by the subsequent marriage on August 25, 1968 of the deceased with defendant No. 1, under the Special Marriage Act, 1954.2. The few facts relating to the matter are as follows: On June 23, 1955 the deceased Dipendra Sankar Guha married one Johanna Mathews under the Special Marriage Act, 1954. Defendants Nos. 2 and 3 are the children of the deceased from the said marriage. On August 7, 1958 the deceased made the will which is exh. 'A' to the plaint. On April 26, 1962 the marriage of the deceased to Johanna Mathews was dissolved by a decree passed by the Bombay City Civil Court in M.J. Petition No. 643 of 1962. Thereafter on August 25, 1968 the deceased married defendant No. 1 under the Special Marri...
Tag this Judgment!Yadaorao Ramchandra Rao Majarkhede and ors. Vs. Agricultural Produce M ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-11-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Bom181; 1974MhLJ338
Chandurkar, J.1. This petition filed by the petitioners, who claim to be the agriculturists, is directed against the two notifications issued under Sections 3 and 4 of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1963, hereinafter referred to as the Marketing Regulation Act, and as also against the action taken by the Collector, Wardha, for holding elections to all the Agricultural Produce Marketing Committees in Wardha District. Notification was issued by the Director of Agricultural Marketing and Rural Finance. Maharashtra State, on June 3, 1970, by which the Director declared his intention to extend the marketing area of the Agricultural produce Market committee, Arvi, in arvi Tahsil of the Wardha District so as to include in its area of panchayat Samiti, Arvi and panchayat Samiti Karanja established under the Maharashtra Zilla parishad and panchayat samities act, 1961, and proper Arvi Town in Arvi Tahsil of wardha District and to regulate the marketing of all th...
Tag this Judgment!Shrinivas Subyya Alwa Vs. Krishnavani Vasudeo Mudliyar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-11-1973
Reported in: (1974)76BOMLR218; 1974MhLJ505
Bhole, J.1. These applications arise out of the ejectment proceedings initiated by the landlady under the provisions of the Bombay Rent Act. In Special Civil Application No. 977 of 1970 the tenant-original defendant No. 1 is the petitioner and in Special Civil Application No. 1391 of 1970 the sub-tenant original defendant No. 2 is the petitioner. Respondent No. 1-landlady gave House No. 365 Rasta Peth, Poona together with the bungalow, outhouses etc. on lease in the year 1948 to the petitioner under the rent note dated November 18, 1948. The period under the said rent note was three months from October 20, 1948 onwards. Even after the expiry of the said period the petitioner continued to be in possession of the premises but the premises were used by them for running a lodging and boarding house. The petitioner under a different document sublet two rooms out of these premises to the sub-tenant, who is using the said two rooms for a godown. He is a money lender and he used those two room...
Tag this Judgment!Borosil Glass Works Limited Vs. M.G. Chitale and Richard M. D'souza
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-09-1973
Reported in: (1974)IILLJ184Bom; 2001(1)MhLj643
Dudhia, J.1. This is a Special Civil Application under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, filed by the petitioners against the order of the 1st respondent, the Industrial Tribunal, dated 21st April, 1972. The petitioner-company is incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and has its registered office and factory at Andheri, Bombay. The 1st respondent is an Industrial Tribunal constituted by the Government of Maharashtra under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Three disputes between the petitioner-company and the workmen employed under it relating to various demands of the workmen were pending before the 1st respondent being Reference (IT) Nos. 29 and 117 of 1963 and 282 of 1971. Respondent No. 2 is a workman employed by the petitioner company and was concerned in the said three references in dispute.2. During the pendency of those proceedings it appears that the petitioner-company issued a charge-sheet dated 22nd October, 1971 to the second respondent alleging that he h...
Tag this Judgment!Sakhubai and ors. Vs. Onkarlal Dulichand Agarwal
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-09-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Bom122; 1974MhLJ257
ORDER1. The present petition has been filed by the legal representatives of Bhagwan Punaji Bari, a tenant upon survey No.701, area 3.31 acres of Rtamtakpura, Akot, district Akola. it is no more in dispute that said Bhagwan was the tenant and that these petitioners are his legal representatives. it is further not in dispute that the field is situated in Akot town and it is within the muncipal limits.2. With respect to this field, the respondent-landlord Onkarlal filed an applicaiton purporting to be under Section 58 (93) (c) read with Section 36 (92) of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region) Act, 1958, here-in-after called the Act, after giving a notice that he wanted this land for personal agricultural cultivation. it was further stated in the body of the petition that the land in question is a horticultural one and had been left out for tha purpose and the rights of hte parties are governed by Section 58 only.3. It may be mentioned that it is not disputed that the...
Tag this Judgment!Kashiprasad Ramanarayan Agrawal Vs. Usmankhan Gulabkhan
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-06-1973
Reported in: AIR1974Bom76; 1973MhLJ925
ORDER1. This is a petition by the land-holder complaining against the orders made by the revenue authorities by which the prayer of the land-holder to put him in possession has been negatived. 2. The respondent Usmankhan, being the tenant, was proceeded against by the land-holder after giving notice under Section 19 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha region) Act, (hereinafter referred to as the act), in that he had not paid the lease money for the year 1960-61. the registered notice was served and in spite of that, the lease-money payment was not forthcoming and, therefore, an application was filed on 9-4-1962 against. Usmankhan which is an application under section 36 of the Act. In this application a specific prayer was made that possession of the property be handed over to the land-holder in accordance with law. The cause for application was, determination of the tenancy for non-payment of the lease-money. 3. A notice was issued to the tenant and, in reply, the t...
Tag this Judgment!Limbayya Limbadri Adep Vs. Narammabai Sadashiv Ande
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-06-1973
Reported in: (1974)76BOMLR344; 1974MhLJ546
Bhole, J.1. The petitioner here is a tenant who is asked to quit by the order passed by the learned Assistant Judge, Poona. He allowed the appeal of the landlord against the order of the Small Causes Court, which had dismissed the landlord's claim for possession. The petitioner had filed a miscellaneous application against the respondent landlord for the purpose of fixing standard rent of the promises in 1958. It was fixed at Rs. 3 per month and when the landlord went in revision before the District Judge, it was dismissed. The landlord therefore challenged the order of the District Court before the High Court and the High Court set aside the order and remanded the matter back for disposal according to law. After the remand the standard rent was fixed by the trial Court at Rs. 5 per month on April 19, 1966. The petitioner-tenant then filed a revision application before the District Court, but it was dismissed on August 11, 1967.2. In the meanwhile when these proceedings in the miscella...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »