Mumbai Court September 1975 Judgments
Keshav Ramchandra Malear Vs. Ramdas Dasharath Malekar and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-30-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Bom330
Sawant, J.1. This letters patent appeal is filled against the decision dated 2-4-1973 of the single Judge in First Appeal No. 366 of 1972.2. The plaintiff had filed a suit being Suit No. 25 of 1947 in the Court of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Satara for partition of agricultural and non-agricultural property against his brothers claiming that the property was a joint family property. In that suit, a preliminary decree was passed on 4-8-1949 declaring the shares of the respective parties. Against the said preliminary decree, the matter was carried in First Appeal No. 647 of 1949 which was decided on 29-7-1953, by which decision the preliminary decree was confirmed. Thereafter, the plaintiff filed an application which was styled as Special Darkhast NO. 22 of 1954 on 13-4-1954 praying for two relief's. The first relief was for determination of their shares in the non-agricultural property involved in the suit were houses. On 4-3-1955, the Court passed an order on the said application...
Tag this Judgment!Manohar Shamrao Singanapure and anr. Vs. Balkrishna Dattatrya Deshpand ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-26-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Bom105; 1975MhLJ816
Deshpande, J.1. This special civil application is referred to this Full bench as it raises a question of some importance as to competency of the Clerk of Court of the District court, and its other officer to receive election petitions, in the absence of the District judge on leave, to whom the aggrieved person has to apply for challenging the validity of election of any Councilor under Section 27 of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis Act of 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act.).2. Election to Zilla Parishad of Buldana took place on 27th May 1972. The respondent No. 1 was declared elected on 2-6-1972 from the electoral division No. 25. The petitioner and two others, the voters, challenged the validity of his election by application dated 16-6-1972, District judge, Buladana was on leave on that date and for some time thereafter. The petitioner therefore lodged three sets of separate applications , one with Clerk of Court of the District Judge, Buldana was on lever...
Tag this Judgment!Harikishan and ors. Vs. Krishna Dhanaji Shelki and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-25-1975
Reported in: AIR1977Bom330; 1976MhLJ537
Deshpande, J.1. All these companion matters raise a common question of some importance. The question was referred to the Division Bench on 9-2-1972 and then to the Full Bench on 13-8-1974. In all these petitions, the petitioner is the same landlord. His application for possession dated 3-10-1961 after attaining majority on 4-10-1960 against his different tenants under Section 36 read with S, 38 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region) Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), for personal cultivation were rejected by the Additional Tahsildar on 30-5-1964 and the order is confirmed in appeal and revision. According to the concurrent orders, the petitioner failed to prove that the lands sought to be resumed constituted the principal source of his income. This finding, among others, is based on the fact that the petitioner acquired about 40 acres of land and sums of Rupees 20,000/-, Rs. 7,000/- and Rs. 2,000/-on different dates during the pendency of the proc...
Tag this Judgment!Prakash Ramnath Adurkar Vs. Ganesh Waman Athawale
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-24-1975
Reported in: (1976)78BOMLR328
Deshmukh, J.1. This is an application by the original accused persona under Article 227 of the Constitution in circumstances which are rather peculiar.2. The facts that are apparent from the record are that respondent No. 1 Ganesh Waman Athawale filed Criminal case No 235/S of 1974 in the Court of the Metropolitan Magistrate, 26th Court, Borivli, Bombay, on May 28, 1974. Process was issued in the complaint and the case was being adjourned from time to time. On February 7, 1975, which was admittedly the date for hearing of that complaint, both the parties appeared. The casa was not heard but was adjourned. There is some dispute as to the next date of adjournment and this question will be discussed by us a little later.3. The case of the complainant is that the next date given was February 19, 1975. On that day, viz. February 19, 1975, the complainant as well as the accused persons appeared. However, it was discovered by the complainant that the rojnama maintained by the Court mentioned ...
Tag this Judgment!Sumanbai Vs. Anandrao Onkar Panpatil
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-23-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Bom212
1. This is a wife's Second Appeal challenging the validity and property of a decree passed by the learned Assistance Judge, Dhulia, on August 2, 1972, passed in favour of the husband for restitution of conjugal rights. The decree was passed by the learned Assistant Judge, Dhulia who set aside the decree passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Dhulia dismissing the husband's petition under Section 9 on the ground that the husband had failed to prove that wife's withdrawal from his society was without reasonable excuse.2. The findings of the trial Judge were based on careful appreciation of the oral evidence of the husband and his witness on the one hand and the wife and her witness on the other and also the documents on record produced by both the sides. The learned trial Judge observed:'It is not disputed that the parties were married in 1963. It appears that they cohabited at Nawapur for about 6 or 7 years. There are three issues out of the marriage. At the time of the birth of th...
Tag this Judgment!Buchayya Chandrayya Irabatti Vs. G.S. Chindhde
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-22-1975
Reported in: (1978)80BOMLR162; 1976MhLJ191
Vimadalal, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution filed by an employer who runs the business of manufacturing cloth on powerlooms seeking to quash and set aside the order passed by the first respondent on May 15, 1974. The short facts necessary for the purpose of disposing of this application are, that respondent No. 2 was a piece-rated worker in the employment of the petitioner, and was, as such, entitled to get wages on the out-turn of his work at the rate of rupee 1 per hundred yards of yarn whenever he was present and worked in the establishment. Respondent No. 2 filed an application under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, before the first respondent who presided over the Labour Court at Sholapur, claiming that he should be paid at the rate of Rs. 8 per day for the 200 weekly holidays between January 1, 1968 and December 31, 1972 under Section 18(3) of the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act, 1948. In the Labour Court, the present petitione...
Tag this Judgment!Sambaji Abaji Patharkar Vs. the State of Maharashtra and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-22-1975
Reported in: 1976CriLJ1854
ORDERApte, J.1. The petitioner in this petition challenges the order passed in appeal by the Additional Sessions Judge, Poona, confirming the order of conviction and sentence passed against the petitioner by the trial Court for an offence under Section 16 (1) (a) (i) read with Section 7 (i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954.2. The petitioner is a grocery merchant carrying on business at Shop No. 1501, New Bazar, Khadkia suburb of Poona. On May 21, 1971, respondent No. 2 B. R. Dharmadhikari, who is the Food Inspector in the employ of the Municipal Corporation of Poona, visited this shop and purchased 450 grams of tur dal which was kept for sale in the shop. He gave the accused to understand that he had purchased that sample for being sent to Public Analyst for examination. Thereafter following the usual procedure of dividing the sample in three equal parts and keeping each sample in a dry sealed packet, one of the packets was handed over to the accused, one was retained b...
Tag this Judgment!Sheikh Mohamed Arshad Faizulla Vs. Devidas Vithal Salsingikar and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-17-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Bom281
Sapre, J.1. This petition under Arts. 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against an order made by the 10th respondent, the Additional Chief Judge, Court of Small Causes, Bombay, on July 16, 1975 in Election Petition No. M/261 of 1973. The election petition was preferred by the 1st respondent Devidas Vithal Salsingikar challenging the election of the petitioner Dr. Sheikh Mohamed Arshad Faizulla at a municipal election for Ward No. 96, Squatters Colony, Jogeshwari, Bombay, held on March 9, 1973 AT that election, the petitioner secured the highest number of votes, namely, 4,705, whereas the 1st respondent secured the next highest number of votes, namely, 4,353. The Additional Chief Judge by the impugned order set aside the election of the petitioner and declared the 1st respondent to have been duly elected at the said election.2. Respondents 2 to 7 are the other candidates who had contested the election. Respondent No. 8 is the Municipal Commissioner for Greater Bombay,...
Tag this Judgment!Tehmi Dinyar Mistry Vs. Dinyar Kaikhushroo Mistry
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-17-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Bom246
Sawant, J. 1. This first appeal is filed against the order dated 7-7-1972 passed by the Single Judge of this Court in Matrimonial Suit No. 36 of 1970 in the Parsi Chief Matrimonial Court at Bombay.2. The few facts leading to this appeal are as follows:-3. The appellant is the ex-wife of the respondent. She had filed a suit being Matrimonial Suit No. 36 of 1970 for a decree of divorce or in the alternative for a decree of judicial separation and for a permanent alimony against the respondent under the provisions of the Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) in the Parsi Chief Matrimonial Court at Bombay. The Court by a decree dated 31-3-1971 dissolved the marriage between the parties under Section 35 of the said Act and granted divorce to the plaintiff-wife on the parties further the Court ordered the defendant-husband to pay to the plaintiff-wife on or before the 30th day of April 1971, a lump sum of Rs. 15,000/- as and by way of permanent alimon...
Tag this Judgment!Janardan Sarvottam Rao Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-17-1975
Reported in: (1976)78BOMLR380
Deshmukh, J.1. This is a revision application by original accused No. 1. The petitioner-accused No. 1 was admittedly in charge of a State Transport Canteen at Atit in Satara District, which was run by his father at the time of the commission of the present offence. While the father was away to South Kanara, the petitioner was in charge of the canteen on June 15, 1973 and at least a fortnight before that. The food inspector took sample of a sweet called ' Bundi Ladu'. After performing the necessary formalities, he sent the sample to the public analyst for his examination and report. The sample was found to be Adulteration inasmuch as coal tar dye was used as a colouring material. On these facts the prosecution was launched against accused No. 1 and his father accused No. 2. After contesting the case for some time, accused No. 1 pleaded guilty to the charge. The learned Magistrate, accepted the plea of guilty at that stage and convicted the accused under Section 16(7)(a)(i) of the Preven...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »