Mumbai Court September 1975 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.
G.G.A. Naidu Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-16-1975
Reported in: (1977)79BOMLR79
1. The above criminal application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the judgment, dated April 16, 1975, passed by the Special Judge, Greater Bombay, in case No. 6 of 1974, in which the petitioner is prosecuted for an offence under Section 5(1)(e) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, on the allegation that while the petitioner was functioning as Income-tax Officer in the office of the Commissioner of Income-tax at Bombay and Nagpur, during the period between February 1, 1958 and November 27, 1971, he was found to be in possession of pecuniary resources or properties both in his name and in the name of his dependent wife and his dependent children, like bank balances, fixed deposits, National Savings Certificates, National Defence Certificates, plots of land, costly household articles, jewellery and motor car, worth Rs. 4,00,687.32, while his known income was Rs. 2,89,986 and his known expenditure was Rs. 1,53,181, an...
Bandu Kesu Jagadale and ors. Vs. Gopinath Ramchandra Inamdar and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-15-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Bom216; 1977MhLJ46
Kania, J.1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against an order of the Commissioner, Poona Division, who is respondent No. 2 before us.2. the facts necessary for appreciation of the points raised before us lie within a narrow compass: The petitioners are the tenants and respondent No. 1 is the landlord in respect of an agricultural land bearing Survey No. 44/1 and admeasuring 13 acres 21 gunthas situated at village Pimpari, taluka Khatav, District Satara. On 29th May, 1971, respondent No. 1 landlord obtained a certificate under Section 88-C of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Bombay Tenancy Act') granting exemption to his said land from the provisions of Sections 32 to 32-R of the Bombay Tenancy Act on the ground that this total annual income including the rent thereof did not exceed Rs. 1500/- and that the suit land did not exceed an economic holding. The petitioners-tenants preferred an appeal a...
Sidramappa Basappa Atnure Vs. Bipinchand Fulchand Gandhi
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-05-1975
Reported in: (1976)78BOMLR309
Mukhi, J.1. A somewhat interesting point is required to be considered in this second appeal and the question that arises is whether notwithstanding, the provisions of as. 91 and 92 of the Indian Evidence Act, it is permissible for the Court to allow a party to show that the contract as mentioned in the relevant document or documents was not the real contract between the parties but that the transaction was something different.2. It is necessary to set out the relevant facts for the purpose of determining this question. The defendant Sidaramappa has been carrying on the business of letting out on hire bicycles and furniture in the city of Sholapur. Sometime in 1962 he required certain additional finance for his business and for that purpose he got an advertisement to be issued in the news paper 'Daily Sakal' calling upon persons who were interested in. financing a business with him to communicate with him. In response to this advertisement, the plaintiff Bipinchand a trader of Poona, wr...
D.B. Bhappu Vs. Parasmal Nemaji Bhimani
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-05-1975
Reported in: (1976)78BOMLR500
Deshmukh, J.1. This was originally a revision application which is now permitted to be converted into a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution. The petitioner is the original complainant, Assistant Collector of Customs, Bombay, on whose complaint Criminal Case No. 279/CW of 1973 is pending before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. The petition seeks to challenge the legality and propriety of the order of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate dated October 30, 1974 directing production in Court of the customs statements of witnesses and the documents on which they might be intending to rely in order to enable the defence advocate to inspect them and take down short notes or copies thereof. The application is opposed.2. The prosecution pending before the learned Magistrate is one under Section 135(7) and 135(ft)(6) of the Customs Act, 1962. As we have pointed out earlier, it is a prosecution commencing on a private complaint by the Assistant Collector of Customs. By abo...
Janba Daulatrao Borkar Vs. Rajesh Kumar Ramjiwan Agarwal
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-05-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Bom70; 1975MhLJ746
ORDER1. The respondent -landlord who is a minor through his father guardian filed an application under Clause 13 (3) (vi) of the C.P. & Berar Letting of Houses and Rent Control Order. 1949, referred to hereinafter as the Rent Control Order contending that his father wants to revive his cloth business to set up an cloth shop in the premises occupied by the petitioner- tenant. In the application he further contended that the Landlord and his father also wants to reside in the portion of the premises. According to the landlord, at present he is residing in a rent house and he has no house of his own in the city of Nagpur. Therefore, he needs this house for his bona fide occupation.2. This application was resisted by the petitioner tenant. He contended that the applicant's father was not doing any cloth business at any time and the application filed is not bona fide. He further contended that in fact one of the blocks has fallen vacant. In that block the applicant's father started a shop o...
Hanifabi Sheikh Abbas and anr. Vs. Balaji Ramaji Khapne and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-05-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Bom219
ORDER1. These proceedings arise out of a reference made by the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Wani, In Civil Suit No. 40 of 1967 under Section 125 (1) of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region) Act, 1958, the issues referred to the Tenancy Court were as follows:'(a) Whether the defendant No. 1 was the statutory tenant of the plaintiff on 5-6-1959? (b) If yes, whether that right was suspended during the period of subsistence of the deed dated 5-6-1959? (c) Whether the right of the defendant as a lessee had merged in the deed? (d) Whether the right of the defendant as a tenant would review in the case of resumption if granted?' It was contended the landholders that the suit land was given to Maroti Rama and Sitaram Baba on lease in the year 1958 and subsequently they had surrendered the possession of the disputed field to the petitioners. Thereafter, it was mortgaged in June 1959 to the respondents. It was the contention of the landholders that initially the field was ...
General Manager, Central Railway and anr. Vs. Jankoo Vithal and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-04-1975
Reported in: (1977)ILLJ235Bom
Sapre J.1. This writ petition under Art. 226 and/or 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by (1) the General Manager, Central Railway, Bombay, and (2) The Divisional Superintendent, Central Railway, Bombay, to set aside and quash the order dated March 26, 1973, passed by the 2nd respondent Mr. A T. Zambre, the then presiding Officer, Central Government Labour Court, Bombay, on an application filed before him by the 1st respondent Jankoo Vithal under S. 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'' holding that the order of compulsory retirement passed against the 1st respondent with effect from December 8, 1970, was void and he shall be deemed to be in service and is, therefore, entitled to the resultant wages and allowances and other benefits. 2. The relevant facts are these : The 1st respondent was employed by the Great India Peninsula Railway, the predecessors of the Central Railway, on November 2, 1943, as a Running Room Bearer at Vict...
Babarao Vs. Sonba
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-03-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Bom332; 1976MhLJ7
ORDER1. This revision application has been filed by the original plaintiff against the order passed by the Civil Judge, Junior Division, Darwha, dated 6 - 12 -1974 rejection his application for amendment of the plaint. Before recording of the evidence the plaintiff filed an application for amendment of the plaint and the map which was in the nature of clarification. This application was opposed by the defendant and ultimately the learned Judge came to the conclusion that as the suit is long pending and the amendment application is filed at the last stage, it does not appear to be bonafide. He further came to the conclusion that by the amendment of the defendant will be required to be changed. According to the learned Judge, proposed amendment as stated in para 5. of the application changes the nature of the suit. In this view of the matter, therefore, he rejected the application. As already observed, it is this order which is challenged in this revision application. 2. Shri Sirpurkar, ...
Sk. Jusa Vs. Ganpat Dagdu Gire and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-02-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Bom222
ORDER1. This revision petition has been filed by the original plaintiff against the order passed by the Joint District Judge, Akola, in Misc. Civil Appeal No. 21 of 1973 dated 10-8-1973. It appears from the record that the plaintiff filed a suit for a permanent injunction against the defendants and also prayed for a temporary injunction by filing an application under Order 39, Rule 2, of the Code of Civil Procedure. According to the plaintiff, the piece of land, namely, the northern side of Survey No. 128/2 situated at Malegaon had fallen to the share of the vendors in the family partition and the vendors were personally cultivating the said piece of land. He further contended that the crop-statements of the suit land from the year 1971 onwards were standing in the name of Namdeo Ganpat. Thereafter the plaintiff entered into an agreement to purchase the said laid on 28-3-1973. He further contended that as prospective purchaser he was placed in possession and he ploughed the suit land a...
Dhruwa Neelkant Vs. Krishna Ramchandra Shastri
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-01-1975
Reported in: AIR1976Bom249
ORDER1. This revision application has been filed against an order passed by the Registrar Small Causes Court, Nagpur dated 6-8-1973 setting aside the ex parte decree passed against non-applicant Krishan Ramchandra Shastri in Civil Suit No. 1454 of 1972 dated 14-11-1972.2. It seems from the record that the applicant-plaintiff filed a suit against the defendant for recovery of an amount of Rs. 100/- on the allegation that he unauthorisedly removed certain bricks belonging to the plaintiff. I am informed that the suit was filed on 24-7-1972 and a summons was offered to the defendant on 8-81972. it seems from the record that in the plaint the defendant was described as an employee in M. E. S. residing at Dharaskar building in Ramdaspeth, Nagpur. The defendant did not accept this summons, as, according to him, the description given in the summons was wrong as he was not an employee of the M. E. S. as mentioned in the summons. It seems that the service was held to be good by the Small Causes...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »