Mumbai Court September 1976 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.
Corporation of the City Vs. Gopal Shastri Narayan Ayyar and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-17-1976
Reported in: 1977CriLJ889; 1977MhLJ139
Dighe, J.1. This is an appeal by the Corporation of the City of Nagpur against the order of acquittal passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class (Corporation), Nagpur on 17th May 1974 acquitting the agent of the Bank of Baroda who was charged for an offence under Section 7(2A) of the Bombay Shops and Establishments Act. 1948. It appears that on 8-1-1974 at about 10-45 A.M. the Shop Inspector attached to the Corporation visited the premises of the Bank of Baroda. tnharampeth Branch, Nagpur and observed that the employer had failed to send an application in the prescribed Form B for. renewal of Registration Certificate in respect of his establishment for the year 1974. After going through the formalities, a challan was lodged.2. On behalf of the accused it Was contended that the provisions of the Shops and Establishments' Act, 1948 {Act No : 79 of 1948) do not apply and as such there was no necessity of taking any such licence. It may be observed that subsequently for the same year 1...
The Municipal Council, Malkapur and anr. Vs. the State of Maharashtra ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-09-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Bom244
Dharmadhikari, J.1. General elections for electing the Councillors to the Municipal Council, Malkapur were held in June 1967. Thereafter, the first meeting of the Municipal Council for electing the President was held in July 1967 and it appears that one Shri J. N. Jadhao, who is respondent No. 4 before us, was elected as the President of the Municipal Council. The term of the elected Councillors in the normal course would have expired in July 1972. But it appears that it was extended from time to time. Initially as there was an acute scarcity in the majority of the districts of Maharashtra in the year 1972, the State Government decided to extend the term of the Municipal Council upto 31st of December 1'972. Then came the Maharashtra Municipal Council Postponement of Elections- due to Scarcity Conditions in the State) Act, 1072. By virtue of this enactment the elections were postponed. It appears from the record that in the meantime on 22nd May 1972 Shri Vallabhdas Jagannath Purohit was...
Shriyans Prasad JaIn Vs. Shanti Prasad Jain
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-09-1976
Reported in: (1977)79BOMLR394
Deshmukh, J.1. These two petitions arise out of an order passed by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate in Criminal Case No. 1/P of 1972 on an application dated February 3, 1975 by original accused No. 1. The order was passed on July 18, 1975.. Against that order original accused No. 1 went in revision to the Court of Session, Greater Bombay, being Criminal Revision Application No. 242 of 1975. That application was disposed of on October 1, 1975. Being aggrieved by this final order giving certain directions original accused No. 2 has filed Criminal Application No. 442 of 1976 and original accused No. 1 has filed Criminal Application No. 909 of 1976. Though the points of view of the parties involved are different, the arguments are common and they are addressed against the same order of the learned Magistrate as varied by the Additional Sessions Judge. Hence these petitions are heard together and will be disposed of by this common order.2. The relevant facts for the purpose of deciding the...
Shriyans Prasad JaIn Vs. Shanti Prasad JaIn and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-09-1976
Reported in: 1977CriLJ1270
Deshmukh, J.1. These two petitions arise out of an order passed by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate in Criminal Case No. 1/P of 1972 on an application dated 3rd February 1975 by original accused No. 1. The order was passed on 18th July 1975, Against that order original accused No. 1 went in revision to the Court of Session, Greater Bombay, being Criminal Revision Application No 242 of 1975. That application was disposed of on 1st October 1975. Being aggrieved by this final order giving certain directions original accused No. 2 has filed Criminal Application No. 442/76 and original accused No. 1 has filed Criminal Application No. 909/76. Though the points of view of the parties involved are different, the arguments are common and they are addressed against the same order of the learned Magistrate as varied by the Addl. Sessions Judge. Hence these petitions are heard together and will be disposed of by this common order.2. The relevant facts for the purpose of deciding these petitions a...
Deccan Farms and Distilleries Ltd. Vs. Velabai Laxmidas Bhanji
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-08-1976
Reported in: [1979]49CompCas321(Bom)
Aggarwal, J.1. The present appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 26th November, 1975, passed by a learned single judge of this court in Company Petition No. 22 of 1974.2. The petitioner, Velabai Laxmidas Bhanji, had given a loan of Rs. 2,500 to a company named Deccan Farms and Distilleries Private Limited on or about 10th September, 1973, for which the said private limited company issued a loan certificate acknowledging the loan of R. 2,500 from the petitioner repayable on 31st August, 1974, being the date of maturity carrying interest thereon at the rate of 15 per cent. per annum. By her attorney's letter dated 26th September, 1974, the petitioner demanded the repayment of the said sum of Rs. 2,500 with interest thereon and by the same letter she gave a statutory notice as required under s. 434 of the Companies Act, 1956. The said statutory notice was addressed to private limited company. It appears that, after the said transaction, the private limited company was co...
Shivyogi Gurumurtippa Wale Vs. Santosh Jivraj Shah
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-08-1976
Reported in: (1979)81BOMLR42
Vaidya, J.1. The petitioner, Shivyogi Gurumurtippa Wale, is the tenant and respondent No, 1, Santosh Jivraj Shah, a minor, is the landlord of the suit premises, consisting of the ground floor of House No. 900, situate at West Mangalwar Peth, Sholapur.2. The landlord filed Regular Civil Suit No. 43 of 1972 against Shivyogi, and Regular Civil Suit No. 45 of 1972, against Shivyogi's son, Sidramappa, who was the tenant on the first floor in the building bearing Municipal House No. 901 in the Court of the civil Judge, Junior Division, Sholapur, for recovery of possession on the ground that he required the suit premises for occupation by himself through his partnership firm in which the plaintiff was admitted to the benefits of the partnership as a minor.3. On August 30, 1971, the houses were purchased for Rs. 16,000 in the name of the minor by his father Jivraj Shah. The defendants have been using the suit premises for the purpose of their retail cloth shop.4. It was undisputed that the pla...
Dwarkanath Hansdas Khaparde Vs. Vithal Tulsiram Ramteke and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-08-1976
Reported in: 1977CriLJ1078; 1976MhLJ714
Masodkar J.1. The petitioner is arrayed as an accused in a complaint presented by the respondent Vithal Ramteke to the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nagpur on November 29, 1973. That complaint alleged offence under several counts such as Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 472, 473, 474, 476 and 477-A of the Indian Penal Code. It is not in dispute that on February 28, 1974, the complaint was registered on all these 11 counts and process issued to the present petitioner-accused. The process issued with regard to offences under Sections 467, 472, 473, 474 and 476 of the Indian Penal Code which were exclusively triable by the Court of Session under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (hereinafter called the Old Code), would have reference to Chapter XVI read with Chapter XVIII of the Code as then applicable. Under the former Chapter the procedure regarding complaints to Magistrates is indicated while under the latter Chapter the procedure regarding the enquiry into cases ...
Kundlik Tukaram Fatangale Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-03-1976
Reported in: AIR1977Bom83; 1976MhLJ825
ORDER1. The only point that arises for determination in this petition is regarding the number of members in the family falling under the definition of 'family unit' as given under Section 4 (1) of the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling on Holdings) Act, 1961 as amended, (hereinafter called the New Act). The petitioner was taken as holding in all the lands measuring 84 acres and 23 gunthas. Pot Kharab of 4 acres was allowed so that the land for the purposes of determining the ceiling area was taken as 80 acres 23 gunthas On the basis of 6 members in the family he was allowed to retain 60 acres so that 15 acres 23 gunthas was declared as surplus.2. The decision of the Surplus-Land Determination Tribunal was maintained by the Revenue Tribunal, but on a slightly different reasoning as will be evident later on. In challenging the decision of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, the petitioner had taken two points, one about the members in the family unit and other about the pot kharab. It...
Dashrath Ramchandra Khairnar Vs. Pandu Chila Khairnar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-03-1976
Reported in: (1977)79BOMLR426; 1977MhLJ358
Naik, J.1. This appeal raises an interesting question of law under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956. It arises in this way : Pandu, plaintiff No. 1 is the husband of Manjulabai, the first defendant and Sitabai plaintiff No. 2. On February 25, 1961 by the gift-deed exh. 54, Pandu gifted survey No. 154/2 of Chinchave, taluka Malegaon to the junior wife Sitabai and survey No. 104/3 to the senior wife Manjulabai. Pandu and Sitabai purported to adopt plaintiff No. 3 on July 26, 1964. Manjulabai the senior wife being opposed to that adoption and not having given her consent to the same, a dispute arose and that dispute was tried to be settled by the first plaintiff Pandu and plaintiff No. 2 Sitabai executing an agreement exh. 62 dated August 18, 1964, in favour of Manjulabai, defendant No. 1 whereby Pandu consented to Manjulabai taking defendant No. 5 in adoption. On the basis of the said consent, the first defendant did take defendant No. 5 in adoption.2. Disputes having arisen...
Bajirao Baliram Mali Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-03-1976
Reported in: (1977)79BOMLR189
Chandurkar, J.1. In this petition filed by the petitioner who is a detenu under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the 'MISA'), the main contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that h spite of the decision of the Supreme Court in A.D.M., Jabalpur v. S. Shukla : 1976CriLJ945 (hereinafter referred to as 'Shukla's case'), there is still a small area of judicial review within which the High Court functioning under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is entitled to exercise its powers and make an order for release o the detenu.2. The facts leading to the filing of this petition are not in dispute. Originally the petitioner came to be detained in pursuance of an order made by the District Magistrate, Dhule, on June 29, 1975. This order (exh. C) recited that where as the District Magistrate, Dhule, was satisfied with respect to Shri Bajirao Baliram Mali of Dhule that it was necessary to make an order of detention with a view to prev...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »