Mumbai Court July 1977 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.
Kausalyabai Jagdeorao Vs. Devkabai Jaiwantrao Deshmukh
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-20-1977
Reported in: (1978)80BOMLR620; 1978MhLJ357
Vaidya, J.1. His Lordship after setting out the facts of the case, and dealing with the evidence not material for this report, proceeded. Mr. Deo then contended that even if the defendant was born on February 3, 1923, she was hardly a child of one year and two months on April 2, 1924 the date of the adoption of her father; and she must be, therefore, considered to have passed, along with her mother, into the adoptive family of the deceased Abaji.2. He also submitted that, irrespective of whether she passed into the adoptive family or not, in accordance with the old Hindu Law, Section 4 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, overruled such rule, if any, with regard to the status of a daughter; and Section 8 of that Act entitled the defendant as a daughter of the deceased Abaji to succeed Abaji as an heir in class I along with Devkabai and Jankabai No. 2, both the widows having one share; and she having the other.3. After the death of Jankabai No. 2, even assuming that as a step-daughter she...
Mrs. Maya Bhagwandas Advani Vs. Bhagwandas Tarachand Advani
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-20-1977
Reported in: (1979)81BOMLR126; 1978MhLJ449
Chandurkar, J.1. This petition arises out of a dispute raised by opponent No. 1, who is the husband of the petitioner, in respect of five shares which admittedly stand in the name of the petitioner but which, according to her husband-opponent No. 1, are really owned by him and opponent No, 1, therefore, wanted to have an award directing the housing society-opponent No. 2 to transfer the said shares in his name. According to opponent No. 1, he and his mother agreed to acquire a flat from one Messrs. Motumal Balchand Construction for a sum of Rs. 21,000 and this amount was paid by them as also a further sum of Rs. 1,300 towards various deposits including a sum of Rs. 251 as entrance fee and the value of the five fully paid up shares of Rs. 50 each in the proposed co-operative housing society. In course of time in or about April 1963, according to opponent No. 1, possession of the flat was delivered to him and the acquirers of the different flats in the building formed a co-operative hous...
Robert Thursch Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-20-1977
Reported in: 1978CriLJ933
Sawant, J.1. This is a petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the order of detention dated 19-4-1977 passed by the Secretary to the Government of Maharashtra, Home Department, under the provisions of Section 3 (1) of the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974. The petitioner is a Belgium national and was found carrying diamonds on his person at the time of his search at the Bombay Airport on the morning of 22-3-1977. The diamonds were valued at Rs. 6,92,259/- and they t were seized under the Customs Act, 1962 by the Customs authorities. It also further appears that on interrogation by the Customs Officers, the petitioner made statements on 22nd, 23rd and 31st March 1977 Under Section 108 of the Customs Act, in which he admitted that he had delivered diamonds, also on previous trips to a Bombay party. He was a carrier of diamonds since 1970 and he used to carry diamonds to Italy in 1975 for which he received commission...
Punamchand Sobaji Oswal Vs. Dattatraya Bharat Dandekar and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-19-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Bom103; 1978MhLJ158
Deshmukh, J.1. This petition under the Maharashtra Debt Relief Act, 1975 represents a glaring instance of misplaced enthusiasm of the AuthorisedOfficer under the Act who has transgressed all limits of procedure, propriety and principles of justice.2. One Bharat Dandekar is a resident of Chiplun. He claims to own a house and some adjoining land as his ancestral property. He had taken loan from time to time from the present petitioner Punamchand Oswal and during the course of his dealings executed an agreement dated 29-12-1971 to sell his property. By that time the loan was Rs. 4,000/-. Subsequently Bharat incurred further liability for the purpose of continuing his own business or profession of preparing brass and copper vessels. Ultimately the total liability amounted to Rs. 8,000/-.3. When this happened he executed a sale-deed dated 14th Oct. 1974 for a consideration of Rs. 8,000/- in respect of his house along with the open plot of ground in favour of the petitioner. A regular sale-d...
Commissioner of Gift-tax, Bombay City-i Vs. Jer Mavis Lubimoff
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-19-1977
Reported in: [1978]114ITR90(Bom)
Kantawala, C.J.1. Mrs. Jer Mavis Lubimoff, the assessee, is the daughter of Sir Nusserwanjee Wadia. He executed a trust deed on January 4, 1927, and created a trust call Jer Mavis Settlement No. 1. Under the trust deed the following four persons were appointed as trustees : 1. Sir Nusserwanjee Nowrojee Wadia (Sir Ness Wadia) 2. His wife, Lady Wadia. 3. Sir Cusrew Wadia and 4. Mr. Leslie Blunt. 2. On the death of Lady Wadia on April 19, 1946, by the deed of appointment dated December 30, 1946, the assessee was appointed as one of the trustees. 3. By clause 2 of the trust deed the trust properties were to be held for the following trusts and its provision are as under : '2. The trustees shall stand be possessed of the Trust Fund and of the dividends, interest and income to be derived therefrom upon the following trusts, that is to say :- (1) Upon trust in the first place to reimburse themselves and to pay and discharge all costs, charges and expenses incurred in or about the administ...
Sholapur Bakar Khatik Association Vs. Sholapur Agricultural Produce Ma ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-19-1977
Reported in: (1979)81BOMLR121
Jahagirdar, J.1. The petitioner in this petition is the association of Khatiks of Sholapur. The association itself is registered under the Societies Registration Act and has also been registered as a public trust under the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950. The Khatiks, who are members of this association, purchase goats and sheep in the market and after slaughtering the same sell the meat in the market for personal consumption of the citizens of Sholapur. The purchase of goats and sheep is made by them in the Sholapur market. The purchases thus made by them are regular and organized inasmuch as such purchases are necessary for enabling them to carry on their own business of selling of meat.2. Respondent No. 1 in this petition is Sholapur Agricultural Produce Marketing Committee which is a committee established under Section 11 of the Maharashtra Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1963, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', Under Section 6 of the Act there is a prohibition ag...
Kunjilal Hanumanlala Jaiswal Vs. B.C. Deo
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-15-1977
Reported in: (1978)80BOMLR599; 1978MhLJ462
Deshmukh, J.1. These petitions arise out of proceedings under Section 47 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 before the State Transport Authority, Bombay, and also the appellate proceedings before the Appellate Tribunal. Since both the applications arise out of the same original proceedings, we have heard them together and this common judgment will dispose of both these petitions.2. The facts giving rise to this dispute may now be noted. The inter-State route Nagpur-Indore via Amravati and Dharni is the subject-matter of grant of regular permit for which there were four competitors. It is not in dispute that there has been inter-State agreement between the State Governments of Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra. According to the terms of that agreement on the Nagpur-Indore inter-State route the primary permit is to be issued by the State Transport Authorities of Maharashtra and it is to be counter-signed by their counterpart in Madhya Pradesh.3. Between October 1974 and December 1974 the State...
Janu Chandra Waghmare and ors. Vs. the State of Maharashtra and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-14-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Bom119; (1977)79BOMLR499
Tulzapurkar, Ag. C.J.1. These petitions raise common questions as to constitutional validity of the Maharashtra Private Forests (Acquisition) Act, 1975, being Act No. 29 of 1975, as amended by Act No. 72 of 1975. The constitutional validity of the said Act has been mainly challenged on three grounds: (a) that the State Legislature of Maharashtra lacks legislative competence to enact the measure, particularly Section 3 thereof, to the extent to which it purports to vest in the State Government the 'forest produce' while acquiring all private forests in the State, (b) that the said enactment, particularly Sections 3 and 5 thereof, contravene the freedom of trade, commerce and intercourse guaranteed under Article 301 of the Constitution and (c) that the enactment, particularly Section 3 thereof, which purports to acquire not merely of mines and minerals, major as well as minor but also mining leases, licences and other rights in mines and minerals conflicts with and trenches upon the occu...
Commissioner of Gift Tax Vs. Jagdish Mohan Nayar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-14-1977
Reported in: (1977)6CTR(Bom)601
Tulzapurkar, J. 1. In this reference made under S. 26(1) of the Gift Tax Act by the Tribunal to this Court, the following question has been referred for our opinion : 'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal rightly held that no gift-tax was chargeable on the respondent ?' 2. This is a consolidated reference arising out of gift-tax assessments made in respect of eight respondent assessees. The common question arising in the case of each one of the respondents relates to the assessment year 1960-61. It appears that the eight respondents previously constituted a firm styled 'Messrs. India Woollen Textile Mills, Amritsar.' All the partners held equal share therein. With effect from 1-7-1959, the business of the firm was taken over by a private limited company named Indian Woollen Textile Mills Private Ltd., Bombay, whose shareholders were the partners of the erstwhile firm. In this limited company all the partners had equal share-holding. Under the agreemen...
Ramchandra Manjunath Prabhu Vs. Atmaram Gopal Gaikwad
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-14-1977
Reported in: (1977)79BOMLR447; 1978MhLJ141
Hajarnavis, J.1. This is an application for revision under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against an order passed by the Executive Magistrate, Greater Bombay, dismissing the application filed by the petitioner under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the ground that he had no jurisdiction to entertain the application.2. Dispute arose between the petitioner and the first five respondents regarding the possession of Shop No. 1, situate at Sitaram Upadhyaya Chawl, Hariyali Village, Vikhroli, Bombay. Suits were filed by either sides and even a report was made to the police by the petitioner regarding breaking open a lock of the suit premises and a case of house breaking was registered by the police against the respondents Nos. 1 and 2. The trial was going on before a Magistrate. The petitioner also approached Executive Magistrate on November 8, 1976 under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Executive Magistrate drew up a preliminary order under S...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »