Mumbai Court September 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.
Madhusudan A. Mahale Vs. P.M. Gidh and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-20-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Bom234; (1978)80BOMLR628; 1978MhLJ436
1. The main question of law which has been argued in this petition on behalf of the petitioner, who was the original licensee of the premises in question, is whether the suit filed by his licensors in respect of the premises of which respondent No. 1 was alone the tenant and whose tenancy was already terminated by the landlord was not maintainable against him in view of the provisions of Section 15-A read with Section 14(2) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rent Act').2. The facts out of which this pe'i-tion arises are not in dispute. The subject-matter of the dispute is a room of which respondent No. 1 is the tenant. The owner of the premises is not a party to any of these proceedings. The petitioner was admittedly allowed to occupy the room on leave and licence basis by an agreement dated 31st July 1969 which was in the name of the wife of respondent No. 1 who is also respondent No. 2 plaintiff No. 2. From time to ti...
Krishnabai and ors. Vs. Baburao and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-20-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Bom290; (1978)80BOMLR582; 1978MhLJ85
1. The short and interesting question that arises in this writ petition is as to whether the petitioners' contention that the respondents and their predecessor-in-title by name Ashru were the tenants, is barred on account of the decision in another tenancy case which was given on the hypothesis that they were the tenants.2. The controversy arises in the following manner: Survey No. 177, admeasuring 34.19 acres and situated at Anjani Bk. was originally owned by the petitioner No. 1 Krishnabai and her husband Raghunath. Raghunath is now dead and the petitioners Nos. 2 to 10 are his legal representatives. The respondents Nos. 1 to 11 are the heirs and legal representatives of a person by name Ashru. After the new Tenancy Act, Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands (Vidarbha Region) Act, 1958 came into force, the name of Ashru was entered as ' tenant of Survey No. 177. Such an entry was made as laid down in S. 8 of the Tenancy Act. It reads as follows:'8. (1) As soon as may be after this Ac...
Rafiq Abdul Rehman Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-20-1977
Reported in: (1977)79BOMLR576; 1978MhLJ211
Deshmukh, J.1. This is an application by a convict through jail. It raises a point of some interest relating to the real meaning and interpretation of Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.2. The petitioner has been convicted in three different cases. One was Sessions Case No. 347 of 1962 which resulted in his conviction under Section 302 as well as under Section 324, Indian Penal Code. The judgment was delivered in that case on February 18, 1963. He was sentenced to life imprisonment under Section 302 and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year each under two different counts under Section 324, Indian Penal Code. The two sentences of one year each were not only to run concurrently with each other but they were both to run concurrently with life imprisonment. In relation to this Sessions case he was arrested on or about September 1962 and was in continuous detention for the purpose of investigation, inquiry and trial of. Sessions Case No. 347 of 1962. This was till ...
State of Maharashtra Vs. Ramprakash
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-20-1977
Reported in: (1978)80BOMLR179
Apte, J.1. A short point which is raised on this reference made by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate is whether a case already committed by the learned Magistrate before the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, came into force on April 1, 1974, but which was taken up for trial by the Sessions Court after that date, should be tried under the old Code by the Sessions Court or whether it should be tried by the Magistrate since under the new Code the Magistrate would be competent to try the offence.2. The facts giving rise to this reference are shortly these:The three respondents were challaned by the police before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate on a charge for offences under Section 120B read with Sections 420/511, 467, 471, Indian Penal Code read with Section 5 of the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947, before the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the new Code') came into force on April 1, 1974.3. The learned Magistrate recorded the ...
Dattaram Shripat Khurase Vs. Harkisondas Laxmidas Ghaswalla
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-19-1977
Reported in: (1979)81BOMLR175
Chandurkar, J.1. The question which arises in this petition is whether if the plaintiff fails to bring on record the legal heirs of one of the defendants who is a tenant of certain premises, the entire suit for eviction abates. The question arises on the following facts:2. A shop, in what is known as Ghaswalla Estate, Old Chawl, House No. 493 Arthur Road, Bombay 7 belonging to the plaintiff-respondent No. 1, was originally tenanted by one Shripat Arjun Khurase who admittedly died some time in the year 1946. After the death of the original tenant, his three sons and widow, defendants Nos. 1 to 3 and defendant No. 4 respectively, were treated as monthly tenants in respect of the shop premises. Alleging that the four defendants who were in occupation of the suit shop premises were in arrears of rent for the period September 1, 1962 to March 31, 1963, a notice dated April 18, 1963 was issued terminating the tenancy of defendants Nos. 1 to 4. The defendants were also called upon to pay the ...
Krishna Santu Wakarekar Vs. Sadashiv Ganesh Harolikar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-13-1977
Reported in: (1978)80BOMLR423
Chandurkar, J.1. In this petition filed by the tenant the orders passed by the revenue authorities in favour of the landlord in the proceedings under Section 33B of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as ' the Tenancy Act') are challenged on the ground that the certificate issued under Section 88C in favour of the landlord was revoked during the pendency of the proceedings and since the correctness of the order of the Commissioner revoking the certificate had not been challenged by the landlord that order had become final and consequently a right had vested in favour of the tenant under Section 88D of the Tenancy Act.2. Certain dates and the nature of the orders which were passed on the relevant dates are required to be stated in order to appreciate the contention raised on behalf of the petitioner.3. Admittedly, respondent No. 1, who is the landlord, is the owner of a part of Survey No. 102, situate at Majnal, Taluka Panhala, of which the petit...
Akola Municipal Council Vs. Nilkanth Anant Athalye
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-13-1977
Reported in: (1979)81BOMLR171; 1977MhLJ773
Masodkar, J.1. The present petition has been filed by the Municipal Council, Akola, seeking to recover and assert the right to collect the tax imposed under Section 4 of the Maharashtra Education (Cess) Act, 1962 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) from respondent Nilkanth Athalye who is the owner of the building located within the municipal limits of Akola but having let out the same to the State Government for running a Deaf and Dumb School and Hostel, is not the occupier of the said building. When the demand was raised, the said Nilkanth Athalye preferred an objection successfully before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Akola, that the provisions of Section 7(&) of the Act were attracted as the building was let out to the State Government and it was, therefore, exempt from the imposition. Challenge by the present petitioner Municipal Council to that view before the Additional Sessions Judge, Akola, failed as is evident from the order dated July 8, 1969 made by that Court. Afte...
Ramchandra Vishwanath Karve Vs. Savitribai
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-09-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Bom212; (1978)80BOMLR622; 1978MhLJ418
Deshpande, J.1. The respondent-plaintiff's suit for declaration that she has become the absolute owner of the house property in dispute has been decreed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Thana. The validity of this decree is challenged by the defendant in this First Appeal. There is practically no dispute about the facts in this case. One Trim-bak had two sons -- Vishwanath and Bhikaji. Vishwanath predeceased Trim-bak leaving behind him his two sons Ramchandra, the defendant-appellant, and Laxman. Plaintiff Savitribai was married to Bhikaji in the year 1928 when the entire family was joint. In the month of October, 1928, sometime after her marriage, Ramchandra and Laxman separated, taking with them their shares in the property from Trimbak. Bhikaji, husband of Savitribai, died on 19th September, 1929. Savitribai appears to have stayed with her parents till 1942, in view of her age. Trimbak executed a will and got it duly registered on or about 7th June, 1930, making provisions for t...
The Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay Vs. Bhagwandas Dwarkadas a ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-09-1977
Reported in: AIR1978Bom271; (1978)80BOMLR193; 1978MhLJ43
ORDER1. The only question which arises in this petition is whether it is necessary for the Bombay Municipal Corporation to first have the exact amount of dues ascertained under Section. 503 before it takes recourse to a suit made permissible by Section. 506 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The facts are not in dispute. A house belonging to the opponents who are not represented in this petition having been found to be in a dangerous and/or ruinous state a notice tinder Section. 354 of the Act calling upon the owners to carry out certain work in respect of the house to avoid the risk was issued. The owners were required to carry out repairs to the flooring of the rearmost rooms of the second and third floors. The opponents (owners) of the house failed to carry out the necessary repairs and the Municipal Commissioner, therefore, got that work executed through an approved contractor in the exercise of his powers under Section. 489 of the Act. ...
In Re: United Western Bank Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Sep-09-1977
Reported in: [1978]48CompCas378(Bom)
Kania, J. 1. This is a winding-up petition under sections 433 and 434 of the Companies Act, 1956. 2. The case of the petitioners as set out in the petition, is briefly follows : One Everkeen Blade Company Ltd. drew eight bills of exchange all dated 17th June, 1975, the particulars whereof are given in the petition, for valuable consideration, upon the company in favour of the petitioners. The company accepted each of the said bills and undertook to pay the amount under the same. These bills were duly presented to the company on maturity, namely, on or about 18th September, 1975, for payment and payment was demanded. The company, however, failed and neglected to pay the amount of the said bills or any part of the same. The said bills were again presented to the company for payment at the company's office on 19th November, 1975. One A. Krishnamurthy, a director of the company, refused to pay the amount due under the said bill stating that he was willing to pay, 'but at present there are ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »