Mumbai Court July 1978 Judgments
Ch. S. Rao Vs. Prabhudas S. Budhwani
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-24-1978
Reported in: (1978)80BOMLR685
Sujata Manohar, J.1. This application has been made by the official liquidator of Uma Investments P. Ltd. (in liquidation) to recover a sum of Rs. 4,000 with interest at the rate of 12 per cent. per annum from the respondents. The respondent No. 1 is a participant in chit fund scheme which was being run by the company prior to liquidation. The respondent No. 2 is a guarantor of respondent No. 1. It is an admitted position that on August 20, 1973 the respondent No. 1 received from the company a sum of Rs. 5,020 in respect of an auction conducted by the company of the twenty-seventh instalment. After deduction of various amounts as provided under the scheme in accordance with the rules of the scheme in which respondent No. 1 was a participant, the respondents executed a promissory note in favour of the company for Rs. 4,600 repayable with interest at the rate of 12 per cent. per annum. This promissory note was executed on the same day i.e. August 20, 1973. The respondent No. 1 made a par...
Tag this Judgment!Hargovind Dharamsey and Co. and Others Vs. Ruby and Co.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-21-1978
Reported in: AIR1979Bom89
ORDER1. The present report of the Official Assignee dated 24th January 1977 is in respect of the sale of right, title and interest of the insolvents in the business known AS M/s. Hargovind Dharamsey & Co. situate at 344, New Nagpada Road, Bombay-8 as a going concern together with stock-in-trade, goodwill and benefit of tenancy rights. On 2-7-1975 an order of adjudication was made against the firm M/s. Hargovind Dharamsey & Co. and its partners. As a result all the estate and effects of the insolvents have become vested in the Official Assignee.2. On the date when the order of adjudication was made the debtors were contractual tenants of the business premises in question. Earlier on 12th April 1962 the landlord had given a notice to quit to the debtors and had filed a suit in the Court of Small Causes at Bombay for ejecting them. Admittedly, how ever, the suit was compromised. Under the consent terms the debtors had continued as contractual tenants of the suit premises right till the da...
Tag this Judgment!The Trustees of the Port of Bombay Vs. Natwarlal Parekh
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-20-1978
Reported in: (1979)81BOMLR373; 1978MhLJ870
Naik, J.1. This petition raises the short question as to whether the civil Court has jurisdiction to entertain an action under Section 13 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). It arises on the following facts :2. The petitioners are a statutory corporation constituted under the Bombay Port Trust Act, 1879. Respondent No. 1 was the owner of Motor Lorry No. BMR 8966 and respondent No. 2 was the driver of that truck in the employment of respondent No. 1.3. On February 16, 1961, the said motor lorry was being driven by respondent No, 2 in a rash and negligent manner on the extreme right hand side of the road at an excessive speed from south to north in the Alexandra Docks of the Bombay Port Trust and when it came near track No. 2, it knocked down one Kacher Gangaram an employee of the petitioners, who was attending to the shunting operation of the said track. The lorry actually dragged the said Kacher for a considerable distance as a result of which ...
Tag this Judgment!Vinayak Purushottam Kalantre Vs. Vikram Balwantrao Deshmukh and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-19-1978
Reported in: 1979CriLJ71
Dharmadhikari, J.1. The petitioner in the present case had filed a private complaint against the respondents before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Baramati for the alleged offences under Sections 408 and 420 read with Section 34 of the I P. C. It is an admitted position that in that case the respondents before this Court were the accused persons. Thereafter by the application dated 31st of Jan. 1977 the complainant filed an application before the Magistrate requesting him to issue summonses to respondent Nos. 1 to 3 calling upon them to produce the documents enumerated in the application. This application was opposed by the respondents. Ultimately by the order dated 17th Aug. 1977 the learned Judge rejected the application filed by the complainant, as according to the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in State of Gujarat v. Shyamlal Mohanlal : 1965CriLJ256 the Court has no authority or jurisdiction to issue any such summonses a...
Tag this Judgment!Bhoorsingh Palasingh Vs. Kesumal Aratmal and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-17-1978
Reported in: AIR1979Bom143; (1979)81BOMLR333
Naik, J.1. By this petition the petitioner challenges the order of respondent No, 5 dated June 2, 1972 whereby respondent No. 5 purported to set aside the conveyance or the sale deed in favour of the petitioner dated June 28, 1967 which was executed by respondent No. 4 vs. the Administrator and Managing Officer, Ulhasnagar. This petition can be disposed of on a very short point and that point is as to whether respondent No. 5, the Authorised Chief Settlement Commissioner appointed under the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) has power or jurisdiction to cancel or set aside the sale deed. The question arises as under:--2. The petitioner who is a displaced person having migrated to India and settled at Ulhasnagar occupied Room No. 1 in Barrack No. 705 at Ulhasnagar Camp No. 3, which was built by Government and formed part of the Compensation Pool under the Act.3. On November 9, 1959 the petitioner entered into an agreement o...
Tag this Judgment!Standard Batteries Ltd. Vs. Casings (India) Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-17-1978
Reported in: (1979)81BOMLR331
Bharucha, J.1. A neat question of some importance arises in this matter: - Is an application or suit filed under the provisions of Section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, a suit within the meaning of Clause XII of the Letters Patent?2. The Plaintiffs have filed this suit under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act asking that the arbitration agreement between the parties should be taken on the file of this Court and an order of reference to an arbitrator be made in respect of the disputes between them. The plaintiffs obtained leave under Clause XII of the Letters Patent upon the averments that supplies of material had been made in Bombay, payments were made in Bombay and the agreement was signed in Bombay; the plaintiffs contended that a material part of the cause of action has arisen in Bombay.3. The defendants have taken out this Chamber Summons for revocation of the leave granted under Clause XII of the Letters Patent. In the affidavit filed in support of the Chamber Summons, the defen...
Tag this Judgment!Jaswantlal Harjivandas Dholakia Vs. the State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-14-1978
Reported in: (1978)80BOMLR411; 1978MhLJ672
Dharmadhikari, J.1. This criminal application is registered on the basis of a letter received from the Superintendent Nasik Road Central Prison, Nasik, who sought clarification regarding the set off to be granted to prisoner Jaswantlal Harjivandas Dholakia. It appears from the record that prisoner Jaswantlal was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for one year and six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 300 or in default to undergo further imprisonment for two months in Case No. C.C. 77O/P/1973 vide judgment of 33rd Court, Ballard Pier, Bombay dated October 1, 1973. Thereafter by the 7th Court, Dadar, Bombay he was again sentenced to undergo two years' imprisonment in C.C. 833/P/1971 by judgment dated December 21, 1973. It further appears from the record that prisoner Jaswantlal had approached this Court through jail in Criminal Application No. 1160 of 1974 requesting that while counting the period of sentence he should be granted the set off as contemplated by Section 428 of the Code of Cri...
Tag this Judgment!Jaswantlal Harjivandas Dholakia Vs. State of Maharashtra
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-14-1978
Reported in: 1979CriLJ971
Dharmadhikari, J.1. This criminal application is registered on the basis of a letter received from the Superintendent, Nasik Road Central Prison, Nasik, who sought clarification regarding the set off to be granted to prisoner Jaswantlal Harjivandas Dholakia. It appears from the record that prisoner Jaswantlal was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for one year and six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 300/- or in default to undergo further imprisonment for two months in Case No. C. C. 770/P/1973 vide judgment of 33rd Court, Ballard Pier, Bombay dated 1st of Oct. 1973. Thereafter by the 7th Court, Dadar, Bombay he was again sentenced to undergo two years' imprisonment in C. C. 833/P/1971 by judgment dated 21-12-73. It further appears from the record that prisoner Jaswantlal had approached this Court through jail in Criminal Application No. 1160 of 1974 requesting that while counting the period of sentence he should be granted the set off as contemplated by Section 428 of the Cr. P.C. The D...
Tag this Judgment!Lakshmi Vishnu Textile Mills Vs. P.S. Mavlankar
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-12-1978
Reported in: [1979(38)FLR378]; (1979)ILLJ443Bom
Deshpande, J. 1. This group of cases raises an important question as to the true interpretation of the words 'twenty months' wages' in S. 4(3) of the Payment of Gratuity Act of 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') indicating the maximum amount of gratuity payable to any employee, engaged in factories or other establishments covered by S. 1(3) of the Act. The petitioners are all employers, while the contesting respondents in all these cases are daily rated workmen. They claimed gratuity from the employer on their retirement. Section 4(1)(b) entitles every employee to gratuity on his retirement, on completion of continuous service for not less than five years. The word 'continuous service' is defined in S. 2(c) of the Act. Gratuity is payable under S. 4(2) of the Act, at the rate of 'fifteen days' wages' for every completed year of service on the basis of the last drawn wages. This rate applies to daily rated and piece rate workman and others, excepting employees of a seasonal est...
Tag this Judgment!Delux Silk Traders Vs. Satyanarayan Mahendrakumar and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jul-11-1978
Reported in: AIR1979Bom149
ORDER1. This is a suit filed by the Plaintiffs, against the defendants to recover a sum of Rs.26,400/- together with interest thereon being the price of art silk sarees sold and delivered by the plaintiffs to the defendants under a contract in writing dated 7th August 1073. Pursuant to the said contract the plaintiffs have delivered 1200 sarees on 14th Aug. 1973 under two hills bearing Nos. 14661 and 1475. It is the case of the plaintiffs that under the said contract the price of the goods was payable on delivery. Since the price was not paid by the defendants to the plaintiffs, the plaintiffs did not supply any further goods to the defendants under the contract. According to the defendants, only 50% of the price was to be paid by the defendants to the plaintiffs within a few days of the delivery of the goods and the remaining 50% of the price was to be paid by them within 60 days of the date of delivery. According to the defendants, the plaintiffs have wrongfully refused to make any f...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »