Privy Council Court November 1932 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.
Bhimabai Jivangouda Patil and Another Vs. Gurunathgouda, Khandappagoud ...
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Nov-04-1932
SIR DINSHAH MULLA: This is an appeal from the decree of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, dated 28th February 1928, which affirmed the decree of the Court of the Joint First Class Subordinate Judge of Dharwar, dated 8th April 1925. The main question involved in the appeal is whether, according to the law prevalent in the Mahratta country of the Bombay Presidency, a Hindu widow, whose husband was undivided at the time of his death, and who has not the express permission of her husband, may adopt a son to him without the consent of the surviving coparceners. The parties are governed by the Mitakshara law, and on questions on which the Mitakshara is silent, by the law as expounded in the Vyavahara Mayukaha of Nilakantha. The following pedigree shows the relationship between the rival claimants : The facts material to the appeal are no longer in controversy between the parties Dayamangouda and his three sons, Nilkanthagouda, Khandapagouda and Jivangouda, constituted a joint Hindu fam...
Alice Marie Vandepitte Vs. the Preferred Accident Insurance Company of ...
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Nov-04-1932
LORD WRIGHT: The appellant, Alice Marie Vandepitte, sustained injuries on 5th March 1928, owing to the motor car, in which she was a passenger and which her husband was driving, being involved in a collision with a motor car driven by Jean Berry. Jean Berry was the daughter of E. E. Berry and was driving the car which was her father's property, with his permission. As she was a minor living with her father, he was civilly liable, under S. 12, Motor Vehicles Amendment Act, 1927, of British Columbia, for injuries sustained by the appellant due to his daughter's negligence, but in the case the appellant brought her action in the Supreme Court of British Columbia against Jean Berry, claiming that she was injured by Jean Berry's negligent driving. In the proceedings, the appellant's husband, E. J. Vandepitte, was brought in as third party. On 13th June 1928, judgment was given for the appellant for $4600 and costs against Jean Berry, and for Jean Berry against E. J. Vandepitte for $2300 and...
Florence A. Deeks Vs. H.G. Wells and Others
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Nov-03-1932
LORD ATKIN: This is an appeal from the judgment of the Second Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of Ontario, which affirmed the judgment of Raney, J., in the Supreme Court of Ontario which dismissed the plaintiff's action. The action is brought by the plaintiff. Miss Florence Deeks, for breach of copyright, but in substance the action is for breach of confidence in permitting the plaintiff's unpublished manuscript to be used without the plaintiff's consent. The action is brought against the Macmillan Company of Canada, which is the company to which the plaintiff entrusted her manuscript; it is brought against Mr. H. G. Wells, who is said to have used the manuscript of the plaintiff improperly as the foundation of his book, The Outline of History, and it is brought against the Macmillan Company, Incorporated, of New York, Messrs. George Newnes, Limited, and Messrs. Cassell and Company, Limited, for having published the work of Mr. Wells which had been so composed. Now whether or no...
(Sri) Nandamani Ananga Bhima Deo Vs. Sri Suseela Mala Patta Mahadevi
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Nov-01-1932
SIR DINSHAH MULLA: This is an appeal from the decree of the High Court of Judicature at Madras dated 30th March 1928, which reversed a decree of the Court of the Additional Subordinate Judge of Berhampore dated 20th December 1922. The suit out of which the present appeal arises was instituted by Nandamani Ananga Bhima Deo, the appellant, to recover from the respondent the zemindari of Chinnakimedi situated in the Ganjam District. The plaintiff claimed to be the son of Brojo Kishore Deo, who was at one time a zamindar of Chinnakimedi, by his wife Jhora. The defendant denied that Jhora was married to Brojo Kishore Deo, or that the plaintiff was the son of Brojo Kishore Deo. The trial Judge decided for the plaintiff. On appeal, the High Court at Madras differed from the trial Judge, and dismissed the suit. From that decree of the High Court the present appeal has been brought to His Majesty in Council. The sole question on the appeal is whether it has been established that a valid marriag...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›