Privy Council Court May 1944 Judgments

Bai Shevantibai Vs. Janardhan Raghunath Warick and Others

Court: Privy Council

Lord Clauson: In the suit which gives rise to the present appeal the appellant as assignee of the purchaser from a member of a joint family of one sixth share in the joint family property, sued for partition of the family property and to have her one sixth share allotted to her. She also sought, as assignee of a mortgage on another sixth share, to have her mortgage enforced; but this part of the suit resulted in a decree in the present appellant's favour for a trifling sum and the only question raised in regard to this part of the case relates to a question of costs. The question remaining in controversy is whether the appellant's claim is barred by the law of limitation. The value of the interest which the appellant claims is well under Rs.10,000, probably about Rs. 3000. The total value of the joint family property exceeds Rs. 10,000. There is no controversy as to the identity or extent of the family property, or as to the right of partition to which the appellant would be entitled i...

Galos Hirad and Another Vs. the King

Court: Privy Council

Reported in: AIR1944PC93

Viscount Maugham: In this case the appellants were charged in the Protectorate Court of the Somaliland Protectorate that on or about the first week in June 1941, at Harawati Balleh near Bohadle in the District of Burao, Somaliland, each of them did participate in a criminal act, namely intentionally causing the death of Corporal Nur Musa done by several persons in furtherance of the common intention of all and thereby committed the offence of murder punishable under Ss. 34 and 302, Penal Code, which applies in the Protectorate. The trouble in this case seems to have originated shortly after the Italian forces had been driven out of British Somali land by His Majesty's forces in the year 1941 and was caused partly at least by the circumstance that rifles had been distributed by the Government to a number of the inhabitants to enable them to resist or to protect themselves against the Italians. Rifles were in these circumstances distributed to certain illaloes or native watchmen. In June...

Bank of Baroda, Ltd. Vs. Punjab National Bank, Ltd. and Others

Court: Privy Council

Lord Wright: The appellant is a company doing banking business, established in the State of Baroda, under the Baroda Companies Act, 1896-97, and having its registered office in Baroda with branches in British India. The respondent is a bank incorporated under the Indian Companies Act. Both banks have branches in Calcutta. M.P. Amin was manager of the Calcutta branch of the appellant bank. Bhagwan Das was manager of the Calcutta branch of the respondent bank. One Mitter (respondent 2) became a customer of the appellant bank at Calcutta. In May 1939, one Ghose (respondent 3) opened an account with the appellant bank on the understanding that he should be allowed "temporary accommodation from time to time." That account was guaranteed by Mitter. On 13th June 1939, Ghose's account with the appellant bank showed an opening debit balance of Rs. 1,26,339 reduced during the course of the day to rupees 89,274. On the same date Mitter's account with the respondent bank was overdrawn to the exten...

Add Muhammed El Dabbah Vs. Attorney General of Palestine

Court: Privy Council

Lord Thankerton: On 24th March 1943, the Chief Justice of Palestine, sitting alone as the Court of Criminal Assize at Haifa, convicted the appellant of murder contrary to S. 214 (b), Criminal Code Ordinance, 1936, and sentenced him to death. An appeal by the appellant was dismissed on 17th April 1943, by the Supreme Court of Palestine, sitting as the Court of Criminal Appeal, and the appellant, by special leave, now appeals against that judgment. Mr. Beyfus, in his full and able argument on behalf of the appellant, conveniently submitted his contentions under two heads, viz., those which challenged the constitution of the Court of Criminal Assize by which the appellant was tried, and those which alleged grave impropriety in the course of the trial. As regards the constitution of the trial Court, the Chief Justice sat alone by virtue of Regulation No. 8 of the Palestine Defence (Judicial) (Regulations (No. 2), 1942, which provided as follows: "3. Whenever the Chief Justice considers it ...

N.R. Kapur Vs. Murli Dhar Kapur and Another

Court: Privy Council

Lord Thankerton: Their Lordships are of opinion that this appeal should not be allowed to proceed as not presenting, apart from one possible point which will be mentioned in a moment, proper subject-matter for an appeal to His Majesty in Council. In the first place, the point upon which a different argument might be suggested, is the point with reference to the outstandings, which is contained in reasons 2 and 3 of the appellant's case. In their Lordships' opinion the matter was rightly decided by the High Court, and there is no substance in the argument suggested to the contrary. It is a question of construction of the partnership deed, and the phraseology of Art. 10 of the partnership deed, in their Lordships' opinion, does not present any such difficulty as would admit a contrary view to the view expressed by the High Court. The remaining three reasons upon which Mr. Rewcastle addressed their Lordships, were reasons 7, 8 and 9. In the opinion of their Lordships, all three are concer...