Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1932Bom259; (1932)34BOMLR143
Baker, J.1. The plaintiff sued the Municipality of Thana by its President, the Municipal Secretary, and the Sanitary Inspector for damages for malicious prosecution for unauthorisedly rebuilding his house. The First Class Subordinate Judge of Thana dismissed the suit. The plaintiff a2. The record of this case is voluminous, and the arguments have 'taken a considerable time. But there is no dispute as to the actual facts, and once the issues of law have been disposed of, the case seems to me to depend on a few salient facts, and many of the details may be omitted. The facts put briefly are, the plaintiff purchased a house in Thana. He applied in March 1922 for the house being entered in his name and for permission to make certain repairs and alterations. This was refused, The Municipality later on in July said that permission was refused because the house was in the regular line. The Municipality also thought of acquiring the house or portions of it for the purpose of widening the stree...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1924Bom325; (1924)26BOMLR155; 79Ind.Cas.1012
Norman Macleod, Kt., C.J.1. This suit arises out of a contract by which the defendant Bank in Bombay agreed to purchase from the plaintiffs in Manchester fifty bales of American bleached yarn double 40 c. i.f. Bombay on certain terms. The contract itself is contained in two telegrams, viz., one dated December 17, 1919, despatched by the Bank to the plaintiffs at Manchester and the second despatched from Manchester by the plaintiffs on December 24, 1919.2. On December 24, 1919, the plaintiffs also wrote to the Bank in Bombay as follows:--We duly received your two telegrams of the 17th instant asking us to place sundry orders at the best possible prices, for which we thank you. We beg to confirm our cable informing you that we had placed.' [Then they set out the price of the goods.] 'We may say that we have booked these prices at the lowest possible prices and earliest shipment. In the present state of our market it is impossible to guarantee delivery, and it must be understood, in case ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1925)27BOMLR113
Norman Macleod, Kt., C.J.1. The three accused were charged before the Acting Sessions Judge of Belgaum with having committed the murder of one Sakreva on the night of April 6, the third accused being charged in the alternative under Sections 502 and 109 of the Indian Penal Code with abetment of the murder. Accused Nos. 1 and 2 were found guilty under Section 302 and accused No. 3 was found guilty of abetment under as. 302 and 109 by the Sessions Judo-e disagreeing with the assessors. All were sentenced to transportation for life. The case for the prosecution was as follows. Sakreva was a Jogti woman living alone. Close by lived Motiappa a carpenter and his wife accused No. 3. Monappa became too intimate with Sakreva with the result that accused No. 3 finding her remonstrances of no avail instigated accused Nos. 1 and 2 to murder Sakreva.2. Sakreva was last seen alive on the evening of April 6. On the evening of the 8th her dead body was discovered in a tank a short distance away from h...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1929)31BOMLR484
Patkar, J.1. This is an appeal against the order of the Joint First Class Subordinate Judge of Dhulia ragcting an Application to restore the suit to the file. The plaintiffs filed suit No. 197 of 1918 to recover possession of the properties in suit. It is alleged that their pleader, Mr. Dev, compromised the suit without their consent and a decree was passed in terms of the compromise. The plaintiffs filed suit No. 25 of 1922 to set aside the compromise decree on the ground the authority to compromise the suit, and, the therefore, the decree was not binding on thim. This suit was not binding on them. This suit was dismissed on January 15, 1923, as their pleader Mr. Shidore was absent, and on the advice of their pleader they filed an appeal agai missal. The appeal was dismissed on June 3C that the order was not appealable. The made an application on June 15, 1925, to vt file, under Order IX, Rule 9, of the Civil P: learned Subordinate Judge held that the a time under Article 164 of the I...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1926)28BOMLR243
Tarapoerwala, J.1. In this case the plaintiffs allege that for several years prior to 1914, they had manufactured and sold under the names of ' Sanatogen ' and ' Formamint ' certain chemical compounds for use in medicine and pharmacy, that within a short time the said compounds sold under the name of Sanatogen and Formamint acquired a very high reputation throughout India and the sales thereof were large and profitable and the names of Sanatogen and Formamint had come to mean chemical compounds of the plaintiffs' manufacture. They further allege that on the outbreak of the War the said compounds were imported into India by the plaintiffs' London firm until the property and assets of the plaintiffs' London firm were sold in June 1917 by the controller appointed under the Trading with the Enemy (Amendment) Act 1916 to Genatosan Limited, that from and after June 1917, the said Genatosan Limited imported the said compounds under the names of Sanatogen and Formamint, that on the termination...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 122Ind.Cas.76
ORDERFawcett, J.1. We do not think that in view of the case of Mahadeo Govind v. Lakshminarayan Ramnath 90 Ind. Cas. 610 A.I.R. 1925 Bom. 52 the grounds urged by Mr. Thakor suffice for our interference with the order summarily dismissing the appeal, but undoubtedly a hardship can arise from Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act not being applicable to an application made under Order IX, Rule 9, of the Civil Procedure Code, and we think that the question should be considered administratively by this Court whether action should not be taken to make Section 5 applicable in such a case by a rule under the Civil Procedure Code or otherwise, as may be necessary. In view of this proposal we admit the appeal, so that should any such alteration be made, the appellant may have the benefit of it.2. The Registrar should submit papers accordingly.3. On December 21, 1927, the Bombay High Court, in virtue of powers under Section 122 of the Code of Civil Procedure, added the following Sub-rule (3) to...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1930All225
1. One Basdeonand Gir obtained leave to appeal to the Privy Council and on the due date deposited a sum of Rs. 4,000 as security for costs and a further sum for printing charges.2. On 2nd November 1927 Mr. Newal Kishore, who was the legal practitioner for Shankernand Gir the respondent to the Privy Council appeal, drafted an application to the Court of the Subordinate Judge at Allahabad in which he prayed that the cash certificates for Rs. 4,000-12-0 and a sum of Rs. 798-11-0 for printing charges, which had been paid into the High Court by the appellant, might be attached:and the amount of the decree may be so far as possible satisfied by attachment thereof.3. The application came before Sudeshar Maitra on 4th February 1928. His order was a short one and may be given in full.The items objected to relate to the printing charges and security furnished by the defendant objector in connexion with his appeal to His Majesty in Council. The decree-holder is anxious to lay his hands on these i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1943All26
ORDER1. This is (in application in revision by one Salig Ram who, along with 30 other persons was tried by a Special Magistrate for an offence punishable under Section 395, Penal Code. The offence that formed the subject of charge against the applicant was alleged to have boon committed on 14th August 1942. The trial was by a Special Magistrate in pursuance of the provisions of Section 10 of Ordinance No. 2 of 1942. The learned Magistrate acquitted one of the accused and convicted the remaining 30 accused. He sentenced Salig Ram to two years' rigorous imprisonment and to a fine of Rs. 50 and in default of payment of fine he ordered Salig Ram to undergo six months' rigorous imprisonment. Salig Ram appealed to the Sessions Judge who dismissed the appeal holding that no appeal lay to him in view of the provisions of Section 13 of the Ordinance. Salig Ram then filed the present application in revision in this Court. The decision of the Magistrate has been assailed by Mr. Pyare Lal Banerji ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1943All331
ORDERIqbal Ahmad, C. J.1. This is an application under Section 491, Criminal P. C, and was filed on 27th April last by one Baldeva Das with a view to secure the release of Pt. Kamlapati Tewari from detention under an order purporting to be made under Rule 26 of the Defence of India Rules. The application is supported by an affidavit which shows that Kamlapati Tewari, who is a member of the Legislative Assembly, United Provinces, attended a meeting of the All India Congress Committee at Bombay and, on his return journey from Bombay was arrested at the Allahabad Railway Station on the night of 10th August 1912, and is at present detained under Rule 26. Sir Tej Bahadur Sapru, who appeared for the applicant, contended that Rule 26 of the Defence of India Rules was invalid and submitted that it had been so held in a recent case by the Federal Court. On 27th April I adjourned the hearing of the application to this date to enable Sir Tej Bahadur Sapru to file a certified copy of the judgment ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1946All306
Braund, J.1. This is a case referred to us under Section 66(1), Income-tax Act, 1922, by a strong Bench of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The assessee is Rani Amrit Kunwar Sahiba, hereinafter referred to as 'the Rani.' The Rani is the wife of Raja Ravi Sher Singh Bahadur, the Ruler of Kalsia State, and is the sister of His Highness the present Maharaja of Nabha State. Kalsia and Nabha States were formerly part of what were known as the Cis-Sutlej States, which are now under the superintendence of the Agent to the Governor-General, Punjab States.2. The Rani for some years past has lived at Dehradun in British India with her sons and daughters who are being educated there and it is common ground that in the year of assessment she was resident in British India within the meaning of Section 4A, Income-tax Act, 1922. The relevant accounting year is 1938-39; and the relevant assessment year is 1939-40. In the assessment year, the Rani received at Dehradun a sum of Rs. 14,744 from Kalsia ...
Tag this Judgment!