Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1935Bom247; (1935)37BOMLR376
John Beaumont, Kt., C.J.1. These are two cross-appeals from judgments of the First Class Subordinate Judge of Belgaum. In the suit from which Appeal No. 477 is brought, the plaintiffs are claiming a declaration that they are permanent tenants of the suit land, whilst Appeal No. 471 is an appeal in a suit brought by the landlord, defendant in the first suit, claiming possession of the suit property on the ground that the plaintiffs are annual tenants. So that the real point in both appeals is whether the plaintiffs in the first suit are permanent tenants op annual tenants.2. For the purposes of determining the plaintiffs' title, the suit land is divisible into two parts, the claim of the plaintiffs being different in respect of those two parts. There is, first, the property shown on the exhibited plan within the parallelogram A B C D, which I will refer to as the 'A property,' and then there is the rest of the suit property, partly to the north and partly to the south of the A property,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1945All55
Malik, J.1. These three appeals arise out of three suits which were filed in the Court of the District Judge of Bareilly. Pandit Badhey Shyam Kathawachak, plaintiff in all the three suits, is a Hindi author who has written several dramas. He was employed by the New Alfred Theatrical Company of Bombay to write certain plays for them. The plaintiff wrote nine dramas, the stage rights in which remained with the company while all other rights were vested in the plaintiff. There were twelve other dramas which had been written by other authors copyrights in which were purchased by the plaintiff from the New Alfred Theatrical Company. Suit No. 3 of 1938 out of which First Appeal No. 217 of 1941 has arisen was filed by the plaintiff against the Twin Record Co. Ltd., on the ground that they had without the plaintiff's consent made certain records of songs of a drama named 'Ishwar Bhakti' and were offering the same for sale to the public. Defendant 1, the Twin Record Co. Ltd., had also been prin...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1934All273; 153Ind.Cas.733
Mukerji, J.1. This Letters Patent appeal arises out of a matrimonial suit. The suit as it originally instituted was based on the following allegations:The petitioner is a European domicile in India and since his very childhood has been deficient in mentality. He had to be looked after by bis relations throuf'hout his life. The respondent is a woman of loose character and has been so from her girlhood. Her brothers and brother's son, in October 1930, land on other occasions, several times threatened the petitioner that unless he married the respondent, he would be visited with 'dire consequences,' that the ground on which those threats were held out was a false one, being to the effect that the petitioner had 'deprived the respondent of her caste.' The respondent was already married and her husband, Mohammad Ali, was still alive. But in spite of this fact the petitioner, on account of the threats and being an 'idiot,' went through a form of marriage with the respondent, on lOfch Novembe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1952Ori143
Ray, C.J.1. The question, involved in this appeal, is whether a plaintiff can avail himself of the benefits of the doctrine of part performance of a contract for sale as against an invasion on his rights by an attaching creditor of the transferor (promisor.) He had objected to the attachment by advancing a claim in Order XXI, Rule 58, Civil Procedure Code. The claim having been rejected he brought the suit, out of which this Second Appeal arises.2. The appeal was heard 'ex parte', and the learned Counsel, appearing on behalf of the appellant No. 1 obtained a decree for costs against them invite our attention to such authorities as could be cited by the respondent had he been represented before us.3. The facts, in short, are that the disputed properties belonged to defendants 2 to 12. Defendant No. 1 obtained a decree for costs against them. After decree, passed on 2-9-1936, the aforesaid defendants separated amongst themselves and the disputed properties fell to the share of defendant ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1902)ILR25Mad244
Davies, J.1. In Appeal against Appellate Order No. 35 of 1901 and Appeal against Order No. 48 of 1900.--There can be no doubt that the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure are applicable to cases tried under special Acts, if the trials are in a Court of Civil Judicature and if there are no rules in the special Acts inconsistent with, or substituted for, the general rules of the Code of Civil Procedure. Now, in the Transfer of Property Act, after an order for sale in a mortgage suit has been made, no further rules are laid down as to the subsequent steps to be taken for the conduct of the sale and other incidents attaching to it. These matters must therefore be governed by the Civil Procedure Code as the Transfer of Property Act is silent in regard to them. The rules for the conduct of sales by a Civil Court are to be found in Chapter XIX (G) of the Civil Procedure Code and there is nothing in that chapter excluding from its operation sales in pursuance of mortgage decrees under th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1934)66MLJ193
1. Of this batch of appeals, the first four have been preferred by A-1, A-8, A-2 and A-3 respectively and the last one by A-5 to A-7. The persons charged and tried in the Lower Court were eight, of whom the 4th accused was acquitted. The rest are the appellants before us. All these appellants were jointly charged for criminal conspiracy under Section 120-B, Indian Penal Code (charge No. I). The 1st accused was further charged under Section 409, Indian Penal Code, for criminal breach of trust in respect of moneys belonging to the Guntur Cooperative Urban Bank and held by him in trust for the said Bank, aggregating to Rs. 25,340 between 15th February, 1929 and 14th February, 1930. He was charged for a similar offence to the extent of Rs. 24,607-4-9 between 15th February, 1930 and 14th February, 1931 (charges Nos. II-A and II-B). The rest of the appellants were charged individually for abetment of criminal breach of trust committed by the 1st accused in respect of various sums under Secti...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Privy Council
Reported in : AIR1949PC207
Datee of decision: 28/07/1948(Part I) and 01/02/1949 (Part II). PART I: Sir Madhavan Nair: This is an appeal from a judgment and decree of the Full Bench of the Chief Court of Oudh dated 10th May 1846, which, on appeal by the defendant, set aside the judgment and decree of the Additional Civil Judge of Lucknow dated 21st March 1940. After the appeal had been filed in the Privy Council respondent 2 was made a party. [2] The appeal relates to the right of succession to a taluqa known as the Sissendi Estate and to other moveable and immovable non-taluqa properties left by Raja Chandra Shekhar and his widow Rani Subhadra Kuer. [3] The main question for decision is whether the adoption of respondent 2 by the late Rani Subhadra Kuer after the death of her husband is a valid adoption. [4] The following genealogical table will explain the relationship of the parties. Pedigree No. 1 is the pedigree of the Taluqdars of Seasendi (Sessendi Pedigree), and Pedigree No. II is the pedigree of the fami...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Privy Council
VISCOUNT SIMON L. C: This appeal is brought, by leave of the Madras High Court, from an order of that Court dated 5th November 1937, dismissing the appellants' application that a writ of certiorari should issue to the Board of Revenue at Madras to bring up, in order to be quashed, an order made by the Collective Board, on 9th October 1936, under S. 172, Madras Estates Land Act, 1908. The ancient writ of certiorari in England is an original writ which may issue out of a superior Court requiring that the record of the proceedings in some cause or matter pending before an inferior Court should be transmitted into the superior Court to be there dealt with. The writ is so named because, in its original Latin form, it required that the King should "be certified" of the proceedings to be investigated, and the object is to secure by the exercise of the authority of a superior Court, that the jurisdiction of the inferior tribunal should be properly exercised. This writ does not issue to correct...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1950Bom4; (1949)51BOMLR602
Gajendragadkar, J.1. When we dealt with First Appeal No. 1 of 1945 and dismissed it with costs on 23rd August 1948, Mr. N.C. Shah for the appellant applied for a refund of court-fees paid by him on the memo of his appeal on the ground that through mistake excessive court-fee had been paid by the appellant. We then directed him to argue this matter before the Taxing Officer and left it open to the Taxing Officer to send the matter back to us if he felt any difficulty in deciding it or if he otherwise thought that the point was of such importance that it should be disposed of by a judgment from the Court itself. Accordingly the matter was argued before the Taxing Officer and he has sent it back to us because he says there is no ruling of our Court on the point in question and that the said point is likely to arise in many other appeals. That is how this matter has come to us again for the determination of the question of the proper court-fees payable in the present appeal.2. This questio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1936)38BOMLR690
Thankerton, J.1. The appellant in these eighteen consolidated appeals is the ruler of Limbdi State in Kathiawar. The respondents are the mulgametis and landholders in eighteen villages of the Khadol Barwala Taluka in Dhanduka in British India, each of the appeals relating to one of the villages. The appellant, as plaintiff in the suits, in substance asks for a declaration that he, and not the defendants, is entitled to be registered as talukdar under the Gujarat Talukdars' Act (Bom. VI of 1888), as amended by Act II of 1905.2. On April 23, 1928, the Subordinate Judge at Ahmedabad granted the appellant in each suit the declaration asked for. On appeal, the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, by an order in each suit dated October 9, 1931, set aside the decrees of the Subordinate Judge and remanded the suits to allow the appellant an opportunity of joining the Government as a party to the claim as regards an agreement dated August 12, 1922, and his absolute ownership of the villages in q...
Tag this Judgment!