Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1948Bom292; (1948)50BOMLR89
M.C. Chagla, Ag. C.J.1. This is an appeal from a judgment of Mr, Justice Tendolkar by which the learned Judge refused to accede to the appellant's petition to set aside an award made by Sir Sajba Rangnekar on August 9, 1946.2. The facts leading up to this appeal are briefly these. Jafferbhoy, the brother of respondent No. 1, died on May 14, 1936, leaving a will dated June 13, 1933, under which he appointed his wife, the petitioner, his brother, respondent No. 1, and his brother's son, respondent No. 2, executrix and executors. Before the death of Jafferbhoy he and Hooseinbhoy, respondent No. 1, were doing business in the name of Abdullabhoy Lalji and Co. and this firm also did business in other names. By Clause 12 of his will Jafferbhoy authorised his executors to carry on the business on behalf of the estate, and pursuant to the directions contained in this clause Hooseinbhoy and the executors of Jafferbhoy agreed to carry on the business. The petitioner then filed a suit for dissolut...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1940Bom369; (1940)42BOMLR750
Wassoodew, J.1. These are two cross-appeals from a decree of the First Class Subordinate Judge at Ahmednagar in a suit to recover damages for breach of contract in the amount of Rs. 9,422-15-3 from the defendants. The alleged contract related to the collection of toll on public roads in the Ahmednagar District, one on the Ahmednagar-Poona road and the other Ahmednagar-Manmad road. The right to collect that toll for one year commencing from April 1, 1933, was publicly auctioned by the Collector on March 2, 1933. It is the plaintiff's case that on, the eve of that auction he with the defendants entered into a partnership to acquire the lease of the tolls from Government and to collect the toll for the benefit of the partnership. It was also agreed according to him that the partners should not bid against one another. It is said that at the auction the lease of thesetwo tolls was secured for the partnership, the bidders being the plaintiff and defendant No. 1 for the Nagar-Poona road, and...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1925Bom49; (1924)26BOMLR987; 90Ind.Cas.580
Lallubhai Shah, Ag. C.J.1. [His lordship after setting out the facts of the case, proceeded:] I shall first take up the points relating to the notice convening the extraordinary general meeting on July 19. In order to appreciate them, it is material to state here that the capital of the Tata Bank was seven and a half crores of rupees, consisting of ten lakhs shares of 11Sectin. 75 each. In respect of each share at the material time Rs. 22-8-0 were oiled in with the result that at that date its paid up capital was two and a quarter crores. The balance sheet of this Bank published before these negotiations commenced relates to the year ending with March 31, 1923. It appears from the evidence that about the end of June 1923, the condition of the Bank was not satisfactory. The deposits in the Bank at the end of March 1923 amounted to about Rs. 5,95,00,000, while at the end of June 1923 they had gone down to 3,37,00,000 of rupees. It is also in evidence that the Manager of the Bank had foun...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 125Ind.Cas.453
1. Parties to this action are dealers in grain in Mandavi Faizganj in the City of Meerut. On Jeth Badi 12, Sambat 1982 corresponding to the 19h of May, 1925, the plaintiff-appellant purchased from the defendant-respondent a khatti or grain pit situate in Ahata Sri Ram. The bargain struck about the purchase of 504 maunds of wheat at the rate of Rs. 5-9-3 per mauud. A quarter of the purchase-money, namely, Rs. 748-9 5 was paid by way of earnest money, It was a term of the contract that the balance of the purchase-money, namely, Rs. 2,100 was to be paid by the plaintiff to the defendant later up to Phagun Sudi 5, 17th of February, 1926, in accordance with the cu stom of the trade which prevailed in the Faizganj market. The terms of the contract were reduced to writing and were embodied in two separate documents in printed forms exchange between the parties. These documents have been the curious name of langot. The etymology of the word is not known but the langot appears to possess the in...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1949)51BOMLR108
Weston, J.1. This is an application under Section 491 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, made on behalf of Rana Birpal Singh who is now under detention in the Central Mental Hospital, Yeravda. Birpal Singh was the Ruler of Bhajji, one of the Simla Hill States, for a number of years up to the year 1940, and it is claimed that thereafter he continued He jure to be the Ruler of that State. In September 1940 he was detained in the Ripon Hospital, Simla, under warrant bearing the signature of an Additional Secretary to the Government of India, issued under the Bengal State Prisoners Regulation, 1818. Since that time he has remained under detention. In the year 1941 he was removed from Simla to the Mental Hospital at Lahore under a further warrant issued under the same Regulation, and in that year an Ordinance was promulgated to remove doubts as to the validity of the detention in Mental Hospitals of persons on warrants issued under the Bengal State Prisoners Regulation. In the year 194...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1939)41BOMLR147
Romer, J. 1. These are three consolidated appeals from the order of the High Court of Judicature at Lahore dated March 10, 1936, made upon an application by the Official Liquidator of the respondents, the Peoples Bank of Northern India, Limited. The question to be determined is whether the appellants should be placed upon the list of contributories notwithstanding the fact that in the year 1933 the directors of the Bank purported to forfeit the appellants' shares, and removed the appellants' names from the register of members in respect thereof.2. The Bank was incorporated in the year 1925 under the Indian Companies Act with a capital of fifty lacs of rupees divided into 50000 shares of Rs. 100 each. These shares, all of which were issued, were called 'A' shares. In the year 1926 the capital was increased by another 50000 shares of Rs. 100 each, of which 25000, called 'B' shares, were then issued. In 1929 some of the remaining 25000 shares were issued and were called 'C' shares, but wi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (1907)ILR29All685
Richards, J.1. In this case one Ganga Prasad applies for the revision of the conviction under Section 500 of the Penal Code and a sentence of fine and imprisonment. It appears that one Birbal was being tried for an offence under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code. Ganga Prasad was called as a witness for the defence, and he thereupon made some remarks of a defamatory nature concerning one Banke Lal. Banke Lal then instituted the present prosecution against Ganga Prasad under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code, and the prosecution resulted, as already stated, in the conviction of Ganga Prasad. It has been contended on behalf of Banke Lal that the words spoken by Ganga Prasad were so irrelevant and foreign to the charge against Birbal that we ought to hold that the words were not spoken by Ganga Prasad in his capacity as a witness at all, and furthermore that some of the words spoken were spoken by Ganga Prasad after he had left the witness box. As to this last allegation it is by no...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1927Bom167; (1927)29BOMLR253; 101Ind.Cas.144
Amberson Marten, Kt., C.J.1. The question we have to decide is whether leave ought to be given to the appellant to continue against the respondent-company a suit No. 672 of 1924 filed by him in the Court of the First Class Subordinate Judge at Ahmedabad against the respondent-company and two other defendants who were in fact the agents of the respondent-company. That leave is required because the company is in liquidation and the suit in question was brought after the winding-up petition although before the winding-up order. Accordingly, Section 171 of the Indian Companies Act, 1913, provides:-When a winding-up order has been wade, no suit or other legal proceeding shall be proceeded with or commenced against the Company except by leave of the Court, and subject to such terms as the Court may impose.2. Of course as we all know, the winding-up order relates back to the date of the presentation of the winding-up petition.3. The plaint itself asked for a declaration (a) that a sum of Rs. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1940Bom172; (1940)42BOMLR262
Wassoodew, J.1. This is a Letters Patent Appeal from a decision of Mr. Justice Sen in second appeal No. 133 of 1935. The material facts can be shortly stated. The suit was instituted on behalf of the Jawhar State to recover a sum of Rs. 1,950 as the balance due for the price of certain jungle sold by the State to the defendant. The plaint was presented1 in Court signed by a Daftardar of the State. The defendant contended that the Daftardar had no authority to sue on behalf of the State and that contention was upheld by the trial Court which dismissed the suit on October 5, 1933. It seems that subsequent to that date at the request of the person appointed to carry on the administration of the State, which was communicated to the Governor-General in Council through the Political Agent and Resident at Baroda, the Central Government in the exercise of their power under Section 85 of the Civil Procedure Code appointed the Administrator of the Jawhar State to prosecute or defend on behalf of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1937Bom244; (1937)39BOMLR224
S.S. Rangnekar, Acting C.J.1. This suit is concerned with the estate of a wealthy family in Poona called Gaikwad family. The common ancestor of the family was one Limbaji. He settled at Indore and enjoyed the favour of the ruler. He as well as other members of the family were employed in the State in various capacities and received from the ruler large gifts in the shape of jewels, cash and other property as a mark of their personal favour. The family thus amassed a large fortune, which they invested in the purchase of immovable property at Poona and Satara Districts. Limbaji died in 1892. About 1897 or 1898, the family seems to have incurred the displeasure of the ruler, in consequence of which their property at Indore was confiscated, and they had to leave the State. The family then came and settled in Poona. Limbaji had three sons,-Gangaram, Gopal and Balwant. Of these, Gopal was the manager of the family. Gopal died in 1906, leaving a widow Laxmibai and a minor son Krishnarao. Gang...
Tag this Judgment!