Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1936Bom330; (1936)38BOMLR903; 165Ind.Cas.34
John Beaumont, Kt., C.J.1. This is an appeal from a decision of Mr. Justice B. J. Wadia given on an originating summons. The summons raised first the question whether on the true construction of a deed of settlement dated November 10, 1930, made by one Fatmabai, the plaintiff has become absolutely entitled to the property at Kambekar Street mentioned in the plaint herein from and after the death of the settlor. The learned Judge answered that question in the negative. The other questions are merely consequential. Mr. Taraporewala for the appellant desired to amend the question by asking who were entitled, and in what shares and for what interests, to the property referred to in the question. I think that we shall have to enlarge the question to some extent, because, if respondent No. 1, who is the trustee of the settlement, is merely told that the plaintiff has not become absolutely entitled to the property, he is left in doubt as to whom he ought to pay over the rents and profits. I t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1941)43BOMLR926
John Beaumont, C.J.1. This is a petition intituled In the matter of immoveable property situate at Navrangpura and In the matter of Ratanji Ramaji and others, all minors. It sets out that the petitioner is the karta of a Hindu joint family, and that the coparcenary property is vested in him, his minor sons and grandsons and his brother and minor sons of his brother, all the minor coparceners being mentioned in the title of the petition. Then the petition sets out the property of the family, and alleges that certain debts have been incurred by the petitioner as karta on behalf of the joint family, the debts amounting approximately to Rs. 10,000. Then it is alleged that an offer has been obtained for the purchase of one item of the coparcenary property, being that mentioned in the title, for a sum of Rs. 66,000 odd, which is alleged to be a very good price, and that the purchaser in the contract has stipulated that the petitioner as guardian of the minors should obtain the necessary sanc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1919)21BOMLR986; 58Ind.Cas.465
Marten, J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment of Mr. Justice Macleod of the 12th December 1918 dismissing the plaintiffs' claim in this suit and allowing the defendants' counter-claim. On the figures since agreed, the amount of the claim is Rs. 69,467-9-0 representing the nett proceeds of sale of certain cotton blankets. The amount of the counterclaim is Rs. 58,440-9-0 representing part of the nett proceeds of sale of certain cotton bales. The aggregate amount in dispute is therefore Rs. 1,27,908. This sum represents the amount alleged to have been owing to the defendants on the security of the blankets and bales, which were pledged to them for differences on certain cotton contracts. The plaintiffs say these pledges and contracts became or were illegal and void, having regard to the outbreak of war at 11 P.M. on 4th August 1914, and that they are entitled to recover the sale proceeds of the blankets which were sold by the defendants in and prior to 1915, and to retain the sale proc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1924Bom41; (1923)25BOMLR778
Pratt, J.1. The plaintiff sues the defendant for damages in respect of a contract for the sale of a motor car.2. The contract is for sale by the defendant to the plaintiff for Rs. 4,000 of which Rs. 1000 had already been paid and the balance was payable in monthly instalments of Rs. 250 on the 5th of May, and of each succeeding month.3. But the contract of sale contained certain very special conditions. These were:-that the buyer will pay instalments punctually ; that after delivery of the car the seller had a right to enter upon the premises where the car was and inspect the car; that the purchaser was not to dispose of the car before the full price was paid; that the purchaser was to insure the car and assign the policy to the seller ; that in default of observance by the buyer of any of the conditions aforesaid the seller had the right to determine the contract and to seize and take possession of the car.4. The word 'hire' is not used in the contract and it is not a hire purchase ag...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1937Bom124; (1936)38BOMLR1137
Broomfield, J.1. This is a batch of civil applications relating to the Chinch-wad Sansthan. The history of this institution is given in Chintaman Bajaji Dev v. Dhondo Ganesh Dev I.L.R. (1888) Bom. 612 In consequence of the decree of this Court in that case, a scheme of management was drawn up, which with some modifications made in 1896 is still in force. It vested the management of the institution in a committee of three trustees,-one representing the eldest branch of the family of the founder, one selected from among members of that family generally, and the third representing the general body of worshippers. All three of the trustees are nominated by the District Judge, Poona.2. Clause 4 of the scheme, which is the most important for our present purpose, is in these terms:-The said trustees shall hold office for life, but it shall be competent to the District Judge of his own motion or upon the application or representation of any person interested in the said Devasthan to remove fro...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1949Bom158; (1949)51BOMLR79
M.C. Chagla, C.J.1. This is an appeal from a judgment of Mr. Justice Bhagwati on a petition filed under the Indian Arbitration Act, holding that the petition was maintainable and adjourning it to Court for being disposed of on the merits. A few facts leading up to this petition may be stated. The petitioners' case was that on January 30, 1948, the respondents gave oral instructions for the purchase of 500 bars of silver. On February 4 the petitioners sent a contract to be signed by the respondents. The contract was delivered to the respondents and according to the petitioners an acknowledgment was obtained in the petitioners' peon book by an employee of the respondents. On February IS the petitioners sent a statement of account to the respondents. The respondents refused to accept the statement of account and in the correspondence that followed the respondents denied that there was any contract between the petitioners and the respondents. The petitioners filed this petition for a decla...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1944)46BOMLR178
George Rankin, J.1. This appeal raises an important question of commercial law under the Indian Contract Act. It is brought by the plaintiff, who carries on business from Calcutta as a distributor of cinema films. The defendants are a limited company who import such films into India. The contract between the parties was expressed in a letter dated May 8, 1936, sent by the defendants to the plaintiff, under which the plaintiff was to maintain at his own cost the defendants' office in Calcutta and handle their films in Bengal, Bihar, Orissa, Assam and Burma in conjunction with the defendants' head office at Cawnpore. The main stipulation was in the following terms :2. That we shall deliver you a brand new positive print of each picture approximately at the average of one picture a month and we shall pay for all the royalties to the producers for the exploitation of the pictures and in consideration of this, you will pay us a sum of Rs. 1,750 towards the cost of each print supplied to you...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1923Bom92; (1922)24BOMLR991
Mulla, J.1. This suit arises out of a contract (Ex. B), dated January 31, 1920, whereby the plaintiffs agreed to sell and the defendants agreed to buy five cases of black and coloured and worsted Venetian at the price of 8 Section 6d. per yard f.b.h. The goods were to be shipped 'in two lots monthly from October approximately.' The suit is to recover the loss on re-sale of two out of the five cases and damages for breach of the contract in respect of the remaining three cases.2. The plaintiffs carry on business as commission agents and merchants in piece goods. The defendants at all times material to this suit carried on business in partnership in piece-goods in the name of Laxmidas Gordhandas. Two out of the said cases arrived in Bombay per s. s. City of London on August 10, 1920. On August 17, 1920, the plaintiff sent an invoice and also shipment samples in respect of the said two cases to the defendants. On September 28, 1920, the plaintiffs sent an invoice and shipment samples in r...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1932Bom15; (1931)33BOMLR1418; 136Ind.Cas.161
Baker, J.1. In the year 1790 A. D. the village of Takli in the Ahmednagar District was granted by the Holkar Darbar by a Sanad to Bhanudas, the great-grandfather of the plaintiffs and his brother Eknath. The property descended to the male issue of the grantees and ultimately to Manohar and Eknath uncles of the plaintiffs who are the sons of Eknath's sister. From the year 1875 the Inamdars had been mortgaging the inam to various persons and ultimately by a decree of the High Court the right of Eknath to redeem the property, Manohar being dead, was declared to be foreclosed.2. The present suit was brought by the plaintiffs, the nephews of Eknath, for a declaration that the inam being for religious and charitable purposes is inalienable and consequently the mortgagees were not entitled to deprive the Inamdars of it. Eknath was defendant No. 5 in the suit as he did not join as plaintiff. He has since died.3. The prayers of the plaintiffs were for a declaration to the effect that the income...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1945Bom395; (1945)47BOMLR287
Blagden, J.1. This was an originating summons having the principal object of determining the validity or otherwise of certain trusts in favour of persons unborn at the date of the creation thereof.2. The facts are not in dispute and so far as material they are as follows:On October 30, 1922, Dadabhai Dajibhai Baria (hereinafter called 'the settlor') had two sons Ardeshir and Rustomji (plaintiffs Nos. 1 and 2), a grandson by Ardeshir called Rohinton born on September 10, 1917, and no other male issue.By an indenture of that date (hereinafter called 'the settlement') he conveyed certain property of which, it was recited, he was the full owner (and there is no evidence or allegation that he was anything less) to himself and plaintiffs Nos. 1 and 2 as trustees upon the following trusts:1. To collect the income thereof.2. To pay outgoings including insurance premia.3. To pay for repairs.4. To pay during the settlor's life one-third of the net residue of the trust income to the settlor, one-...
Tag this Judgment!