Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Oct-16-1931
Reported in : AIR1932Bom370; (1932)34BOMLR780; 140Ind.Cas.164
John Beaumont, Kt., C.J.1. This is an appeal from a decision of the District Judge of West Khandesh. The plaintiffs sued for a declaration that the three houses and the mango trees upon the land, the survey numbers of which are referred to in the judgment of the learned District Judge, belong to them and for recovery of possession thereof from defendant No. 2, and also to recover price of mango crops and damages from both defendants.2. The material facts are that one Sonia, the predecessor-in-title of the plaintiffs, became the occupier of the survey numbers referred to, upon which stood the mango trees in suit and upon one of which survey numbers, viz., 127, stood the three houses in suit, On the grant of the land to Sonia, Government did not reserve the trees under the power contained in Section 40 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code, and in the year 1907 Sonia applied to the Collector for a kaul or lease of the trees, and the Collector replied that the trees had been declared to be of S...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jun-30-1931
Reported in : (1931)33BOMLR1192
Patkar, Ag. C.J.1. These are four applications for quashing the order of commitment of the several accused under different sections of the Indian Penal Code passed on May 14,1931, by the Special Magistrate appointed to try the case. It is not necessary to mention all the facts leading to the prosecution of the accused in this case. The commitment can be quashed under Section 215 by this Court only on a point of law.2. The first point taken on behalf of the accused is that the case was started as a warrant case and the learned Magistrate led the accused to believe that he was trying the case under Chapter XXI of the Criminal Procedure Code and not inquiring under Chapter XVIII of the Code, and therefore the accused had no opportunity of cross-examining the prosecution witnesses and leading evidence on their behalf before the Magistrate. It is further urged that though the Magistrate had power to commit the accused under Section 347 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the Magistrate was boun...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Aug-28-1931
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
Decided on : Mar-03-1931
Reported in : (1931)33BOMLR675
Madgavkar, J. 1. This application raises a question of some importance under Section 526 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. On September 25, 1930, a disturbance took place at Chirner, thirteen miles from Panvel, forty-seven accused were sent up before the Magistrate, and on January 31, 1931, were committed by him for trial before the Sessions Court of Thana under Sections 120B(1), 147, 148, 149, 224, 302, 332, 379, and 395 of the Indian Penal Code. The trial would have taken place at Thana with a jury.2. On February 12, 1931, the following notification, No. 8252-2 dated February 5, 1931, was published in the Bombay Government Gazette-Under Section 193(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (V of 1898), the Governor in Council is pleased to direct that Mr. N.R. Gundil, LL.B., Assistant Judge and Additional Sessions Judge, Thana, shall try the case known as the Chirner Riot Case, which has been committed to the Sessions by Mr. R.R. Sonalkar, a Magistrate of the First Class in the dis...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Nov-25-1931
Reported in : 140Ind.Cas.331; (1932)63MLJ450
Reilly, J.1. The questions referred to us are(1) whether the High Court has power to interfere with a decision of the Board of Revenue under Chapter XI of the Madras Estates Land Act,(2) whether the Board of Revenue has in this particular case exceeded the jurisdiction conferred upon it, and(3) what should be 'the final order to be passed in this case,' i.e., on this revision petition.2. It appears that under Section 164 of the Estates Land Act the Local Government ordered that a survey should be made and a record-of-rights should be prepared for 21 villages in the Mandasa Zamindari in the Ganjam district, which was done. On an application made by the ryots of the villages the Local Government afterwards ordered under Section 168 of the Act that a settlement of rent should be made for the villages. The Revenue Officer appointed for the purpose settled the rents for the villages. The ryots being dissatisfied, appealed against his orders to the Board of Revenue, which had been appointed ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Nov-20-1931
Reported in : AIR1932Mad474; (1932)62MLJ720
Reilly, J.1. These cases refer to two Banks which have been registered under the Co-operative Societies Act, namely,' the Madras Central Urban Bank, Limited, and the Madras City Co-operative Bank, Limited, both of which carry on their operations in Madras. The Commissioner of the Corporation of Madras demanded profession tax from these two Banks tinder Section 111 of the Madras City Municipal Act of 1919. Under that section only persons who are not liable to companies' tax under Section 110 of the Act are liable to profession tax. Both the Banks objected to the Commissioner's demands, at that stage apparently maintaining that they were liable neither to profession tax nor to companies' tax. They appealed to the Standing Committee of the Corporation, which rejected their appeals. Then, under Rule 15 of SchIV of the City Municipal Act they appealed to the Court of Small Causes and at that stage contended that, if they were liable to be taxed at all, it was under Section 110 of the Act to...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Nov-20-1931
Reported in : 140Ind.Cas.422; (1932)62MLJ608
1. This is an appeal from a judgment of Eddy, J. The plaintiff in the Court below, who has since died, was a Hindu widow claiming to be a member of the Bhujakshatriya community. The first two defendants are brothers; and all the defendants with the exception of the 2nd defendant are responsible officers of that community. The plaintiff's claim was for damages for slander and for a declaration, injunction and damages for excommunication. Her case was that the defendants orally stated that she had given birth to an illegitimate child in the Gosha Hospital, Madras. The learned Trial Judge found that all the defendants uttered the slander complained of and gave the plaintiff Rs. 2,000 in respect of her claim for damages. Then the next claim of the plaintiff was that she was excommunicated by the defendants without being given an opportunity of defending herself against a charge of unchastity made by two women to the defendants that she had given birth to an illegitimate child at the Gosha ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jan-14-1931
Reported in : AIR1932Bom330; (1932)34BOMLR634
Blackwell, J.1. On June 27, 1930, the plaintiffs as the holders for value of bills of lading for 27,398 bags of sugar loaded on a ship owned by defendants No. 1 brought this suit to recover from defendants Nos. 1 and 2 damages in respect of a short delivery of 1078 cwts., 2 quarters and 26 lbs. This short delivery is admitted. The suit was also framed in conversion in respect of certain sweepings. That claim and the issues raised thereon were abandoned at the hearing.2. The pleadings as originally framed were defective on both sides, and I allowed certain amendments both of the plaint and of the points of defence in order that all the matters in dispute between the parties might be properly determined.3. The ship arrived on May 4, 1929, and was completely discharged on May 8, 1929. Having regard to Article 31 of the Indian Limitation Act, the suit against defendants No. 1 was prima facie barred,-the suit not having been brought until June 27, 1930. In order to meet this difficulty the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : May-21-1931
Reported in : (1931)33BOMLR1338
Atkin, J.1. This is an appeal from an order of the High Court of Judicature in Bengal affirming an order of the Court made in its original civil jurisdiction on an application for directions made by the liquidators of the Bengal National Bank, Ltd., the respondents in this appeal. The respondent bank was incorporated in 1907 and registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1882. On or before May 4, 1923, the respondent bank had borrowed from the Imperial Bank of India, the appellant, hereinafter called the Imperial Bank, the sum of ten lacs with interest, and on May 4, executed and delivered to the Imperial Bank a debenture creating a floating charge on the whole undertaking, properties, assets and interests present and future of the respondent bank as security for the loan. On August 1,1923, a similar debenture was executed and delivered to the Imperial Bank, creating a similar floating charge as security for a further loan of ten lacs with interest. Both documents were duly registered ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Aug-11-1931
Reported in : AIR1932Mad55; (1932)63MLJ962
Vepa Ramesam, Kt., Offg., C.J.1. These are appeals against the award of the District Judge of Salem made in certain land acquisition proceedings which vvere taken pursuant to the Town Planning Act (VII of 1^20). The scheme was generally known as Maravaneri Extension and was intended to enlarge the accommodation of Salem Town. The facts of the case may now be stated.2. On 1st February, 1921, the Madras Government invited the Municipal Council of Salem by a notification published in the Fort St. George Gazette to submit for their sanction within three months from the date of the publication of the notification a scheme in respect of the area now in question (Ex. A). This was under Section 12 of the Town Planning Act. That section authorises the Government to fix a date within which the Municipal Council should submit the scheme and the Government fixed three 'months as the period. The Salem Municipal Council did not submit their scheme within three months. The draft scheme was submitted ...
Tag this Judgment!