Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Mar-08-1945
Reported in : AIR1946Bom159; (1945)47BOMLR867
Lokur, J.1. The facts out of which this appeal arises are not in dispute. The Ahmedabad Municipality established a Provident Fund for the benefit of its employees in 1914, and in exercise of the powers under Section 8 of the Provident Funds Act, 1925, the Government of Bombay applied the provisions of that Act to that Fund by a Notification dated July 2, 1929. The Municipality used to invest the Provident Fund in public securities including its own debentures. Those debentures had been issued by the Municipality under the Local Authorities' Loans Act, 1914. On June 20, 1933, the Collector of Ahmedabad wrote a letter to the Municipality that the moneys of the Provident Fund could not be invested by the Municipality in its own debentures as they were not securities within the meaning of Section 20(d) of the Indian Trusts Act, 1882. The President of the Municipality was therefore, requested to take steps to dispose of the debentures and to reinvest the proceeds in public securities. Later...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Aug-09-1945
Reported in : AIR1946Bom216; (1945)47BOMLR1010
Bhagwati, J.1. The petitioners are partners carrying on business in partnership in the firm name and style of Kokwah Chinese Restaurant at Dhanraj Mahal, Apollo Bunder, Bombay. They have been occupying shops Nos. 1, 5 and 11 on the ground-floor of the Dhanraj Mahal and have been conducting the business of the restaurant since March 22, 1944, when they purchased the restaurant together with its paraphernalia and goodwill from the previous owners thereof on payment of a sum of Rs. 42,000. The restaurant has been in existence in any event from and after May 1942 when the previous owners stopped their business of curios which they had been carrying on there along with the business of restaurant and converted the whole premises for their user as a restaurant. The restaurant employs about twenty-four servants and is fitted up with costly fixtures, fittings and furniture which has been installed therein. It also enjoys considerable goodwill in so far as it commands a great reputation and cate...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Sep-06-1945
Reported in : AIR1946Bom499; (1946)48BOMLR327
Bhagwati, J.1. Two brothers, one Vithal Ramchandra Parulkar and another Vishnu. Ramchandra Parulkar, had monetary dealings with a firm of money lenders by name Himmatmal Manji & Co. commencing from sometime prior to November 17, 1922V The account in respect of these monetary dealings was maintained in the joint names, of Vithal Ramchandra Parulkar and Vishnu Ramchandra Parulkar in the books of account of Messrs. Himmatmal Manji & Co. This account was adjusted on or about November 17, 1922, when a sum of Rs. 25,150 was found due and owing by the two brothers to the firm of Messrs. Himmatmal Manji & Co. as of that date. On the same date the adjustment was recorded in the books of account of Messrs. Himmatmal Manji & Co. showing the said sum of Rs. 25,150 as due by both of them 'Personal debts to the account of both till today, November 17, 1922.' Signatures of both of them were appended at the foot of this adjustment. On the same day it was agreed between the firm of Messrs. Himmatmal Ma...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Dec-21-1945
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!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Feb-23-1945
Reported in : AIR1945All102
Iqbal Ahmad, C.J.1. This is a reference by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Central and United Provinces, under Section 66(2), Income-tax Act (11 of 1922) and the question referred to this Court is:Whether on the facts of this case the Income-tax Officer was justified in taking the assessee's gross income from money-lending to be Rs. 31,081.2. The facts that led to the reference, and as. they appear from the statement of the case submitted by the Income-tax Commissioner, are very simple. Shrimati Singari Bai, the assessee, a professional money-lender, regularly kept her accounts according to what is known as the 'mercantile accountancy system' or the 'book profits system of accountancy' or the 'complete double entry book-keeping.' Under this system the net profit or loss is calculated after taking into account all the income and all the expenditure relating to the period, whether such income has been actually received or not and, whether such expenditure has teen actually paid or not. T...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jul-17-1945
Reported in : (1946)48BOMLR1
Thankerton, J.1. This appeal is brought by leave of the Federal Court of India, from a judgment of that Court (Spens C.J., Varadachariar and Zafrulla Khan JJ.) dated August 31, 1943, dismissing eight appeals by the Crown against orders and judgments of a divisional bench of three Judges (Mitter and Sen JJ., Khundkar J., dissenting) of the High Court of Judicature at Fort William in Bengal, dated June 3, 1943.2. The orders and judgments of the High Court were made upon applications under Section 491 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1898, for directions in the nature of habeas corpus on behalf of nine persons, detained in various jails in pursuance of orders made under Rule 26 of the Defence of India Rules, 1939, on various dates from October 24, 1940, to March 8, 1943. These orders and judgments directed the release of the applicants. Of the nine original applicants eight are called as respondents in the present appeal, but their Lordships were informed that two of the respondents had be...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Nov-08-1945
Reported in : AIR1946Bom516; (1946)48BOMLR341
Bhagwati, J.1. The plaintiffs have filed this suit, being members of the Arya Samaj, Bombay, on behalf of themselves and all other members of the said society, which is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act XXI of 1860, against the first defendant who is the president of the said society, as representing the society of the Arya Samaj, Bombay, and against defendants Nos. 2, 3 and 4 who are the members of the managing committee of the society on behalf of themselves and all the other members of the managing committee of the society, for a declaration that the resolutions dated October 8, 1944, passed at an extraordinary general meeting of the society are ultra vires and in fraud of the minority, for a declaration that the resolution dated January 21, 1945, passed at the general meeting of the said society is also null and void and for further and other reliefs. The resolutions dated October 8, 1944, enacted certain changes in the constitution of the said society and t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jul-31-1945
Reported in : (1946)48BOMLR138
Goddard, J.1. Their Lordships now give their reasons for the advice they humbly tendered to His Majesty on July 31, that this appeal should be dismissed.2. The appellant together with his brother Elmi was charged on July 22, 1944, before the Protectorate Court of Somaliland with the murder of his half-brother Abdillahi on or about May 17, 1942. The Judge of the Court convicted the appellant and sentenced him to death, and acquitted Elmi. The conviction and sentence were confirmed on appeal by the Military Governor sitting as Judge of the Protectorate Court on the appellate side and the appellant subsequently obtained special leave to appeal to His Majesty in Council. The ground upon which special leave was given was that the Court had admitted and acted upon the unsworn evidence of a girl of ten or eleven years of age whom the Judge found was competent to testify but whom he did not consider was able to understand the nature of an oath. It was conceded by the Crown that if her evidence...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Apr-29-1945
Reported in : AIR1945Bom494; (1945)47BOMLR716
Kania, J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment of Coyajee J. on an application for stay of arbitration proceedings under Section 34 of the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940. The plaintiff, claiming to be the adopted son of defendant No. 1, filed this suit for several declarations on the footing that on adoption he became a member of the joint family. He claimed discovery and partition in the joint family properties. He alleged that he was adopted on February 9, 1942. On coming to know of this suit, defendant No. 1 took out a notice of motion for stay, on the ground that under two agreements dated January 30, 1942, and July. 26, 1942, the plaintiff and defendant No. 1 had agreed to refer all matters which may arise and cause disputes between them to arbitration. In support of that notice of motion defendant No. 1 filed an affidavit in which he propounded the two documents mentioned above. The plaintiff filed his affidavit in reply in which he denied that he had executed the documents propou...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Aug-09-1945
Reported in : AIR1946Bom346; (1946)48BOMLR104
Sen, J. 1. The plaintiff-appellant brought this suit for a declaration that defendants Nos. 1 to 3 had no right to proceed with the arbitration case No. 9 of 1942 and that the attachment levied against the property mentioned in the plaint was illegal and void, for a permanent injunction restraining the said defendants from proceeding with the case, and for damages amounting to Rs. 1,000.2. The material facts are these. One Rajaram Govind Joshi was a clerk in the service of defendant No. 3, the Deogad Urban Co-operative Bank, Limited, having been appointed as such on July 27, 1936, He became a member of the bank in October,. 1937, and on September 18, 1941, he passed an indemnity bond furnishing security against misappropriation. In 1942 the accounts of the bank were audited, and it. appears that the auditors discovered that between January, 1939, and March 1942 there had been defalcation to the extent of Rs. 16,008-12-0, and as Rajaram was in charge of the accounts of the bank, it was ...
Tag this Judgment!