Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian boilers amendment act 2007 section 8 amendment of section 7 Court: privy council Year: 1930 Page 1 of about 23 results (0.069 seconds)

Sep 04 1930 (PC)

The Corporation of Madras Vs. the Madras Electric Tramways and the Mad ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Sep-04-1930

Reported in : AIR1931Mad152; (1931)60MLJ551

Reilly, J.1. These two appeals relate to suits in which the Corporation of Madras claimed declarations that the Madras Electric Tramways Company and the Madras Electric Supply Corporation respectively were subject to the. control of the Commissioner of the Corporation under Sections 287 and 288 respectively of the Madras City Municipal Act. The suits were tried by the Judge of the City Civil Court, who dismissed both of them. They came on appeal before Waller, J., whose opinion was that both the Companies carried on their operations under special Acts, or what were equivalent to special Acts, inconsistent with the general Act, the City Municipal Act, and that the Corporation of Madras were not entitled to the declarations for which they sought. He upheld the decision of the City Civil Court; and it is against that decision that these two appeals have been preferred.2. I think it will be convenient to deal with the two cases separately, and, if I may say so with great respect, I doubt w...

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 01 1930 (PC)

Manchersha Ardesar Vs. Govind Ganesh Joshi

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Apr-01-1930

Reported in : AIR1930Bom424; (1930)32BOMLR1035

Shingne, J.1. This is a suit to recover a debt due on two promissory notes Exhibits 54 and 56, executed by defendant No. 3 in his personal capacity. The promissory note Exhibit 54 dated June 3, 1925, was executed by defendant No. 3 in favour of plaintiff No. 1 alone and the promissory note Exhibit 56 dated July 81, 1925, was executed by defendant No. 3 in favour of plaintiffs Nos. 1 and 2. There is evidence to show that the dealings of both the plaintiffs are joint and the Court of first instance has found that both the plaintiffs are jointly interested in the two promissory notes in suit. This finding is not challenged by respondent's pleader. Exhibit 54 was for a sum of Rs. 5|200 due under an account and Exhibit 56 was for a sum of Rs. 300. Out of this sum of Rs. 300 a sum of Rs. 100 is stated to have been borrowed on June 7, 1925.2. Five persons were impleaded as defendants one of whom, , viz., defendant No. 5, is a minor. Defendants Nos. 1 to 4 are full brothers and defendant No. 5...

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 11 1930 (PC)

Nina Dalal Vs. Merwanji Pheeozshaw Dalal

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Apr-11-1930

Reported in : (1930)32BOMLR1046

Amberson Marten, Kt., C.J.1. This appeal comes before us on the preliminary issue whether this High Court has jurisdiction to entertain the petition of the petitioner for restitution of conjugal rights. The learned trial Judge decided that issue in the negative feeling himself bound by a decision of the appellate Court in Nusserwanji Wadia v. Eleonora Wadia (1913) 15 Bom. L.R. 693, I.L.R. 38 Bom. 125. The petitioner now appeals, and as this is a Full Bench, we are not bound, as the learned Judge was, by that particular decision. So in effect this appeal is an appeal from the decision in Wadia v. Wadia. The sole ground on which it is contended by the respondent that the judgment should be upheld is that both parties to the petition are not Christians but only one, and that, consequently, the jurisdiction given or continued to this Court by the Indian Divorce Act 1869, as subsequently amended, does not apply.2. As regards the facts, it is sufficient to say that the lady claims to be a Ru...

Tag this Judgment!

May 01 1930 (PC)

Rajah Kocherlakota Venkata Jagannadha Rao Garu Vs. Maharajah Ravu Venk ...

Court : Chennai

Decided on : May-01-1930

Reported in : AIR1931Mad140; (1931)60MLJ56

Horace Owen Compton Beasley, Kt., C.J.1. Appeal No. 409 of 1925.--The plaintiff's suit was for a mortgage decree for Rs. 1,88,487-15-6 representing principal and interest alleged to be due under a mortgage deed, Ex. A. This deed arose out of the compromise already dealt with in Appeal No. 446 of 1925. It will be remembered that under that compromise, dated the 29th of November, 1920, one of the properties purchased in the ' Court sale, viz., Polavaram village with its hamlets was agreed to be retained by the Rajah of Polavaram in consideration of the payment of the sum of Rs. 1,39,986-1-0 to the plaintiff. The compromise was entered into by the Rajah's adoptive mother. This amount had been deposited in Court by the plaintiff being the balance remaining after the Court sale of the defendant's properties by the plaintiff. Being unable to pay this sum in cash the 1st defendant's adoptive mother as his guardian executed in favour of the plaintiff on the 14th of December, 1920, a bond for t...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 25 1930 (PC)

The Tea Financing Syndicate Ltd. Vs. Chandra Kamal Bez Barua

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Jul-25-1930

Reported in : AIR1931Cal359

Rankin, C.J.1. This suit was brought so long ago as 1924 by a Company, the Planters Agency Co. Ltd., against the defendant, Bezboruah, the proprietor of a Tea Estate in Assam called the Boloma Tea Estate. Pending suit the plaintiff Company assigned its interest to the Tea Financing Syndicate Ltd. which has been substituted as plaintiff, but this assignment may for the present purpose be ignored.2. The suit is brought upon a dead of hypothecation dated 3rd February 1920. This deed in effect provided that the plaintiffs would make advances or grant other pecuniary accommodation to the defendant to an extent not exceeding Rs. 80,000 to enable him to work and carry on the Boloma Tea Estate; but it was expressly stipulated by the concluding words of the deed that advances would be made for so long and to such extent only as the plaintiffs in their discretion should think fit, and that the plaintiffs might discontinue them as and when' they considered it expedient with one month's notice to ...

Tag this Judgment!

May 27 1930 (PC)

Nagarbashi Banik Vs. Meghnath Maishan and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : May-27-1930

Reported in : AIR1931Cal171,129Ind.Cas.839

Graham, J. 1. This appeal is from a decision of the District Judge of Tipperah confirming a decision of the Munsif, 3rd Court, Brahmanberia, and arises out of a suit for specific performance of a contract for the sale of some land within the town of Brahmanberia together with twohuts standing thereon. The plaintiff's case was that defendants 1 and 2, to whom the land and house in question belonged, entered into a contract with him to sell them to him for a sum of Rs. 525, that he paid Rs. 125 as earnest money, that the defendants executed a baynapatra in his favour on 22nd Agrahayan 1322 B. S., and that subsequently they sold the land and houses to defendant 3, who in his turn transferred them to defendant 4.2. It appears that at the trial the baynapatra, not having been registered, was not admitted in evidence by the Munsif as creating a charge upon property following the decision of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in the case of Dayal Singh v. Indar Singh A.I.R. 1926 P.C....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 24 1930 (PC)

Mahant Shanta Nand Gir Vs. Mahant Babudeva Nand Gir

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Jan-24-1930

Reported in : 125Ind.Cas.477

Grimwood Mears, C.J., Boys and Young, JJ.1. One Basudevanand Gir obtained leave to appeal to the Privy Council and on the due date deposited a sum of Rs, 4,000 as security for costs and a further sum for printing charges.2. On the 2nd of November, 1927, Mr. Newal Kishore, who was the legal practitioner for Shantanand Gir, the respondent to the Privy Council appeal, drafted an application to the Court of the Subordinate Judge at Allahabad in which he prayed that the cash certificates for Rs. 4,000-12-0 and a sum of Rs. 798 110 for printing charges, which had been paid into the High Court by the appellant, might be attached and the amount of the decree may be so far as possible satisfied by attachment thereof. The application came before Mr. Sudeshar Maitra on the 4th of February, 1928. His order was a short one and may be given in full:The items objected to relate to the printing charges and security furnished by the defendant-objector in connection with his appeal to His Majesty in Cou...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 24 1930 (PC)

(Mahant) Shantha Nand Gir Chela and Mahant Gayanand Gir Vs. (Mahant) B ...

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Jan-24-1930

Reported in : AIR1930All225

1. One Basdeonand Gir obtained leave to appeal to the Privy Council and on the due date deposited a sum of Rs. 4,000 as security for costs and a further sum for printing charges.2. On 2nd November 1927 Mr. Newal Kishore, who was the legal practitioner for Shankernand Gir the respondent to the Privy Council appeal, drafted an application to the Court of the Subordinate Judge at Allahabad in which he prayed that the cash certificates for Rs. 4,000-12-0 and a sum of Rs. 798-11-0 for printing charges, which had been paid into the High Court by the appellant, might be attached:and the amount of the decree may be so far as possible satisfied by attachment thereof.3. The application came before Sudeshar Maitra on 4th February 1928. His order was a short one and may be given in full.The items objected to relate to the printing charges and security furnished by the defendant objector in connexion with his appeal to His Majesty in Council. The decree-holder is anxious to lay his hands on these i...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 14 1930 (PC)

Emperor Vs. Balgaunda Ramgaunda Patil

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Nov-14-1930

Reported in : (1931)33BOMLR296

J.W.P. Beaumount, C.J.1. In this appeal accused No. 1 was convicted under Section 471 of the Indian Penal Code for using a forged document, viz., a will and accused Nos. 2 to 4 were convicted under Section 467 of the same Code which is the section which imposes a penalty for forging a will, the offence of forgery being described in Section 463 of the Code, The facts shortly are that the maker of the will, Malgaunda A, Patil, died on January 7, 1916, and five years later, viz., on January 21, 1921, an application was made by accused No. 1 to the District Judge of Satara for letters of administration with the will annexed. Accused No. 1 was the principal beneficiary under the alleged will. In these proceedings the District Judge came to the conclusion that the will was forged. He came to that conclusion after examining all the accused as witnesses and he dismissed the application. On November 6, 1922, he made an order under Section 476 of the Criminal Procedure Code sending the case to t...

Tag this Judgment!

May 26 1930 (PC)

Raja Probhat Chandra Barua Vs. Emperor

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : May-26-1930

Reported in : (1930)32BOMLR1541

Russell, J. 1. The appellant is zamindar of the permanently settled estate of Gouripur, and he appeals to His Majesty in Council in the circumstances herein set forth.2. By an assessment note of the Income Tax Officer of Dhubri dated August 28, 1925, the appellant was assessed under the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, to income tax in respect of income arising from his said estate. On appeal the assessment was confirmed by order of the Assistant Commissioner dated December 22, 1925.3. At the request of the appellant the Commissioner of Income Tax, Assam, acting under Section 66 of the said Act, submitted certain questions for the decision of the High Court.4. The questions so submitted were three in number, and (as amended in the course of the hearing) they were in the following terms:--I. Whether the following sources of income are agricultural and therefore exempted from assessment to Income tax under Section 4 (3) (viii) of the Act? [Then follow ten items which it is unnecessary to set...

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //