Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: life insurance corporation act 1956 section 43 application of the insurance act Sorted by: old Court: mumbai Year: 1936

Apr 06 1936 (PC)

Nawab Major Sir Mohammad Akbar Khan Vs. Attar Singh

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Apr-06-1936

Reported in : (1936)38BOMLR739

Atkin, J.1. This is an appeal from a decision of the Court of the Judicial Commissioner, N. W. Frontier Province, allowing an appeal from the Subordinate Judge of Mardan, who had made a decree in favour of (the plaintiff. By the decree on appeal the plaintiff's suit was dismissed with] costs.2. The suit was commenced by a plaint dated July 25, 1929, based upon a deposit receipt dated April 1, 1917, to recover the principal sum of Rs. 43,900 said to have been deposited with the defendants on deposit account with interest at the agreed rate of five and a quarter per cent, per annum. The alleged deposit receipt bore only an affixed stamp of one anna, and the Subordinate Judge in framing the issues stated as the first issue the question whether the document fell within the definition of a promissory note and was it therefore not admissible in evidence. Without hearing any evidence as to the circumstances in which the document came into existence he decided this issue as a preliminary point...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 29 1936 (PC)

Stephen Seneviratne Vs. the King

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jul-29-1936

Reported in : (1937)39BOMLR1

Roche, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave from a verdict and sentence given and passed in the Supreme Court of the Island of Ceylon on June 14, 1934. The appellant was charged with having murdered his wife on October 15, 1933, and after a trial lasting twenty-one days he was found guilty by a majority of five to two of the jury, one of the five in the majority recommending him to mercy. Sentence of death was passed but this sentence was commuted to one of rigorous imprisonment for life.2. The main ground of the appeal is that on the evidence a verdict of guilty could not properly or safely be found and that the jury ought to have been so directed and that in these circumstances such grave injustice had been done as to require the interference of His Majesty. The appellant also complained of certain specific matters in the conduct of the trial as causing or contributing to the miscarriage of justice. Such matters were: that a very large amount of hearsay evidence was admitted and w...

Tag this Judgment!


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