Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1877)ILR1Bom23
Michael Westropp, C.J.1. The facts of this case are very clearly stated in the judgment of the Court below by Green, J., and we agree with him in his decision on those facts. We must consider that several matters combine to make up a cause of action, and that, in such a case as the present, the dishonour of a bill or hundi by the drawee is a part of the cause of action of the holder against the indorser. It has been held that notice of dishonour is a material part of the cause of action against an indorser, and that being so it seems to us to follow as a matter of course that the dishonour itself must also be a material part of that cause of action.2. We also consider that the custom sworn to by the plaintiff's witnesses is a reasonable one, and in accordance with the law merchant. We must regard the plaintiff as holder for value of the hundi sued on. It appears that there was a large balance due to him from Popsang and on receipt of the hundi, viz., on the 3rd June, he entered the amo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1889)ILR13Bom404
Charles Sargent, C.J.1. We think this Court has no jurisdiction, and the order appealed from must be confirmed. The object of this suit, as set forth in the plaint, is to have the accounts taken of the Zanzibar business. The defendant, who was manager there, is charged with misappropriating money. Reliance is placed upon the fact that certain sums of money, which form part of the total amount with which he is charged, were misappropriated by him by means of certain misrepresentations made or directions given in Bombay. We do not think that that is sufficient to give this Court jurisdiction. The mere fact that the fraud in connection with certain items in the account was effected in Bombay would not justify a change of venue. It is possible that the case would be tried here in a manner more satisfactory to the plaintiff than it can be elsewhere: but that is not a matter for our consideration. The simple question is, whether such a material part of the cause of action has arisen in Bomba...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1904)ILR27Bom54
Crowe, J.1. This was a rule granted to the Public Prosecutor calling on Yarjivandas alias Kalidas Bhaidas to show cause why the order passed by Mr. Binning, Acting Chief Presidency Magistrate, discharging him under Section 209 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Act V of 1898), should not be set aside and why he should not be committed to the Court of Sessions for trial on charges under Sections 471 and 109 of the Indian Penal Code.2. Mr. Branson, who has appeared to show cause against the rule, has contended that it is not competent to this Court to set aside the order and direct the commitment of the accused either under the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure or under tine Charter or the Charter Act, and that the prosecution is not prejudiced in any way because it is open to them to make a fresh application, the order of discharge not amounting to in acquittal. The learned Counsel drew our attention to several Calcutta cases in which, he argued, there was considerable divergenc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1912)14BOMLR1194
Batchelor, J.1. This is an application for leave to appeal to the Privy Council in the matter of an award made by this Court on appeal from the Court of the District Judge. The proceedings were taken under the Land Acquisition Act (I of 1894), and the question raised was as to the value of certain land acquired under that Statute by the Government. It is admitted that the value of the property involved in this application exceeds Rs. 10,000, and it is also admitted that a substantial point of law is involved in this Court's judgment with reference to the position occupied by the Special Collector under the Land Acquisition Act. The difficulty, however, in the way of the applicant is furnished by the judgment of their Lordships of the Privy Council in The Rangoon Botatoung Company Limited v. The Collector, Rangoon : (1912)14BOMLR833 . Prima facie, as the learned Advocate General admitted, this decision seems to bar the applicant's right to appeal to the Privy Council. It was sought, how...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1913)ILR37Bom506
Batchelor, J.1. This is an application for leave to appeal to the Privy Council in the matter of an award made by this Court on appeal from the Court of the District Judge. The proceedings were taken under the Land Acquisition Act (I of 1894), and the question raised was as to the value of certain land acquired under that Statute by the Government. It is admitted that the value of the property involved in this application exceeds Rs. 10,000, and it is also admitted that a substantial point of law is involved in this Court's judgment with reference to the position occupied by the Special Collector under the Land Acquisition Act. The difficulty, however, in the way of the applicant is furnished by the judgment of their Lordships of the Privy Council in Rangoon Botatoung Company, Ltd. v. The Collector, Rangoon 1912 40 Cal 21. Prima facie, as the learned Advocate General admitted, this decision seems to bar the applicant's right to appeal to the Privy Council. It was sought, however, to es...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 17Ind.Cas.952
Batchelor, J.1. This is an application for leave to appeal to the Privy Council in the matter of an award made by this Court on appeal from the Court of the District Judge. The proceedings were taken under the Land Acquisition Act (I of 1894), and the question raised was as to the value of certain land acquired under that Statute by the Government. It is admitted that the value of the property involved in this application exceeds Rs. 10,000, and it is also admitted that a substantial point of law is involved in this Court's judgment with reference to the position occupied by the Special Collector under the Land Acquisition Act. The difficulty, however, in the way of the applicant is furnished by the judgment of their Lordships of the Privy Council in the Rangoon Botatoung Company Limited v. The Collector, Rangoon 14 Bom. L.R. 833 : 16 C.W.N. 961 : 12 M.L.T. 195 : (1912) M.W.N. 781 : 16 Cri.L.J. 245 : 22 M.L.J. 276 : 10 A.L.J. 271 : 5 Bur. L.T. 205 207 : 16 Ind. Cas. 188. Prima facie, a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1914Bom6; (1914)16BOMLR195
Shah, J.1. This is an application for leave to appeal to His Majesty in Council, arising under the following circumstances:-2. A suit was brought by one Gangappa Rudrappa Hundekar in the Court of the First Class Subordinate Judge at Bijapur substantially to have it declared that he was the adopted son of the deceased Rudrappa Hundekar against Chanbasava kon Rudrappa and others. The suit was decided on the 12th February 1909 in favour of the plaintiff. Chanbasava preferred Appeal No. 61 of 1909 to this Court against the decree in the said suit. On the 7th August 1909 an application was made by one Virupakshappa to be joined as a co-appellant with Chanbasava and to continue the appeal with her alleging that he was adopted by Chanbasava on the 12th May 1909. The application was granted on the 13th August 1909 subject to any objections the respondents might have to urge at the hearing. Chanbasava is stated to have died about 15th October 1910 but apparently no application was made by any o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1921)23BOMLR1132
Norman Macleod, Kt., C.J.1. The petitioners applied to this Court for an order under Section 45 of the Specific Relief Act directing the Chief Co-Revenue Authority to refer a case for the decision of the High Court under Section 51 of the Indian Income Tax Act VII of 1918.The application was refused and the petitioners now ask us to grant them leave to appeal to the Privy Council. It has been contended for the opponents that no appeal lies from a decision of the Court refusing to make an order under Section 45.2. Section 48 says :-Every order under this Chapter shall be executed, and may be appealed from, as if it) were a decree made in the exercise of the ordinary original civil jurisdiction of the High Court.3. Section 49 says :-The costs of all applications and orders under this Chapter shall be in the discretion of the High Court.4. It would certainly appear at first sight that Section 48 only contemplated that orders directing an act to be done or forborne should be appealable as ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1921Bom128(1); (1921)23BOMLR1102
Norman Macleod, Kt., C.J.1. This is an application for leave to appeal to the Privy Council from the decision of the High Court on a reference from the Chief Revenue Authority under Section 51 of the Indian Income Tax Act (VII of 1918). Sub-section 3 of Section 51 is as follows:-The High Court upon the hearing of any such case shall decide the questions raised thereby, and shall deliver its judgment thereon containing the grounds on which such decision is founded, and shall send to the Revenue-Authority by which the case was stated a copy of such judgment under the seal of the Court and the signature of the Registrar; and the Revenue-Authority shall dispose of the case accordingly, or, if the case arose on reference from any Revenue-officer subordinate to it, shall forward a copy of suoh judgment to such officer who shall dispose of the case conformably to such judgment.2. It is contended by the respondent that the judgment of the High Court on the case stated by the Chief Revenue Auth...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1922)24BOMLR16
Norman Macleod, Kt., C.J.1. This is a rule granted at the instance of the Government of Bombay calling upon Balkrishna Govind Kulkarni, Editor and Publisher of the Shubhodaya newspaper at Dharwar, to show cause why he should not be committed for contempt of Court in respect of the publication of an article commenting on the proceedings in the Court of the First Class Magistrate at Dharwar against two volunteers of the Temperance Committee who were alleged to have extorted some money from a Bhangi.2. The article commences:-Proceedings have been instituted against two volunteers of the Temperance Committee for the alleged extortion of thirteen annas and the hearing commenced ten days back...The Police have appointed to conduct the case one of their inspectors who merely does what he is asked to do by the police and echoes them and earns his pay without any trouble. Every one in the town seems to be under the impression that the complainants voluntarily paid the fine and that the case owe...
Tag this Judgment!