Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Aug-07-1936
Reported in : AIR1936Bom201; (1937)39BOMLR332
Broomfield, J.1. This is an application for leave to appeal to the Privy Council by the unsuccessful plaintiff in First Appeal No. 31 of 1932. The main question is whether the property is of the appealable value. The plaintiff claimed to be the owner of immoveable properties in the Narwadari village of Ode in the Anand Taluka, under the will of one Desaibhai. In the first instance he filed his suit in the Court of the Second Class Subordinate Judge, Umreth, claiming a declaration that he is the owner of various properties specified in the plaint, an injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with his possession, possession of specified properties from the defendants, one-third share in certain properties sold by the defendants and Rs. 2,400 for mesne profits for three years of the properties in the possession of the defendants. The suit was valued as follows : Rs. 130 for the declaration and injunction, Rs. 333 for plaintiff's share in the price of the properties sold, Rs. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Aug-07-1936
Reported in : AIR1937Bom326
Broomfield, J.1. This is an application for leave to appeal to the Privy Council by the unsuccessful plaintiff in First Appeal No. 31 of 1932. The Main question is whether the property is of the appealable value. The ptantiff Claimed to the owner of immoveable properties in the Narwadari village of Ode in the Anand Taluka, under the will of one Desaibhai. In the first instance he filed his suit in the Court of the Second Class Subordinate Judge, Umreth, claiming a declaration that he is the owner of various properties specified in the plaint, an injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with his possession, possession of specified properties from the defendants, one-third share in certain properties sold by the defendants and Rs. 2,400 for mesne profits for three years of the properties in the possession of the defendants. The suit was valued as follows: Rs. 130 for the declaration and injunction, Rs. 333 for plaintiff's share in. the price of the properties sold, Rs. 2,40...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Mar-23-1936
Reported in : AIR1936Bom363; (1936)38BOMLR632; 165Ind.Cas.672
John Beaumont, Kt., C.J.1. This is an appeal from a decision of Mr, Justice Black-well. The plaintiffs are suing the defendants as the sureties upon an administration bond, and the learned Judge dismissed the suit on a preliminary issue of limitation.2. The facts are not in dispute. On October 21, 1920, one Chunilal Motilal died intestate, leaving two minor sons, who are the plaintiffs. On July 14, 1921, leave was given to Nathalal Motilal to apply for letters of administration. On November 24, 1921, the said Nathalal Motilal, and the defendants, as sureties, entered into a bond, which is exhibit A, for payment to Pheroz Behramji Malabari, Registrar of this Court in its Testamentary and Intestate Jurisdiction, and William J. Howard, acting Assistant Prothonotary, their executors, administrators and assigns of the penal sum of Rs. 1,76,682, which was double the value at which the estate was sworn. The conditions of the bond which was in the usual form, were, first, that Nathalal Motilal...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Nov-02-1936
Reported in : AIR1937Bom158; (1937)39BOMLR103
Broomfield, J.1. This is an appeal under the Letters Patent from a judgment of Mr. Justice Divatia confirming an order of the District Judge of Poona by which the respondent was appointed guardian of his minor niece Lilavati and it was directed under Section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act that she should be restored to his custody from that of the opponents. The respondent who made the application to the District Court is the paternal uncle of the minor girl. The appellants are the persons who opposed that application. Opponent No. 1 is the maternal uncle of the girl and opponent No. 2 is his brother-in-law. According to the findings of the lower Courts, which have not been seriously disputed, the respondent, i.e., the paternal uncle, who is a resident of Kolhapur State, brought up the minor and maintained both her and her mother from the time of her father's death. It appears that the girl now and again visited her other relations who resided in Poona,. but for the greater part of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jan-23-1936
Reported in : (1936)38BOMLR479
George Rankin, J.1. These three appeals concern a religious institution in Manak in the Lahore district, and the buildings, lands and other property belonging thereto. The first appeal, No. 10, is brought by the plaintiffs in a suit under Section 92 of the Civil Procedure Code to remove the defendant Basant Das from the office of mahant or custodian of the institution upon the grounds of misconduct and mismanagement. The learned Subordinate Judge found for the plaintiffs and made an order removing Basant Das and appointing another custodian. The High Court at Lahore set aside this decree and dismissed the suit. No question or difficulty arises as to the competence of this appeal, but the defendant, Basant Das, having died since the High Court's decree, the appeal has not been pressed.2. Appeals Nos. 108 and 109 are brought from two decrees of the High Court reversing the decision of a tribunal appointed under the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925, (Punjab Act VIII of 1925). The tribunal had enq...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Aug-28-1936
Reported in : AIR1937Bom114; (1936)38BOMLR1314
Broomfield, J.1. We are concerned in this case with a dispute between members of the Municipal Board of Bhivandi-Nizampur in the Thana District, as to whether plaintiff No. 5, who was elected President of the Municipality at a meeting held on November 6, 1934, was or was not validly elected. This depends on the construction of Section 23, Sub-section (7A)-, of the Bombay District Municipal Act, III of 1901, as amended by Act XXVI of 1930. This clause provides as follows :-On the expiry of the term of office of a municipality the president and vice-president shall continue to carry on the current administrative duties of their offices until such time as a new president and vice-president shall have been appointed or elected and shall have taken over charge of their duties. Provided that in the case of a new municipality constituted under this Act, a meeting for the election of a new president shall be called by the president of the retiring municipality. The president of the retiring mu...
Tag this Judgment!