Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: representation of the people act 1951 section 139 repealed Sorted by: old Court: mumbai Page 1 of about 18 results (0.085 seconds)

May 03 1887 (PC)

Manohar Ganesh Tambekar and ors. Vs. Lakhmiram Govindram and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1888)ILR12Bom247

..... can and do take this property and this revenue absolutely as their own without any trust or annexed duty, and whether, if they enjoy by a kind of agency or representation of the idol conceived as a personality, they fulfil the duty they owe to this ideal person in merely revelling on the growing revenues, or are bound to widen the ..... in its secular executive and judicial capacity habitually intervened to prevent fraud and waste in dealing with religious endowments. it was quite in accordance with the legal consciousness of the people that the bombay regulation xvii of 1827 gave to the collector a visitatorial power enabling him to enforce an honest and proper administration of religious endowments. the connexion of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 19 1889 (PC)

In Re: Ganesh Narayan Sasthe

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1889)ILR13Bom600

..... a means similar to that mentioned by lord campbell in harrison v. bush 5 e. & b. 344 : 25 l.j. (n.s.) q.b. 25 namely, representation to the proper authority. mr. justice birdwood and myself (who happened to be vacation judges) brought to the notice of the government certain sworn statements contained in the record of ..... the anglo-norman kings used to make a regular profit by selling the office of sheriff: 'the effect of this, of course, was to produce great oppression of the people, as the officials, who paid this largely for their places, strove to indemnify themselves by exacting immoderate fees, by unjust confiscations, by imposing excessive lines, and every ..... been allowed in the purchase and sale of offices, and the permission to the officials to make private profits out of judicial places, had caused many oppressions of the people. the following are passages from the argument of the commons of england.9. at page 1335: 'but the common law, and the several acts of parliament before .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 09 1902 (PC)

Jehangir M. Cursetji Vs. the Secretary of State for India in Council

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1904)ILR27Bom122

..... fact that the manner in which he acted was consistent with the practice of other people, all i can say is that he should go to proper authorities, and i have not the smallest doubt that if he makes a proper representation in the proper quarter his representation will be considered by the proper authorities. the mere fact that i do not entertain .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 14 1906 (PC)

Emperor Vs. Bhaskar Balvant Bhopatkar

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1906)8BOMLR421

..... was an attempt to excite feelings of unwillingness to accept government as such and whether the intention to excite such feelings can be inferred from an article which -if its representations were accepted and believed-would deprive the subject of all confidence in government as such, and which represents that the government is of a character execrable, cruel and merciless ..... you are charged but the offence appears to have been a deliberate one, and has a tendency to thwart the efforts of the authorities to do good to the people and to lead them to regard with suspicion and distrust the efforts that may be made for their good, and that is very far from being a patriotic action. ..... excuse.' as stated by mr. justice cave in reg. v. burns & others (1886) 16 cox. 355 'a man cannot escape from the uttering of words with intent to excite people to violence solely because the persons whom he addressed may be too wise or temperate to be induced to act with violence.' it is no excuse for a man who .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 12 1907 (PC)

Emperor Vs. Tapidas Durlabhdas

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1907)9BOMLR732

..... goods are made up or by the wrapper or by the name or design. the counterfeit is itself a representation and the appellant, being found to have imitated the complainant's trade mark knowingly cannot escape the consequences merely because he sold and advertised his soap as swadeshi. he practised ..... acted innocently and that because he sold his soap as swadeshi and advertised it as such. assuming that to be the case, still it does not assist the appellant. a representation that goods of the manufacture of a are those of b need not be made orally or in writing but it may be made by the manner in which the ..... with the flower brand impressed on it; whereas the appellant's has a design of two stars with the star brand impressed. there, again, it is not uncommon for unwary people looking at the two to mistake a flower for a star on a design. these coincidences could not have been accidental. indeed, mr. talyarkhan, the appellant's counsel, has with .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 25 1912 (PC)

Mervanji Mancherji Cama Vs. the Secretary of State for India in Counci ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1912)14BOMLR654

..... because negligent misrepresentation does not amount to deceit and, therefore, does not give rise to any cause of action, and that a person injured by the collector's negligent representation would have no remedy, according to derry v. peek (1889) 14 app. cas. 337. it was, however, pointed out by lord justice bowen in low v. ..... duties under the bombay city land revenue act.12. the learned judge decided these issues in favour of the plaintiffs holding that if the collector really made representations or was guilty of omissions with the effect alleged by the plaintiffs there would be an indisputable estoppel binding upon his superior principal, the secretary of state ..... same act, that the land was admitted and represented by the collector to be of quit and ground rent tenure and the plaintiffs' solicitor relying upon the representation contained in the aforesaid documents as to the tenure of the land advised the plaintiffs to enter into the proposed mortgage which the plaintiffs thereupon did.6. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 22 1914 (PC)

Emperor Vs. Anandrao Balkrishna Rangnekar

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1915)17BOMLR82

..... those allegations his action came under section 500 of the indian penal code, he answered that he had not exceeded the privilege given by law to aggrieved persons to make representions to superior officers. there is thus no question of the responsibility of the accused for the petition he presented, and there is no doubt that in that petition he ..... biswas had publicly addressed the following words to the plaintiff in the presence of several persons:- 'you are unchaste, you are a prostitute. i will publish before the caste people that you are a prostitute and stop invitations to you. i took you to the garden house at kalighut and had illicit intercourse with you.' the woman filed a suit ..... , the mamlatdar says that he acted as he did towards the accused ' with intent to make a deterrent example in a case.' he admits that there were other people in the village who were equally in default as the accused, but pleads that he selected the accused because his name was first in a list of about ten or .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 12 1920 (PC)

Lakshman Gowroji Nakhwa Vs. Ramji Antone Nakhwa

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1921Bom93; (1921)23BOMLR939

..... satisfied that the defendant honestly thought that he was the owner of the dar and that he had grounds for thinking so and that if he did make any representation, it was not fraudulent.51. then it was said that there was a mutual mistake of fact and therefore the agreement was void under section 20 of the ..... their nets on- for thin likewise, if it be the property of the honourable company, no ground rent is exacted. thus your honourable board will perceive that these people are never employed by (government without being paid for their labour and that the indulgences granted thorn are highly beneficial to their private emoluments.67. but i doubt whether ..... surat directors to the company which says: 'we, finding it prejudicial to your ccoleries or fishing stakes of bombay, worli, mazagaon and other places and much inconvenient to your people....'27. in our courts, we find a valuable decision of sir michael westropp in baban mayacha v. nagu shravucha i.l.r (1876) bom. 19 with reference to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 19 1924 (PC)

A.J. Von Wulfing Vs. D.H. Jivandas and Co.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1926)28BOMLR243

..... that that was also manufactured by the plaintiffs.15. a significant fact may here be noted that genatosen limited sold their compound in the market with the following representation on their label:-this product is now absolutely british. the english assets of a. wolfing & co., including all stocks of sanataogan, etc., have been purchased ..... appellants do not claim any special right to the manufacture of 'maizena', or any exceptional method in making their 'maizena', and that the respondents and all other people have just as much right as the appellants have to manufacture the thing-no matter whether it is called 'maizena', corn flower, or any other name. ..... manufacture. the stock of original sanatogen which remained in bomby at the commencement of the war fetched a very high price, which fact also shows that the people believed the real sanatogen to be the sanatogen of the plaintiffs' manufacture.14. ahmed haji haroon stated that he bought the sanatogen of the american manufacture seeing .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 24 1925 (PC)

Jamshedji Ardeshir Wadia Vs. the Secretary of State for India

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1926)28BOMLR25

..... the grant was reserved.55. the last point urged for the plaintiffs was that government was estopped from claiming non-agricultural assessment, as their conduct in the past was a representation that they would not claim any altered assessment from the holders of land in the event of its conversion to building sites. at the most it could be said that ..... land assessment, much as the non-agricultural assessment now in question. on the main issue in the suit no. 84 and appeal no. 77, the plaintiff-appellant fails.13. no representation by government to him is sat up; and he built his house in 1905. the issues of estoppel and limitation raised on his behalf, appear to be equally without substance .....

Tag this Judgment!


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