Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1936Bom218; (1936)38BOMLR395; 163Ind.Cas.300
..... ' no presentment for payment was made either at madras or at any other place, and it was held that the creditor had no right to sue without presentment being first made, and that the word ' place ' in sections 68 and 69 of the negotiable instruments act must be construed as including ' places ', as it would be anomalous to require presentment if one place is mentioned, but none if two places are mentioned. ..... the only material part of the written statement is the first paragraph in which the defendant submits that the promissory note in suit not having been presented for payment, the suit is not maintainable; and the only issue raised is whether the suit is maintainable having regard to the fact that the promissory note in suit has not been presented for payment to the defendant. ..... madras was one of the specified places, and the other place was specified by providing that the presentment was to be at any other place where the creditor had a shop. ..... 242 in that case the promissory note mentioned ' madras or any other place where you (the creditor) have your shop as the place of payment. ..... 5,000 with interest at one per cent, per mensem from may 11, 1932, till judgment, costs, and interest on judgment at six per cent, per annum,-less rs. ..... this is a suit upon a promissory note dated may 11, 1932, to recover the sum of rs. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1935)37BOMLR826
..... : (1) whether an award under the indian arbitration act (ix of 1899) against a firm in the name of the firm is valid ; and (2) 'whether it is competent for the high court under the provisions of order xxi, rule 50 (2), of the code of civil procedure, to determine whether persons who dispute that they are partners in a firm against which an award has been made in the name of the firm are so liable.3. ..... documentary and oral evidence was produced before the learned judge, who decided both the above-mentioned issues in favour of the company, and by his order of september 8, 1932, granted leave to the company to execute the said award against the respondents as partners in the said firm of m. p. ..... the result was that the said order of september 8, 1932, was set aside, the said chamber summons was dismissed as against the respondents and a declaration was made that the respondents were not partners and that they did not hold themselves out as partners in the said firm of m. p. ..... but the evidence of both dhanjibhai and chogmal was given in august, 1932, nearly four years after the alleged conversations, and it is impossible to rely implicitly upon the recollection of witnesses as to conversations alleged to have taken place so long ago, when there is no documentary evidence of any kind to corroborate such recollection and especially when the documentary evidence is in direct contradiction thereof.43. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1935)37BOMLR845
..... , in an action for a nuisance between the owners of adjoining land,-however desirable it may be that litigation should cease by one of the parties purchasing the property of the other, we think the counsel have no authority to agree to such a sale and bind ..... ; and we are of opinion, that although a counsel has complete authority over the suit, the mode of conducting it, and all that is incident to it-such as withdrawing the record, withdrawing a juror, calling no witnesses, or selecting such as, in his discretion, he thinks ought to be called, and other matters which properly belong to the suit and the management and conduct of the trial-we think he has not, by virtue of his retainer in the suit, any power over matters that are collateral to it for instance, we think ..... in the result the order made in review should be reversed and the decree dated march 8, 1932, should be set aside. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1935)37BOMLR815
..... it was pointed out in the judgments of the court of appeal that a company is a separate entity to the shareholders : that during the continuance of the company the latter have no right to the profits except so far as they are distributed on a regular declaration of dividend : and that on winding up their sole right is to share in the assets available after winding-up : and that for the purpose of ascertaining such assets it is quite immaterial whether the company originally possessed them by way of capital or profits. ..... counsel for the respondent pointed out that the contention of the commissioner in this case was the contrary of that made by him in the previous case in madras which was successful in the high court. ..... 38,305 together with the greater part of the capital sum due was remitted to him in madras, by the promissory note of a debtor of the: firm made out in the respondent's favour. ..... this is an appeal from the high court at madras on a reference under section 66 of the indian income-tax act, 1922. ..... for the reasons given they are of opinion that this appeal should be allowed : the order of the high court dated april 27, 1934, should be set aside ; and the question referred to the court by the commissioner should be answered that the sum of rs. ..... 38,305 received by the respondent in madras in respect of interest on capital employed in business in ceylon is assessable under section 4 (2) of the indian income-tax act. ..... (1932) mad. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1935)37BOMLR580
..... the king-emperor can be distinguished from the madras case and the present case on the ground that there it was not proved that the complainant had knowledge of the breach of the provisions of the section before the complaint was ..... 488 not only because the facts of the present case are similar to those in the madras case but also because the reasoning adopted in that case is to be preferred to the view taken in the two calcutta 'cases in akshoy kumar dey ..... he acquitted the accused on a preliminary ground that the prosecution was barred by limitation under section 15 of the indian merchandise marks act, which provides that no such prosecution as is mentioned in section 14 (and that includes a prosecution under section 482 of the indian penal code) shall be commenced after the expiration of three years next after the commission of the offence or one year after the first discovery thereof by the prosecutor, whichever expiration first happens ..... appears from the evidence that from october 1, 1932, when -according to the complainant himself he knew that his trade mark was being infringed by the accused, to july 24, 1933, when according to him he discovered that a customer was misled on account of the use of this trade mark by the accused, there has been a continuous use of this mark by the accused. ..... , however, the complainant has ^admitted that he became aware of the use of his mark in october, 1932.11. ..... the result is that limitation runs from october 1, 1932, and not from july :24, .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1935Bom359; 158Ind.Cas.168
..... 699 can be distinguished from the madras case and the present case on the ground that there it was not proved that the complainant had knowledge of the breach of the provisions of the section before the complaint was filed. ..... ponnusami tevan (1899) 22 mad 488 not only because the facts of the present case are similar to those in the madras case but also because the reasoning adopted in that case is to be preferred to the view taken in the two calcutta cases in akshoy kumar dey v. ..... the question raised in this revision application depends upon the construction of section 15, mercandise marks act, the particular point being whether the word 'offence' as used in that section means the specific offence alleged in the charge or the first of a series of offences when the offence as here is a continuous one. ..... here, however, the complainant has admitted that he became aware of the use of his mark in october 1932, the result is that limitation runs from 1st october 1932, and not from 24th july 1933. ..... it appears from the evidence that from 1st october 1932, when according to the complainant himself he knew that his trade mark was being infringed by the accused, to 24th july 1933, when according to him he discovered that a customer was misled on account of the use of this trade-mark by the accused, there has been a continuous use of this mark by the accused. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1936Bom99; (1935)37BOMLR665
..... this being a suit for infringement of the patent, the plaintiff must, under section 29 of the indian patents and designs act (ii of 1911), prove that during the continuance of the patent acquired by him under the act in respect of an invention the defendants have made, sold or used the invention without his license or counterfeited it or imitated it. ..... i may point out that in the earlier suit which went up to the appeal court there was no evidence of the quantities of almonds that were treated by the plaintiff's process and then sold in the market, but accord-rag to the view of the appeal court, the quantity of the goods sold may be immaterial, as the secret of the process cannot be detected, whatever may be the quantity of the goods sold.14. ..... the affidavit was made in the other suit on june 27, 1932, and i held the statement to be relevant as the plaintiff stated that the affidavit was made on his behalf and he had adopted the statements in the affidavit as his own. ..... the patent was sealed on april 27, 1932, with effect from the date of the application. ..... 940 of 1932, in june 1932, for an injunction to restrain him from infringing his patent rights. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1936Bom130; (1939)41BOMLR506
..... that depends, i think, on section 53(1) of the presidency-towns insolvency act, which provides :where execution of a decree has issued against the property of a debtor, no person shall be entitled to the benefit of the execution against the official assignee, except in respect of assets realized in the course of the execution by sale or otherwise before the date of the order of adjudication and before he had notice of the presentation of any insolvency petition by or against the debtor.now it is clear that these moneys were realised before the date of the order of adjudication, but it is also clear ..... on november 17, 1931, that petition was dismissed by the insolvency judge, and talati, on december 15, presented an appeal against that order, and on september 15, 1932, that is, after the payments in question were made, the court of appeal allowed the appeal, and restored the petition to the file, but stayed the petition till cooper's suit against talati to have the consent decree set aside had been disposed of. ..... what the privy council was dealing with there was the relative priorities of a foreign order of adjudication and an attachment in the country in which the attaching court was situated, that is to say, an attachment in madras and a judgment of. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1935Bom410; (1935)37BOMLR697; 158Ind.Cas.757
..... he keeps no books of account, and, therefore, the income-tax officer was not able to ascertain with accuracy what the profits were from the sales of gold and silver, but in the year of assessment 1932-33 the income-tax officer added to the assessee's income a certain percentage on the sale of gold and silver, three per cent, on the sale of gold and five per cent, on the sale of silver, and on that basis he made the assessment under section 23(5) of the act. ..... the question which the commissioner has raised is : ' whether in the circumstances of the case, a part of the income, profits and gains from sales of gold in the year 1987 samvat can be said to have ' escaped' assessment within the meaning of section 34 of the income-tax act, 1922, at the time of the original assessment for the year 1932-33. ..... there was an appeal to the assistant commissioner, who agreed generally with the view taken by the income-tax officer, but for some reason, which is not apparent, he assessed the income on the sale of gold at four per cent, on the sale price, and the income on the sale of silver at ten per cent, on the sale price ; that is to say, he raised the original rate by one per cent, in the case of gold and five per cent, in the case of silver, and made an assessment on that basis.2. ..... 840, and by the madras high court in the commissioner of income-tax, madras v. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : [1935]3ITR372(Bom)
..... made assessment on that basis.the question which the commissioner has raised is : whether in the circumstances of the case, a part of income, profits and gains from sales of gold in the year 1987 samvat can be said to have escaped assessment within the meaning of section 34, income tax act, 1922, at the time of original assessment for the year 1932-33.that question purports to be a summary of three questions which the assessee had desired to raised, and which related to the income generally of the assessee and covered income from ..... the sale of silver as well as his income from the ..... (india) limited, and by madras high court in commissioner of income tax, madras v. .....
Tag this Judgment!