Privy Council Cases
Colonial & appellate judgments
Browse Privy Council & House of Lords decisions
Search appeals from Indian High Courts decided by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council and related appellate benches - foundational authority for constitutional and commercial law.
Colonial & appellate
Latest Privy Council judgments
Emperor Vs. Pranshankar Shambhuram Raval and anr.
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1950Bom14
Chainani, J.1. In this case a prosecution was instituted against the two accused under Rule 81 (4), Defence of India Rules, 1939, before Khan Saheb S.K. Desai, who was then City Magistrate, First Class, Ahmedabad. After he had recorded some evidence, further hearing of the case was postponed, as the prosecution wanted to consider the question of its withdrawal. Eventually it was decided that the case should be proceeded with. In the meantime Khan Saheb S.K. Desai had retired, and the case came up for hearing before Mr. R.K. Desai. The accused then made a request that all the witnesses previously examined should be recalled and reheard, and this request was granted. A question then arose whether the evidence of these witnesses recorded before Khan Saheb S.K. Desai was or was not to be regarded as evidence in the case. The Magistrate heard the advocates on both sides and then passed an order in the following terms on 29th January 1948. 'I decide that the previous evidence stands and is n...
Tag this Judgment!Natvarlal Punjabhai and ors. Vs. Dadubhai Manubhai and anr.
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1950Bom55
Chagla, C.J.1. We may mention one further contention which was urged by Mr. Shah at one stage which seemed to us to make it possible to dispose of this appeal. Mr. Shah's contention was that the Deputy Nazir as the guardian of Punjabhai was appointed on 29th November 1924, and he went into possession of the property in 1925. In 1929 Punjabhai attained majority. When Punjabhai died in 1931 the Deputy Nazir was appointed as the guardian of the property of defendants 1 and 2. The learned Judge has held, in our opinion rightly held, that from 1925 the Deputy Nazir for Punjabhai was in possession of half the share of the property claimed by the plaintiffs adversely to Kashibai. There can be no doubt that the possession of the Deputy Nazir for Punjabhai was adverse, because in the order made on 29th November 1924, in face of Bai Kashi's contention that Punjabhai was not entitled to the whole of the estate left by Mathurbhai, the Court appointed the Deputy Nazir the guardian of Punjabhai of t...
Tag this Judgment!Changa and ors. Vs. ChaudhraIn Bhagwan Dei
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1949All493
Mushtaq Ahmad, J.1. This is an appeal against a judgment of Mr. Shri Nath, the learned Civil Judge of Bijnor, which I have found to be a model of a laboured, evasive and rambling document To give a picture of the judgment in a single sentence, it is based on a distortion of the most vital document on the record, on documents that had no bearing on the point in issue, on a certain former deposition of one of the defendants-appellants which really was not admissible and on a complete disregard of the entire body of the oral evidence, which, in fact, contained clear admissions of the truth of the case of the party against which the learned Judge decided the case by the witnesses of the opposite party in whose favour he decided it.2. The appellants before me are the six defendants against whom the respondent brought the suit leading to this appeal for possession over plot 05, measuring 11, and plot 98, measuring 7 biswas, total 18 biswas, in village Sarakthal Madhoo, Pargana Dhampur, Distr...
Tag this Judgment!Mohd. Siddiq Vs. Mt. Zubeda Khatoon Through Abdul Ali
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1952All616b
ORDERKidwai, J.1. This reference has been made by the District Magistrate of Lucknow to set aside an order passed by a Special Magistrate of the first class of Lucknow granting Mt. Zubeda Khatoon maintenance under Section 488, Cr. P. C., against her husband.2. The facts as they may be taken to be established at this stage are that Mt. Zubaida Khatoon, who is the lawfully married wife of the opposite party voluntarily left her husband's house & took up her residence with her father. The husband filed a suit for restitution of conjugal rights & obtained a decree on 26-1-1946. The decree, however, was made conditional upon the husband paying Rs. 130 to the wife. This payment was made into Court but the wife did not obey the order contained in the decree for restitution & thereupon the husband applied that the money should be attached & not paid over to the wife until she obeyed the orders of the Court.3. In the meanwhile, the wife instituted suits for recovery of her dower debt & the do w...
Tag this Judgment!Sm. Ahmadi Begum Vs. Sm. Kulsumun Nisa and ors.
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1952All644
Agarwala, J.1. This is an application in revision against an order of the learned Civil Judge of Pilibhit ordering the pltf. to pay the court-fee determined by the Munsarim in accordance with the directions of the Court.2. The pltf.-applicant brought a suit for partition of certain properties. One of the properties was a certain Habib market at Agra. He valued it at one lac The defts. challenged the valuation & urged that the amount of court-fee paid was insufficient. The Court decided to determine the issues of valuation & court-fee first.3. An amin was appointed who reported that the price of the market was Rs. 4,36,760. The Court, however, came to the conclusion that theproper valuation was Rs. 7,85,657 & ordered the pltf. to pay court-fee on his share of the property according to this valuation. Against this order the pltf. at first filed a First Appeal from order in this Court. On the last date of hearing learned counsel for the appellant desired that the appeal be converted into ...
Tag this Judgment!K. Joggayya Vs. King
Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1951Ori142
Ray, C.J.1. The appellant has been convicted under Sections 366 and 342, Penal Code, and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and pay a fine of RS. 100/- for the first offence and six months rigorous imprisonment for the second.2. The prosecution case is that the appellant abducted the girl (p. W. l) while she was on her way back after purchase of paddy in Nuapali village in company with about 9 or 10 others each of whom had a bag load of paddy on the head. The accused happened to be by the side of the road when Chandramma and patty were proceeding to the aforesaid village for purchase of paddy. He also was found loitering on the road near a tank while they were returning. He came with a stick from behind the girl and pushed down the bag load of paddy from her head and forcibly carried her away in his arms lifting her body by putting one-hand under the knees and another around the neck. In this condition, he took her to some distance and then dragged her ...
Tag this Judgment!Tirthabasi Ghose and ors. Vs. Bhuyani Trinayani Dasi
Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR1951Ori306
Narasimham, J.1. This is an appeal by some of the judgment-debtors against the order of the Subordinate Judge of Cuttack dismissing in part their objection under Schedule 7, C. P. C. to the execution of a maintenance decree obtained by the respondent Bhuyani Trinayani Dasi against her late husband Srichandan Bhuyan Btuudafoan Chandra Roy in O. S. No. 484 of 1908. The maintenance decree (Ex. P) was passed on 16.8.1909 and several items of zamidari properties of Sriohandan Bhuyan Brundaban Chandra Roy were charged with liability for the maintenance of the respondent. Two of those items are touzi Nos. 1453 and 1463 appertaining to Balasore Collectorate. The maintenance decree was slightly modified when the litigation was taken up to the High Court in 1917. But for the purpose of the present appeal it is unnecessary to discuss in detail the history of that litigation. It is sufficient to note that the aforesaid two touzis and several other properties of Sriehandan Bhuyan Brundaban Chandra ...
Tag this Judgment!Damodar Das Vs. Mt. Godawari and ors.
Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1949P& H391
1. This regular first appeal is directed against the decree made on 29th January 1946 by the Senior Sub-Judge of Delhi in a suit filed on 11th August 1944 by Damodar Dass, the plaintiff appellant, against the three defendants respondents for a declaration that the sale-deed dated 81st May 1944 registered on 20th June 1944 and executed by the defendant-respondent Mt. Godawari in favour of the defendant respondent Jai Narain in respect of a house in Delhi fully described in the plaint was without consideration and valid necessity and was null and void and ineffectual as against the rights of the reversioners after the death of Mt. Godawari.2. The plaintiff Damodhar Dass is one of the brothers of one Gopal Sahai deceased, Godawari (defendant 1) is the second wife and the surviving widow of Gopal Sahai. Moti Ram (defendant 3) who was a natural born son of one Lachhi Ram, the eldest brother of Gopal Sahai was on or about 22nd November 1937 adopted by Gopal Salmi as a son unto himself as evi...
Tag this Judgment!T.S. Sivaprakasa Mudaliar and anr. Vs. K.M. Samarapuri and ors.
Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1950Mad116
Horwill, J.1. In February 1948 two persons to whom we will refer as respondents 1 and 3, brought into existence two companies. One was the Thirunageswaram Weavers' Welfare and Benefit Co., the share holders of whom are weavers working in Thirunageswaram. The other was Ramada and Co., Ltd. a private company consisting of only two share-holders, respondents 1 and 3 themselves. These two persons were presumably responsible for the drawing up of the constitution of the two companies; and it was agreed upon at the same time that a managing agency agreement should be executed, whereby the powers of management in the Thirunageswaram Weavers' Welfare and Benefit Co., Ltd., should be exercised by Ramaswami and Co. Ltd., for a term of 20 years, with a further extension of 20 years upon the resolution of the company at an ordinary general meeting. Unfortunately, these two respondents fell out; and so made it difficult for them to conduct either their own business of Ramaswami and Co., Ltd. or tha...
Tag this Judgment!Benoy Shankar Dhandania and ors. Vs. Choteylal Dhandania and ors.
Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1952Cal343
Sinha, J.1. This is an appeal from a judgment of Das J. dated 12-8-1948 dismissing the plffs' suit for a declaration that the decree & order made in suit No. 1676 of 1941 (hereinafter referred to as the said suit) are invalid & void, for setting aside the said decree & order & for other reliefs.2. The relationship of the parties will appear from the following genealogical table: HARCHANDRAI (d) _______________________|__________________________ | | Jawala Prasad Gobordhandas (died) | _______________| | Hiralal (deft. 3) Banarashi debi = Choteylal (deft. 1) ______________________________________| (Ist wife deceased) = Narbadadebi (2nd wife) | | | | | Purushottamlal (minor) Ratanlal (minor) Banwari (minor) | Tulsiprasad (minor) (deft. 2) (deft. 4) (deft. 5) (deft 6) Bhagwatiprasad = Savitri Debi (deft. 7) _________________________|______________________ | | | Benoy S sakar Bejcy Shankar Bimal Shatikar (minor) (Pltf. 1) (minor) (Pltf. 2) (minor) (pltf3)3. The said suit was instituted by H...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 6697
- 6698
- 6699
- 6700
- 6701
- 6703
- 6704
- 6705
- 6706
- 6707
- Next ›
- Last »