Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1950)52BOMLR448
MacDermott, J.1. The suit out of which this appeal arises was brought in forma pauperis by the respondent against the appellant under the Fatal Accidents Act, 1885, for damages for the death of her husband, Ronald Duncan Wells. He had died on December 14, 1937, as the result of injuries received a few days earlier when the engine on which he was serving as a firem n in the employment of the North Western Railway was involved in a collision within the limits of the railway station at Mirpur Mathelo. The respondent alleged that the collision was caused by the. negligence of the railway's employees and claimed on behalf of her two children and herself. At the date of the accident the North Western Railway was owned by the Government of India and administered by the Secretary of State for India in Council acting through the North Western (State) Railway Administration. The deceased was then serving on the railway pursuant to a contract of service made by him with the Secretary of State on ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1950All401
ORDERSapru, J.1. The applicant in this revision is a tenant of about eleven years' standing. He was, under an agreement in writing, dated 14th November 1944, bound to pay a rent of Rs. 3-8-0 per month for the house he was occupying. Before that date he was paying a rent of Rs. 2-8-0. According to the municipal assessment of April 1942 the rental value of the house is Rs. 3 p. m.2. The landlord applied to the Court under the U. P. Control of Rent and Eviction Act (Act III [3] of 1947) to enhance the rent which the applicant had been paying to him from and about the year 1944. The suit which was brought by him purports to be under Section 8 (4) of the said Act. By its order dated 15th May 1948, the Court enhanced the rent of the house in suit to Rs. 10 p. m. It is against that order of the learned. Munsif that the applicant has come up in revision to this Court. Section 5 (1) of the Act layer down that'the rent payable for any accommodation to which this Act applies shall be such as may ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1951Raj123
Datt, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment, dated 30-6-1949, of the Ses. J. Baran sentencing the appellant Mt. Motia to 3 years' R. I. under Section 304 and 3 years under Section 317, Penal Code, both the sentences to run concurrently. Mt Motia is the widow of one Bhanwaria Carpenter & was living with her mother in the village of Khajurna situated within the jurisdiction of the Police Station at Anta. She was challaned under Sections 302 & 318, Penal Code, & was committed to Sessions, charged under the same offences by the Mag. I class, Mangrol. The learned Ses. J Baran, convicted her under Sections 304 & 317, Penal Code, holding that the offence under Section 318, is not proved against her.2. The case against the applts. as disclosed by the prosecution witnesses & as found by the lower Cts. is that Mt. Motia was pregnant with an illegitimate child & this fact was known to several persons in the village & specially to some of the prosecution witnesses. On 12-2-1949, suddenly the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1951Raj126
Sharma, J.1. This is an appeal by one of the defts. against the appellate decree of the learned Ses. J. Rajasamand in a suit for pre-emption & arises under the following circumstances :2. The pltf. Bhuralal filed a suit for pre-emption against the applt. Ambalal & Nanda resp. 2 for the pre-emption of a house belonging to Nanda resp. 2 situated in Mauza Giloond in the Ct. of the Dist. Munsiff Chittor at Kapasan. It was alleged that the plaintiff had his own house adjacent to the house in suit in which the drains of the plaintiff's house discharged water. At first it had been agreed between the pltf. & Nanda that the house would be sold to the pltf. But subsequently Nanda changed his mind & sold the house for an ostensible sum of Rs. 350-0-0 to Ambalal applt. on 6-8-1945. It was pleaded that the custom of pre-emption prevailed in the village Giloond & also that the real consideration was Rs. 300-0-0. The pltf. claimed pre-emption on the payment of the sum found due by the Ct. The deft. N...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1950Mad365
Panchapakesa Ayyar, J.1. This is an appeal by the Madras Government against the acquittal of the three respondents by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Tiruvallur, and involves an important question of law, namely whether police constables can be subjected to criminal force by persons arrested by them for a non cognizable offence after their escape from custody and in revenge. The facts are briefly these. At about 7 P. M. on 21st June 1948, the three respondents and the mother of respondents 2 and 3 (accused 4 in the lower Court who was discharged, and is not the subject of this appeal) were quarrelling with each other and abusing each other in a public place, and were in fact committing an affray falling under Section 160, Penal Code. P. Ws. 1 and 2, two constables of Gummidipundi station, within whose limits the affray was taking place, went to the spot with a head constable, P. W. 3, and tried to stop the affray in progress, and warned the respondents not to quarrel. The story of P. Ws...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1950Mad619
ORDERPanchapakesa Ayyar, J.1. The only three points for determination in this case are whether in a prosecution under Section 15(b), Madras General Sales Tax Act, the validity of the assessment can be questioned by a party or gone into by a criminal Court in any prosecution or other proceeding before it, (1) where the turnover on which the person is assessed relates wholly to the period before 1st January 1948 and the assessment is made before 1st January 1948 but the prosecution is instituted after 1st January 1948 when the new Section 16A came into force; (2) when the assessment is made after 1st January 1948, as in this case, but a portion of the turnover on which the assessment is based relates to the period before 1st January 1948; and (3) where the turnover, assessment and prosecution are all after 1st January 1948. 2. I shall take the last case first. I agree with the learned Public Prosecutor that, as Section 16A stands, the validity (including therein both the legality and the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Privy Council
LORD MACDERMOTT: The suit out of which this appeal arises was brought in forma pauperis by the respondent against the appellant under the Fatal Accidents Act, 1855, for damages for the death of her husband, Ronald Duncan Wells. He had died on 14th December 1937, as the result of injuries received a few days earlier when the engine on which he was serving as a fireman in the employment of the North Western Railway was involved in a collision within the limits of the railway station at Mirpur Mathelo. The respondent alleged that the collision was caused by the negligence of the Railway's employees and claimed on behalf of her two children and herself. At the date of the accident the North Western Railway was owned by the Government of India and administered by the Secretary of State for India in Council acting through the North Western (State) Railway Administration. The deceased was then serving on the Railway pursuant to a contract of service made by him with the Secretary of State on ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1950)52BOMLR591
Patanjali Sastri, J.1. This is an appeal from a judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay dismissing an appeal from a conviction and sentence by the Presidency Magistrate, Fifth Court, Bombay, for an offence under the Bombay Abkari Act (V of 1878).2. The appellant was charged with having in her possession, in contravention of the Act, a quantity of foreign liquor (While Label Scotch Whisky) in excess of the limit permitted under a Government notification dated July 20, 1948, issued under the Act, and she was convicted and sentenced to a term of three months' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500, or in default to a further term of six weeks' rigorous imprisonment. On appeal to the High Court her main contention was that the Provincial Legislature had no power under the Government of India Act, 1935, to-legislate with respect to the possession of foreign liquors, and that Section 14-B of the Bombay Abkari Act, as amended by the Bombay Abkari (Amendment) Act (XXIX of 1947)...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1950Bom319; (1950)52BOMLR313
Chagla, C.J.1. One Vishweshwar who died in 1928 made a will prior thereto dated 17th January 1926. By this will he gave a life-estate to his wife, defendant 1, and gave the absolute interest to the plaintiff. Defendant 1 adopted defendant 3 to her husband on 3lst December 1945. On 10th December 1944, defendant 1 executed a mortgage in favour of defendant 2 and the plaintiff filed the suit out of which this appeal arises for a declaration that his interest was not bound either by the adoption of defendants by defendant l, or by the mortgage executed by defendant l in favour of defendant 2. The trial Court gave the declaration to the plaintiff which he sought.2. In this appeal only two contentions have been urged by Mr. Murdeshwar and they relate to the validity of the will and the binding character of the mortgage executed by defendant 1. It is contended by Mr. Murdeshwar that on the adoption of defendant 3 by defendant 1 the doctrine of relation back comes into play and in the eye of t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Reported in : AIR1951Raj108
1. The applt Jahangir Khan filed a suit in the Ct of City Munsif, Udaipur, against Karamdat Khan & the State Council Udaipur for an injunction restraining the defts from dispossessing the pltf from a house situated near Surajpol in the town of Udaipur. During the pendency of the suit Karamdat Khan executed a sale deed in favour of Mohan Lal resp & he died thereafter. The pltf Jahangir Khan alleging that there was no other legal representative of the deceased excepting his ownself got the name of Karamdat Khan struck off from the records without any substitute. On 6-12-1947, Mohan Lal filed an appln under Order 22 Rule 10, C. P. C, for the substitution of his name in place of that of Karamdat Khan on the ground that the property in dispute had been assigned to him by Karamdat Khan. The learned Munsiff however on the same day rejected the appln on the ground that Mohan Lal was not the heir of Karamdat Khan & his name could not be substituted in place of that of the deceased against the w...
Tag this Judgment!