Skip to content


Bhogilal Vs. Popatbhai - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectContract
CourtMumbai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1883)ILR7Bom125
AppellantBhogilal
RespondentPopatbhai
Excerpt:
.....act (ix of 1872), section 265--plaint--court fees act (vii of 1870), section 7, clause iv(f)--suit for accounts. - maharashtra scheduled castes, scheduled tribes, de-notified tribes (vimukta jatis), nomadic tribes, other backward classes and special backward category (regulation of issuance and verification of) caste certificate act (23 of 2001), sections 6 & 10: [s.b. mhase, a.p. deshpande & p.b. varale, jj] caste certificate petitioner seeking appointment against the post reserved for member of schedule tribe his caste certificate was invalidated subsequently held, his appointment would not be protected. the observations/directions issued by supreme court in para 36 of judgment in the case of state v millind reported in 2001 91) mah. lj sc 1 is not the law declared by supreme.....charles sargent, kt., c.j.1. as the plaintiff has sought the relief contemplated by section 265 of the contract act (ix of 1872) by suit, he must pay the ad-valorem, court fees stamp required by a suit for account's under section 7, el. iv (f) of act vii of 1870.
Judgment:

Charles Sargent, Kt., C.J.

1. As the plaintiff has sought the relief contemplated by Section 265 of the Contract Act (IX of 1872) by suit, he must pay the ad-valorem, court fees stamp required by a suit for account's under Section 7, el. iv (f) of Act VII of 1870.


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