Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: indian law reports act 1875 Page 1 of about 132,729 results (0.267 seconds)

Sep 24 1957 (HC)

State Vs. Ramji Vithal Chaudhari and anr.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1958Bom381; (1958)60BOMLR329; 1958CriLJ1296; ILR1958Bom505

..... difficulty in following the decision in the case of soni damodar (a), it is necessary for us to refer to section 3 of the indian law reports act, 1875. it may be mentioned that what was produced before the learned magistrate was not an unauthorised report of the decision but a certified copy of the judgment in soni damodar's case (a). section 3 of the ..... the language of the exception itself, apart from any decisions thereupon, that if a person, were in good faith to believe himself to be entitled to the lawful custody of a minor child, unless that act was committee for any immoral or unlawful purpose, the exception would prevail. in this case, however, upon the facts before us, mr. vaidya cannot legitimately argue ..... act provides 'no court shall be bound to hear cited, or shall receive or treat as an authority binding on it, the report of any case ........other than a report published under the authority of any state government'. the language of section 3 is quite clear that ..... it is established that he was not entitled at the material date to the custody of the girl and had committed the act of forcibly taking away the girl without the consent of the mother who was then the lawful guardian. the contention of the learned assistant government pleader was based upon the decree that was passed in the divorce suit already .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 08 1982 (HC)

Balubhai G. Navlakhi and anr. Vs. Dharamdas Vithaldas Shah and anr.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1982Bom538; 1982CriLJ2147

..... consistent practice not to allow this journal to be cited in my court. this is apart from the question involved under the indian law reports act, 1875.9 to 12 * * * * *13. petition dismissed. ..... this court, copies of judgments of this court which are marked by the judges to be referred to the law reporters are given to the bombay law reporter and the maharashtra law journal. the all india reporter obtains certified copies of the judgments of this court and thereafter publishes the judgments in its journal. there is ..... it is not indicated by the publishers of this journal or the editor that the copies of the judgments on the basis of which they are reported in this journal are certified copies of the judgments. i have often seen grave grammatical and other mistakes appearing in the pages of this journal. ..... nothing in this journal called bombay cases reporter to indicate on what basis this journal has obtained the copies of the ..... judgments of t he court. there is no guarantee that what has been reported .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 02 1926 (PC)

Ningappa Marbasappa Arleshwar Vs. Gyanaji Pomaji Marwadi

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1927Bom157; (1927)29BOMLR269; 101Ind.Cas.155

..... is not a case of a decision of a high court in india which, until it is reported in the authorised series of the indian law reports, might not be binding under the provisions of the indian law reports act of 1875. this is a decision of the privy council which binds all the courts in india, at ..... this case, supposing that registration was, indeed, indispensable to its validity.3. that amounts to saying that an objection under section 49 of the indian registration act is very much on the same footing as an objection that a suit is barred by limitation ; and an appellate court, even if it ..... . 489 that an objection that a document, which requires registration but is not registered, is not admissible in evidence under section 49 of the indian registration act, may be taken in the court of appeal though no objection was taken to its admissibility in the court of first instance. there west j ..... 4,000, fell under this decision, assuming that the plaintiff's case is correct. accordingly, he urged that under section 49 of the indian registration act this agreement could not affect any immoveable property that it purported to cover and is inadmissible in evidence. mr. bahadurji for the respondent objected that ..... 1920) 28 bom. l.r. 1372 where their lordships laid down that an agreement for sale of immoveable property is compulsorily registrable under the indian registration act, in any case where the intending buyer has paid earnest money of rs, 100 or over and has not refused to accept delivery of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 14 1910 (PC)

Dattambhat Rambhat Vs. Krishnabhat Govindbhat

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1910)12BOMLR491

..... (1892) 17 bom 425. in giving this preference to the judgment in krishna v. hari : (1908)10bomlr615 , he has lost sight of the provisions of section 3 of the indian law reports act xviii of 1875.3. we think, however, that he has misread the judgment in krishna v. han : (1908)10bomlr615 , which was shown by the judgment of the court in parashram v. putlajirao ..... has become payable by the mortgagor and therefore in the absence of a contract to the contrary the mortgagee has the right under section 67 of the transfer of property act to an order that the property be sold.4. we, therefore, reverse the decree of the lower court and pass a decree for the plaintiff ordering that, in default of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 16 1926 (PC)

Ram Sahai Vs. Madan Lal Kanhaiya Lal and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1926All346

..... the report at all. it is a great pity that the courts below do not pay more attention to this provision which is in a large measure ..... the application the learned judge based himself upon a reported decision of this high court, namely, mazhar husain v. mt. amtul bibi air 1922 all 101. the case is a recent one having been decided in 1922. as a matter of fact, according to the provisions of section 3 of the indian law reports act of 1875, the learned judge was not bound to look at ..... such right by an order, he should pass such order, but if he should still entertain doubts, having regard to the dicta to which we have referred in the report in indian cases and to the foregoing expression of opinion about the real interpretation of this real rule he should exercise the powers conferred upon him by the code under order 46 ..... in such a case the lower court has the advantage of ascertaining for itself what the facts really were. we find, on looking at the original record of the case reported in indian cases that, as a matter of fact the applicant in that case was the holder of a decree which he had obtained upon his assignment or mortgage, and that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 29 1925 (PC)

Nawab Shuja-ul-mulk Bahadur Vs. Umir-ul-umra Bahadur and ors.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1925)49MLJ498

..... differ from the judgment of the high court in this case. ' it is suggested for the respondents that this decision has not been reported in the indian law reports and therefore it is not binding on us. the indian law reports act (act xviii of 1875) section 3 is in these terms:no court shall be bound to hear cited, or shall receive or treat as an authority binding on ..... it, the report of any case decided by any of the said high courts on or after the said day, other than a report, published under ..... the authority of the governor-general in council.6. this act ..... has no application to a decision of the privy council, and, therefore, we are at liberty to refer to an unauthorised report of the decision of the privy council and, if we are satisfied that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 20 1901 (PC)

Mahomed Ali HosseIn Vs. Nazar Ali and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : (1901)ILR28Cal289

..... them an unreported case or ruling, basing that view upon section 3 of act xviii of 1875. that section was framed to constitute a monopoly, if the judges so desired, for the authorised law reports. it only says that no court shall be bound to have cited the report of any case, etc.; it does not prevent the court from looking at ..... language of the documents is related to existing facts. 'the distinction between evidence as to the mere intention of the parties to the deed and as to the acts and conduct of the parties has been recently pointed out in an unreported case decided by mr. justice banerjee and mr. justice pratt on the 12th of december ..... 22 all. 149 that the court below was wrong in admitting it, but here it is reasonably clear that the evidence which was admitted was evidence as to the acts and conduct of the parties, and this court following many other cases has decided in the full bench case of preonaih shaha v. madhu sudan bhuiya (1898) i. ..... same court. this has always been done, and can and ought to be done. a judgment is none the less an authority because it has not been reported. otherwise the question of whether or not a judgment could or could not be so regarded would depend upon the mere whim of the ..... reporter. i, therefore, respectfully dissent from the view on this point expressed in the case of makbul ahmed v. rakhal das hazra (1900) 4 c.w.n. 732. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 23 1985 (HC)

Laxmidas N. Madhvani Vs. Madhvani Private Ltd.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1986)88BOMLR308

..... by surprise. if a judgment is to be found reported in any journal, there is no surprise because lawyers are supposed to be aware of the reported judgments. it is also a matter of common knowledge that normally judges would refer to the law reporter a judgment which in their opinion lays down a new ..... by anything that could be said by any high court.19. on the other hand, if we notice the provisions of both the indian stamp act and the bombay stamp act we observe that both the parliament and the state legislature have treated the allotment of shares and the sale of shares differently. article ..... . in the abovementioned case, the supreme court considered the meaning that is ascribed to the word 'allotment' occuring in section 75(1) of the companies act. that provision requires a company to rile a return of the allotment of its shares with the registrar within a month of the making of the allotment. ..... 1,02,000.6. proceeding further, the learned judge held, rejecting the plaintiffs' contention, that section 6(iv)(j) of the bombay court-fees act, which is as follows:in suits where declaration is sought, with or without injunction or other consequential relief and the subject-matter in dispute is not ..... 36 in schedule i of the indian stamp act speaks of letter of allotment of shares in any company or proposed company; article 37 of schedule i of the bombay stamp act similarly speaks of letter of allotment of shares in any company or a proposed .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 10 1926 (PC)

Harkisandas Bhagvandas and ors. Vs. Bai Dhanu

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : AIR1926Bom497

..... be disregarded by a subordinate court (section 3 of act 18 of 1875) and cf. swryaprakasam v. mimuswamy chetty a.i.r. 1925 mad. 348. though this: cant no doubt, be corrected by having bala v. sadashiv : (1921)23bomlr1066 reported in the indian law reports, i think in any case it is desirable to ..... the two documents being connected and interdependent parts of one single transaction of mortgage, both the documents came within section 17(1)(b) of the indian registration act. that decision, therefore, with due respect, is not correct.61. where, however, it is clear that the parties intended that the first ..... with the terms of the documents the question, whether the agreement requires to be registered must be answered with reference to the provisions-of the indian registration act as contained in section 17, sub-section (2), clause (v); and it cannot be treated as compulsorily registrable, because it forms part ..... actual and legal, of the parties, partly perhaps from the fact clause (1)(b) and clause (2)(v) of section 17 of the indian registration act are not contradictory, nor, taken together, exhaustive. there maybe a third category of documents which create a right to obtain another document but do ..... into force and when, therefore, the law in india was different under the view taken in dinkarrao's case [1882] 2 ch. d. 562, their lordships did not consider the question with reference to the provisions of the transfer of property act or the indian contract act. i may refer in this connexion .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 20 1925 (PC)

Sethu and ors. Vs. Palani Alias Thirumeni thevan

Court : Chennai

Reported in : 94Ind.Cas.535; (1926)50MLJ453

..... been married.' sir samuel evans, president of the probate division, answered the question in the affirmative. we have not been able to get at the report of this case, but the case is discussed in 30 law quarterly review page 153. the facts in that case are very similar to the present and though the judgment in the case is not before ..... hindu law but the privy council in collector of trichinopoly v. lakkamani and ors. (1874) 1 ..... india as stated in section 112 of the evidence act. nor is it the present law of england vide ingestre v. the attorney-general times 1913, oct. 14. see 30 law quarterly review p. 153 a case of which we have got no report, but which is commented on in an article in 30 law quarterly. mr. govindaraghava aiyar argues that it is opposed to ..... us the conclusion arrived at by the learned president of the probate division is in conformity with section 112 of the indian evidence act.5. the decision in rahi and ors. v. govind valad teja (1875) 1 .....

Tag this Judgment!

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