Gopal, Krishnaji Ketkar vs Mahomed Haji Latif & Ors on 19 April, 1968
Equivalent citations: 1968 AIR 1413, 1968 SCR (3) 862, AIR 1968 SUPREME ... Bench: V. Ramaswami , J.C. Shah , G.K. Mitter
PETITIONER:
GOPAL, KRISHNAJI KETKAR
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
MAHOMED HAJI LATIF & ORS.
DATE OF JUDGMENT
Gopal Krishnaji Ketkar vs Mahomed Jaffar Mohamed Hussein And Anr. on 22 May, 1953
Equivalent citations: AIR1954SC5, AIR 1954 SUPREME COURT 5
Author: Chief Justice ... they sent a thank offering under the charge of one Kashinath Pant Ketkar, a Kalyan Brahmin who the plaintiffs say was one of their ancestors
HUssein and another on the other said in the course of which Ketkar claimed the sole right to manage the Dargah. It is the Dargah ... passed. It came into force on January 21, 1952. Ketkar made an application under that Act, under protest, for registering the Darga as a Public
Sitaram Sakharam Mangle vs Laxman Vishnu Ketkar on 21 February, 1921
Equivalent citations: (1921)23BOMLR749, AIR 1921 BOMBAY 87(2)
JUDGMENT
Norman Macleod
Seema Sudhir Ketkar And Anr vs The Reg. Gen. High Court, Mumbai And Ors on 28 June, 2019
Bench: Ranjit More , Bharati Dangre ... Respondent
Ors.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 3020 OF 2019
Ms. Seema Sudhir Ketkar And Anr. ....Petitioner
V/S
The Reg . Gen. High Court, Mumbai
Balkrishna Raoji Velankar vs Parashram Mahadeo Ketkar on 12 March, 1926
Equivalent citations: (1926)28BOMLR949, AIR 1926 BOMBAY 479
JUDGMENT
Norman Macleod
Emperor vs Shreekant Pandurang Ketkar on 21 January, 1943
Equivalent citations: (1943)45BOMLR323
JUDGMENT
John Beaumont, Kt., C.J.
1. The first application
Patil and Miss Roshni Patil have appeared for the appellant and Mr. Ketkar and Mr. Khadapkar have appeared for the respondent ... suit, namely the one for specific performance of the contract.
10. Mr. Ketkar, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent No. 1, on the other hand
lane of Kamathipura, M.R. Road, Bombay. Head Constable Ketkar, therefore, contacted Sub-Inspector Dagdu Patil (P.W. 5) and accordingly the raiding party went ... brought to Police Station where Sub-Inspector Patil recorded the statement of Ketkar which was treated as First Information Report upon which a crime
defendants who are the original vendorsthe contract was between the plaintiff and Ketkars who were the first purchasers. Under the sale deed passed ... Ketkars to the plaintiff no right to damages is transferred, nor could any such transfer be made under the Transfer of Pro-perty Act. Secondly
