Allahabad Court July 1902 Judgments
Hingu Lal Vs. Baldeo Ram and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-10-1902
Reported in: (1902)ILR24All553
John Stanley, C.J. and Banerji, J.1. This is an appeal against the decree of the District Judge of Mirzapur, dismissing the suit of the plaintiff, appellant, on the ground that it is barred by the provisions of Section 43 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The property claimed is a house which originally belonged to one Sahai. After Sahai's death it was in the possession of his widow, Musammat Kabutra, who died in 1892. The defendants are the brother, and the sons of the brother of Musammat Kabutra, and they are alleged to be in possession of the house. The plaintiff claims to be entitled to the house as next heir of Sahai after his widow's death. The suit was resisted upon the ground, amongst others, that it offended against the provisions of the 43rd section of the Code. The Court of first instance overruled this plea and decreed the plaintiff's claim. The defendants appealed, and in their appeal they reiterated the plea based on the provisions of Section 43. The lower appellate Court a...
Tag this Judgment!Daulat Ram and ors. Vs. Parmanand
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-09-1902
Reported in: (1902)ILR24All549
John Stanley, C.J.1. The plaintiffs, respondents, who are the sons of one Nathu Rani, brought this suit for proprietary possession of 71/2 shares out of 10 biswas in mauza Nagla Sada under the following circumstances: On the 22nd of March, 1881, Nathu Ram mortgaged with possession 7J shares to the predecessors in title of Parmanand, the defendant appellant, to recover a sum of Rs. 4,600 and interest thereon, and on the 9th of May, 1881, the same parties granted a lease of the same property to Nathu Ram. Nathu Ram, as security for the rent payable under the lease, mortgaged the property to the lessor. The predecessors in title of the defendant appellant died; rent fell into arrears under the lease, and the defendant appellant instituted a suit against Nathu Ram to recover the amount due to him for arrears of rent by sale of the equity of redemption of the property. On the 27th of November, 1889, a decree for sale was passed, and on the 31st of March, 1890, an appeal against the decree f...
Tag this Judgment!Ghansham Singh Vs. Badiya Lal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-07-1902
Reported in: (1902)ILR24All547
John Stanley, C.J. and Banerji, J.1. This suit was brought by the plaintiff to have it declared that two mortgages, one made by the widow of Charan Singh and the other by his mother, were made without legal necessity and wore void, and for possession and mesne profits. Charan Singh was the owner of the property in suit. After his death his mother Jai Kunwar was recorded as owner. On the 8th of January, 1877, the mother and the widow together hypothecated a share in the village Nawsnagir to Madan Gopal to secure a sum of Rs. 300. Madan Gopal sued upon his mortgage and obtained a decree, and at the auction sale Ishri Prasad, father of the defendants, purchased the property on the 23rd of August, 1892. Again, on the 7th of February, 1881, the same parties mortgaged a share in another village called Kajrauth to one Murli Dhar. On his death the name of Ishri Prasad was entered in respect of the mortgaged property. The mother of Charan Singh died many years ago. His widow Dan Kunwar died on ...
Tag this Judgment!Naziran Bibi Vs. Ali Ahmad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-05-1902
Reported in: (1902)ILR24All542
Banerji and Aikman, JJ.1. The respondent, Musammat Naziran Bibi, and one Bismillah Bibi, obtained a decree for foreclosure against the appellant under Section 86 of the transfer of Property Act, 1882, on the 27th of November, 1897. For the payment of the mortgage money the decree allowed a period of six months, which expired oh the 27th of May, 1898. On the 23rd of May, 1901, Musammat Naziran Bibi applied under Section 87 of the Act for an order absolute for foreclosure. That application was resisted on two grounds--first, that it was barred by limitation; and secondly, that Naziran Bibi alone was not competent to make it. The plea of limitation has been overruled by both the Courts below. With reference to the other plea, the lower appellate Court has reversed the order of the Court of first instance, and remanded the case to that Court under Section 562 of the Code of Civil Procedure. From this order of remand the present appeal has been brought.2. The plea of limitation has been rep...
Tag this Judgment!Batul Bibi Vs. Sham Das and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-04-1902
Reported in: (1902)ILR24All538
John Stanley, C.J. and Banerji, J.1. One Rajab Ali was entitled to a share of zamindari property and sir lands appertaining to it. On the 25th of January, 1890, he mortgaged it to the plaintiff, and in the years 1893 and 1895 he also granted usufructuary mortgages in favour of the defendants of the same property. The defendants brought a suit for possession as mortgagees on foot of their earlier mortgage, and obtained a decree on the 4th of January, 1894, and on the 2nd March, 1894, got possession of the sir lands. The plaintiff brought a suit on foot of her mortgage impleading both Rajab Ali and the defendants, and on the 24th of June, 1895, obtained a decree for sale, which decree was made absolute on the 15th of February 1896. At the auction sale held in execution of her decree, the plaintiff purchased the property on the 20th of August, 1896, and obtained possession on the 25th of February, 1897. Upon this sale Rajab Ali became ex-proprietary tenant of the sir lands, and he, on the...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›