Allahabad Court February 1907 Judgments
Ram Sarup Vs. Kishan Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-21-1907
Reported in: (1907)ILR29All327
Banerji, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the appellant to recover from the respondent arrears of rent. The respondent is an, occupancy tenant. On the 21st of October 1902 he made a usufructuary mortgage of his occupancy holding to the plaintiff appellant, and then executed a kabuliat undertaking to pay rent for the mortgaged land. It is on the strength of this kabuliat that the present suit was brought. The suit was resisted upon the ground that under the provisions of the Agra Tenancy Act, No. II of 1901, the mortgage was void and that the plaintiff had no title to sue for rent. Both the Courts below have sustained this defence. The plaintiff appeals.2. It is contended on his behalf that the mortgage made by the defendant respondent is not absolutely void, but is only voidable at the instance of the landlord, and that it is not open to the defendant to question its validity. In support of this contention reliance is placed upon the provisions of Section 31 of the Act....
Tag this Judgment!Raghubans Puri Vs. Jyotis Swarupa and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-18-1907
Reported in: (1907)ILR29All325
John Stanley, C.J. and William Burkitt, J.1. In the suit out of which this appeal has arisen the plaintiff asked for a declaration that a sale-deed, dated the 18th of October 1901, of property specified in the plaint, was void and claimed possession of the property detailed in that deed. He put in an alternative claim, that if the plaintiff was not entitled to possession of the buildings upon the land, a decree for possession of the land itself might be passed in his favour and the defendants ordered to remove the materials of the buildings and that the plaintiff might be put into possession of the land. He also asked for any other relief to which he might 'in the ends of justice' be entitled.2. It appears that some time between the years 1860 and 1866 the predecessor in title of the plaintiff leased at least a portion of the land in dispute to Mr. Frederic Wilson, the father and predecessor in title of the defendant Charles Wilson. Upon this land buildings were erected and an extensiv...
Tag this Judgment!Kadhu Singh Vs. Baljit Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-13-1907
Reported in: (1907)ILR29All423
George Knox and Richards, JJ.1. This was a suit to enforce a mortgage. The mortgage was made by one Kunjal Singh. He, his sons, grandsons and great-grandsons were all made parties to the original suit, and the plaintiff sought to obtain a decree against the joint ancestral property of the defendants. A joint written statement was filed on behalf of all the defendants by a pleader named Munna Lal. The suit was subsequently referred to arbitration, and an award, which we have no reason to think to be an unfair or unreasonable award, was made. It, however, appears that the original vakalat-namah given to Munna Lal was not signed by one of the defendants, Daryao Singh. The submission to arbitration was signed by three of the defendants, namely, Baljit Singh, Punni Singh and Tara Singh. Munna Lal purported to sign on behalf of the other defendants. An objection was taken to the award by two of the defendants, namely, Lochan Singh, and Hem Singh. The objections appear to have been frivolous....
Tag this Judgment!Uman Dat Vs. Lachmi NaraIn and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-07-1907
Reported in: (1907)ILR29All322
John Stanley, C.J. and Burkitt, J.1. The suit out of which this appeal has arisen was a suit for sale of mortgaged property under two bonds. These bonds provided for the payment of interest at the rate of 10 per cent. per annum; with a condition that if the interest was not paid in the second year compound interest should be charged, and that this condition should remain in force until the whole amount was paid off. The learned District Judge, modifying the decree of the Court below as regards interest, allowed compound interest up to the date of realization. He says in the course of his judgment: 'As for the rate of interest to be allowed for the period subsequent to the date fixed for payment in the 'decree, I see no cause to decree any other than the contractual rate. It is true that it is compound interest, but the rate (10 1/2 per cent per annum) is not a high one, but is a little less than the prevalent rate (12 per cent per annum). There was no harsh or unconscionable bargain an...
Tag this Judgment!Hasan Ali Khan and anr. Vs. Mazhar-ul-hasan and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-07-1907
Reported in: (1907)ILR29All318
John Stanley, C.J. and William Burkitt, J.1. This is an appeal against a decree of one of the learned Judges of this Court sitting alone.2. The suit was instituted against one Ali Mazhar as an exproprietary tenant to recover the rent of certain lands which had been his sir. He had been the proprietor of the mahal in which he held this sir land. Many years ago Ali Mazhar made default in paying the revenue assessed on the mahal, whereupon the Collector, acting under the powers conferred on him by the North-Western Provinces Land Revenue Act of 1873, Section 154, attached the mahal and took it under direct management. At the same time acting under the provisions of Section 190 of the same Act, the Collector fixed the rent to be paid in future by Ali Mazhar in respect of this land. Ali Mazhar was recorded as an ex-proprietary tenant. This suit is one to recover the rent so fixed, and alleged to be due and payable for the years 1308 and 1309 Fasli by the respondents, the representatives in ...
Tag this Judgment!Kishan Prasad and ors. Vs. Shamrathi Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-02-1907
Reported in: (1907)ILR29All311
John Stanley, C.J. and William Burkitt, J.1. The main question in this appeal is one of limitation. The suit was brought to recover a sum of Rs. 9,240-7-0 alleged to be due on foot of an account stated on the 9 th of August 1901. The plaintiffs Kishan Prasad, Bishan Prasad and Jamna Prasad instituted the suit on the 3rd of June 1904 as managers of a joint family business, styled Manorath Bhagat Dhana Ram, carried on in the District of Ballia, to recover the debt which was due by the family of the defendants in respect of money dealings. The dealings between the parties had been carried on for several years, and on the 9th of August 1901 the accounts were adjusted, when the defendants Shamrathi Singh, Mahadeo Singh and Rajinandan Singh admitted the correctness of the balance and affixed their signatures to the account, Mahadeo Singh signing it on behalf of himself as well as of Shamrathi Singh. 2. In their written statements the principal defendants objected to the array of plaintiffs c...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›