Allahabad Court June 1910 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Brij Lal Singh and anr. Vs. Bhawani Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-06-1910
Reported in: 7Ind.Cas.115
John Stanley, C.J.1. This second appeal arises out of a suit for redemption of a mortgage of the 2nd of August 1867 and the circumstances under which it was brought are as follows:The predecessors-in-title of the plaintiffs borrowed money from one Kharagjit deceased, and as security there for, hypothecated their share in the village of Badhaula. The mortgage provided that if the mortgagors failed to re-pay the money borrowed in Jeth 1275 fasli, the mortgagee should be at liberty to take possession of the mortgaged property. Default was made in payment of the mortgage debt and the mortgagee took possession of the mortgaged property. Later on, namely, on the 3rd of July 1874, a further mortgage to secure a small sum was executed by the mortgagors in favour of Kharagjit. In that document, it is recited that the sum of Bs. 98, was duo by the mortgagors to Kharagjit and the executants thereby agreed to pay interest on that amount at the rate of Rs. 2 per cent, on demand. In order to secure ...
Babu Batuk Nath Vs. Musammat Munni and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-04-1910
Reported in: 7Ind.Cas.36
Karamat Husain, J.1. The appellant is the purchaser of a decree obtained upon a mortgage on March 29th, 1898, against the respondents or the persons whom they represent. The original decree having been written upon very flimsy paper is now very much torn and is in places illegible but it is admitted by the parties to this appeal that the following translation of it prepared in First Appeal No. 132 of 1898 decided on February 14th 1900 is correct. The translation of the relevant portion of the decree runs as follows:It is ordered that the plaintiff do pay Rs. 975 on account of Court-fee within a week in respect of Rs. 29,534 claimed by defendants Nos. 2 to 7 as prior mortgage debt, the plaintiff do further pay to defendants Nos. 2 to 7 or deposit in Court Rs. 29,534 with interest at Rs. 6 per cent. per annum together with one set of Pleader's fees and other costs incurred by defendants Nos. 2 to 7 within 5 months from to-day. If the plaintiff fails to pay the said Court-fee or the said ...
Girwardhari and anr. Vs. Jai NaraIn and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-04-1910
Reported in: 7Ind.Cas.39
Chamier, J.1. This is an appeal against an order of the District Judge of Mainpuri, dismissing an insolvency petition presented by the appellants under the Provincial Insolvency Act (III of 1907).2. The learned Judge appears to have been under the impression that the proceedings were governed by the Code of Civil Procedure, 1882, for in dismissing the petition he refers to Section 351 of that Code. We must, however, consider whether the dismissal of the petition can be supported under the Provincial Insolvency Act. The grounds stated for dismissing the petition are that the appellant Girwardhari Lal feigned ignorance about the existence of his account-books and prevaricated on other matters.3. Section 12 of the Provincial Insolvency Act provides that when an insolvency petition is admitted, the Court shall make an order fixing a date for hearing the petition and notice of the order shall be given to the creditors by publication in the local Official Gazette and in such other manner as ...
Salamat-ul-lah Vs. Partab Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-04-1910
Reported in: 6Ind.Cas.795a
1. This appeal arises out of a suit for sale on a mortgage. The Courts below have given the plaintiff a simple money decree, holding that the mortgage sued upon was a usufructuary mortgage and that: therefore, by reason of the provisions of Section 67 of the Transfer of Property Act, plaintiff could not obtain a decree for sale of the property.2. The plaintiff comes here in second appeal and it is contended that the Courts below have wrongly interpreted the mortgage-deed in suit and that upon a true construction of that document he was entitled to a decree for sale of the mortgaged property.3. The mortgage-was for a term of five years, during which time the mortgagees were to remain in possession and receive the profits of the property in lieu of interest. The mortgage was to be redeemed after the expiry of the term. Then follows a provision to the following effect: After the expiry of the term, the mortgagee shall have power to institute a suit and realise the money by public or priva...
Musammat Tulsha Vs. Mathurapuri and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-04-1910
Reported in: 6Ind.Cas.794
1. We are of opinion that the construction put upon the Will of Chhotepuri by the learned District Judge is correct. By his Will the testator gave to the appellant 3 hiswas, 13 biswansis, 1 ndnaivansi, 14 1/2 anwansis of zamindariproperty comprised in certain pattis in the village of Hariha, the numbers of which are stated in the plaint. These pattis are described as being in the separate possession of the testator. In addition to the property so described, the testator was entitled to property in other villages and also to shamlat pattis in the; village of Hariha. These shamlat pattis in the khewats have numbers assigned to them, different and distinct from the numbers of the pattis specifically ffiven to the appellant. The pattis given by the testator by his Will are as pattis and they alone are assessed to revenue. The shamlat pattis are owned in shares by proprietors of asli pattis in common, and are not assessed to revenue. The Court of first instance held that under the bequest i...
Shiam Lal and ors. Vs. NaThe Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-03-1910
Reported in: 7Ind.Cas.65
1. This appeal arises out of a suit for recovery of arrears of rent. A shop and premises belonged to the firm of Thakur Dass and Dhani Ram. This shop and premises wore sold by the Court in execution of a decree on the 29th of June 1907 and purchased by Jaggi Lal. The sale was not confirmed until the 22nd of August 1908. Prior to the 22nd of August 1908, rents of tenants fell into arrears and in the aggregate a sum of Rs. 700 was due for such arrears on that date. In execution of a decree obtained against Thakur Dass and Dhani Ram, these arrears were sold on the 18th of December 1908 and were purchased by the plaintiff. He instituted the suit out of which this appeal has arisen for recovery of these arrears. The defence set up by the defendants was that the plaintiff was not entitled to them but that the purchaser under the purchase of the 29th of June 1907 was so entitled.2. Both the Courts below gave a decree to the plaintiff.3. This second appeal was then preferred and the contention...
Shafi-un-nissa and ors. Vs. Fazalrab and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-03-1910
Reported in: 7Ind.Cas.293
Karamat Husain, J.1. The facts are these:--One 1di on the 15th of January, 1866, executed a mortgage deed in favour of his son Shams-ud-din. The material portion of the said mortgage-deed may be rendered as follows:A sum of Rs. 700 in all is due to Shams-ud-din by me, hence executing this deed in favour of Shams-ud-din, I covenant and give in writing that in lieu of the interest on the said sum which at the rate of Rs. 2 per mensem amounts to Rs. 168, I mortgage with possession 56 bighas, 11 biswas and 7f dhurs yielding a rent of Rs. 113-2-3 at the rate of Rs. 2 per bigha, situate in the village Angwa alias Kathgaun and put him in possession. The said Shams-ud-din is to appropriate the rents of the said land amounting to Rs. 113-2-3. He may either cultivate the land or let it to tenants. I and my heirs and representatives shall raise no objection. After deducting Rs. 113-2-3 an annual balance of Rs. 54-13-9 remains due, and whenever I shall intend to pay off the debt, I shall pay the p...
Raja Shah Vs. HusaIn Shah
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-02-1910
Reported in: 7Ind.Cas.314
Chamier, J.1. The facts found by the Court below are as fellows:For a long time past the defendant and his ancestors before him have hoisted a flag bearing the arms or emblems of a Muhammadan taint, named Madari, at a fair which is held annually at Makanpur near Jhansi, and they have been in the habit of taking the flag to weddings in the town of Jhansi and appropriating any offerings that were made to it, For 20 years or so, before 1908, one Madari hoisted in Jhansi a flag bearing the arms or emblems of another saint, named Muin-ud-din Chishti. He used to take the flag to weddings and appropriate any offerings that were made to the flag. In 1908, Madari made over this flag to the plaintiff and purported to transfer to him the right to take the offerings made to it. In June, 1908, the plaintiff planted his flag at the house of one Grappa, where a wedding was about to take place. The defendant pulled the flag down and took it away. Hence the present suit which was instituted in July, 19...
Syed Khursheed Ali and ors. Vs. Musammat Wazir-un-nissa and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-02-1910
Reported in: 6Ind.Cas.857
Chamier, J.1. This is an appeal against a decree of the District Judge of Aligarh. The respondents object that no appeal lies inasmuch as the decree was passed upon a compromise recorded under Section 375 of the Code of Civil Procedure 1882. To this the appellants reply (1) that the learned Judge should have disregarded the compromise inasmuch as they, the appellants, resiled from it before or as soon as it was brought before the Court, (2) that the compromise was unlawful and (3) that the compromise should have been disregarded as plainly unworkable. The following facts are admitted:In July 1871, the respondent Ashik Ali mortgaged certain property to Basit Ali, father of the appellants. In November 1873, Ashik Ali mortgaged other property to the same person. In July 1905, Ashik Ali sold both properties to the respondent, Warisunnissa. After the death of Basit Ali, the appellants in April 1906 brought a suit upon the mortgage of 1871 and obtained a decree on July 15th 1907. In July 190...
Muktabal Singh and anr. Vs. Haran Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-02-1910
Reported in: 6Ind.Cas.841
1. The plaintiffs in the suit, out of which this appeal has arisen, were Muktabal Singh and his minor son Partab Singh. The two plaintiffs and Bhawani Singh, who is the uncle of Muktabal Singh, were members of a joint Hindu family and owned 196 bighas, 13 biswas of land in the village of Mai Nath, perqanah Koil, District Aligarh, On the 17th of May 1900, Bhawani Singh executed a deed of gift of a one-half share in this property in favour of the defendant No. 1, Karan Singh, who, as has been found by the Court below, is a stranger to the family. On the strength of this deed of gift, Karan Singh obtained mutation of names in his favour; and in the year 1903, the plaintiffs joined with him in instituting a suit for enhancement of rent against tenants. In the year 1907, Karan Singh instituted a suit for profits against the plaintiffs. The institution of this suit of profits was the cause of the bringing of the present suit. The reliefs asked for in the plaint were open to objection but the...