Allahabad Court February 1911 Judgments
John Henry Rhine Vs. Mabel Rhine
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-23-1911
Reported in: 9Ind.Cas.796
John Stanley, C.J.1. These appeals arise out of cross-petitions for divorce under the Indian Divorce Act. The appellant, John Henry Rhine, who is an Engine Driver on the North-Western Railway, was married to the respondent Mabel Rhine in the Central Provinces in the year 1897. The last residence of the parties was at Saharanpur. There has been no issue of the marriage. Mrs. Rhine left her husband in April 1909 and went to her brother in the Punjab. She, on the 28th of May 1909, instituted a suit in Lahore against her husband for 'dissolution of their marriage, or in the alternative for judicial separation'. The plaint in this suit was returned to her to be filed in the proper Court, the Court at Lahore not having jurisdiction in the matter, and accordingly the plaint was filed in the Court of the District Judge of Saharanpur on the 30th of July 1909. Meantime, Rhine filed a petition for divorce on the 22nd of July 1909 on the ground of his wife's adultery with the co-respondent, Leonar...
Tag this Judgment!Mahant Ram Ratan Gir Vs. Prag Dutt Pande and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-23-1911
Reported in: 9Ind.Cas.835
1. The suit out of which this appeal has arisen was brought under the following circumstances. The defendant-respondent Prag Dat Pande executed a mortgage on the 10th of June 1884 and on the basis of that mortgage a suit was brought for sale against Prag Dat, his two sons Rajwant and Bhagwant and against the sons of Rajwant and Bhagwant. The suit was defended by Rajwant and his sons but the other defendants did not appear. A decree was passed on the 30th of April 1897 and this decree was affirmed, on appeal, by this Court on the 8th of January 1900. On the 27th of April 1900 an application was made for an order absolute for sale Prag Dat, thereupon, applied under Section 108 of Act XIV of 1382 to have the decree set aside but his application was dismissed on the 22nd of September 1900 and on the same date the decree of the 30th of April 1897 was made absolute. Prag Dat applied for revision of this order but was unsuccessful. He then brought a suit to have the decree of the 30th of Apri...
Tag this Judgment!Jai Mangal Deo and ors. Vs. Sri Rani Bedsaran Kuar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-22-1911
Reported in: 9Ind.Cas.819
Banerji, J.1. The facts of this case are set forth in our judgment in the connected Second Appeal No. 67 of 1910 in which we held, in concurrence with the Court below, that the question of the title of the plaintiff-respondent was res judicata. In consequence of our decision in that case the learned Advocate for the appellants contends that we must be taken to have held that the plaintiff had no title to the property in suit and that, therefore, she is not entitled to maintain her, claim against any of the defendants. I do not agree with this contention. We have not in deciding the connected appeal, held that the plaintiff has no title. All that we have held is that the question of her title being res judicata against those defendants who were respondents to that appeal the issue as to her, title could not be tried, as against those defendants. As the appellants were no parties to the suit in which the previous judgment was passed that judgment cannot operate as res judicata as between...
Tag this Judgment!Permanand Vs. Sat Pershad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-21-1911
Reported in: 9Ind.Cas.617
ORDER1. This is a reference under Section 60 of the Stamp Act of 1899. A document was produced in the Court of the District Judge of Cawnpore. It was assumed by the Court below that this was a document, which authorized the holder, who is nominated therein, to appear and do all acts necessary for the execution of a certain decree which had been transferred from the Punjab to Cawnpore for execution. We are dealing with the case on the assumption that the document, if duly stamped, was sufficient for the purpose. The document bears an eight-anna Court-fee label and no other stamp. The donee of the power is not a certificated Mukhtar or Pleader and the question is whether, under these circumstances, the document is duly stamped. Section 2 Clause (21) of the Stamp Act defines the expression 'power-of-attorney includes any instrument (not chargeable with a fee under the law for the time being in force) empowering a specified person to act for and in the name of the person executing it.' The...
Tag this Judgment!Shib Charan Das Vs. Ramchandar Sarup and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-21-1911
Reported in: 9Ind.Cas.827
1. The question in this appeal is whether the plaintiff's claim is barred by the rule of res judicata. The facts are these. The plaintiff and other parties had disputes about the partition of certain property which belonged to them. They prepared lots and appointed an arbitrator for the purpose of assigning the lots to the different persons interested. On the 17th of December 1904, an agreement of reference was drawn up and one Babu Ramanuj Dayal was appointed arbitrator. On the 23rd of December 1904, lots were drawn and lot No. 1 fell to the share of the plaintiff and his co-sharers. One of the properties comprised in that lot was 20 biswas of the village Sherpur. On the 14th of December 1905 an award was made, but in that award by a mistake instead of entering the whole of the 20 biswas of the village Sherpur in lot No. 1, only a half of that village was entered by the clerk who copied out the lots embodied in the award. The mistake was discovered and the attention of the arbitrator ...
Tag this Judgment!Khadim HussaIn Vs. Babu Bishen Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-17-1911
Reported in: 9Ind.Cas.633
1. This case must go back to the Court below for trial on the merits. The application was one made by the appellant to be adjudged an insolvent. It was opposed on the ground, amongst others, that the applicant was possessed of property which he had not placed at the disposal of the Court. The learned Judge only examined the applicant and he says in his judgment that he was not satisfied that the applicant was unable to pay his debts. The reason he assigns for this conclusion is that the applicant's mother is possessed of property and he is her only son. That is not a sufficient reason for holding that the applicant is not entitled to be adjudged an insolvent. We allow the appeal, set aside the order of the Court below, and remand the case to that Court with directions to reinstate it under its original number in the register and dispose of it according to law. Costs here and hitherto will follow the event....
Tag this Judgment!Raj Kishore Upadhya Vs. Babu Gurcharan Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-17-1911
Reported in: 9Ind.Cas.634
1. There is no substance in this appeal. The appellant's contention is that the application for execution of the decree is time-barred. The learned Vakil for the appellant has stated the facts connected with the case and detailed the applications which were made for execution. Amongst others, he has referred to an application, dated the 9th of September 1906. In this application the judgment-creditor applied to the Court that time might be given to the debtor, and further that a fresh proclamation for sale might be issued. The subsequent application was made within three years from the date of this application. It is clear that the application for the issue of a fresh proclamation for sale was an application which saved limitation. Under these circumstances this application is not time-barred and the appeal must fail. We dismiss it with costs including fees in this Court on the higher scale....
Tag this Judgment!Kalian Das and ors. Vs. Bhawani Shankar and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-16-1911
Reported in: 9Ind.Cas.631
1. The facts connected with this appeal are these. The decree-holders-respondents obtained a decree for sale under Section 88 of the Transfer of Property Act against one Debi Das, his sons and grandsons. The mortgaged property was sold by auction but as the proceeds of the sale did not satisfy the whole amount of the decree an application for the recovery of the balance under Section 90 was filed. This application was made against the legal representatives of Devi Das, he having died in the meantime. The Court decided that having regard to the decree under Section 88. the person and property of the heirs of Devi Das would not be liable, but that the amount claimed could be recovered only from such properly as belonged solely to Debi Das. A decree was drawn up accordingly. This decree directs the realisation of the balance of the original decree from the properly of Debi Das. Reading the decree by the light of the judgment, it is clear that what the Court directed by the decree was that...
Tag this Judgment!Naubat Singh Vs. Baldeo Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-15-1911
Reported in: 9Ind.Cas.666
1. A preliminary objection has been taken to the hearing of this appeal on the ground that, having regard to the provisions of Section 104(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, no appeal lies to this Court. The suit out of which this appeal has arisen was brought in the Court of the Munsif. He was of opinion that it was not cognizable by him and accordingly made an order under Order VII, Rule 10 returning the plaint to be presented to the proper Court. From this order/an appeal was preferred to the District Judge under Order XLIII, Rule (1)(a). The learned Subordinate Judge, to whose Court the appeal was transferred and who heard it, was of opinion that the suit was cognizable by the Munsif, and accordingly set aside the order of the Munsif and remanded the case to his Court for trial on the merits.2. Section 104(2) provides that no appeal shall lie from any order passed in appeal under that section. The order appealed against is an order passed in appeal under that section because Clause...
Tag this Judgment!Jhabbar Musalman Vs. Suraj Prashad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-15-1911
Reported in: 9Ind.Cas.894
Griffin, J.1. The facts which have given rise to the present appeal are as follows: One Amir was the occupancy-tenant of a holding. He died leaving two sons, the plaintiff-appellant and one Bahadur. Amir died about the year 1905; Bahadur died a few days after Amir leaving a widow Musammat Lalui. The names of the plaintiff-appellant and Musammat Lalui were recorded as tenants of the holding in the village papers. On 21st September 1908, Musammat Lalui executed a deed under which in consideration of a sum of Rs. 399-8. She sold the crops standing upon the plots specified in the deed and relinquished her occupancy-rights in that portion of the original holding to the defendants the zemindars of the holding. The plaintiff in the present suit seeks for a declaration that the deed is null and void as against him. The Court of first instance decreed the suit, but upon the ground that Bahadur had predeceased his father. The lower Appellate Court found that Bahadur died after his father and tha...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »