Allahabad Court July 1912 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.
Habib-ullah Khan and anr. Vs. Lalta Prasad and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-12-1912
Reported in: (1912)ILR34All612
Muhammad Rafiq and Piggott, JJ.1. The plaintiffs in this case are the proprietors of village Bakhshpur in the Pilibhit district, and the defendants are the holders of certain muafi lands situated within the same village. It appears that the muafi lands held by the defendants are on the boundary of the village, at a point where it is subject to fluvial action by the Khakhra river. The real dispute between the parties is whether certain land, accreted to village Bakhshpur by alluvion through the action of the Khakhra river at this point, accrues to the muafi lands of the defendants and becomes a part of their muafi holding, or accrues to the village of Bakhshpur as a whole and becomes a portion of the village lands of which the plaintiffs are proprietors. This was the first point raised by the pleadings. The defendants further pleaded that the plaintiffs suit was barred by limitation, as they had never been in possession within 12 years of the institution of the suit of any portion of th...
Habibullah Khan and anr. Vs. Lalta Prasad and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-12-1912
Reported in: 17Ind.Cas.94
1. The plaintiffs in this case are the proprietors of village Bakhshpur in the Pilibhit District, and the defendants are the holders of certain muafi lands situated within the same village. It appears that the muafi lands held by the defendants are on the boundary of the village, at a point where it is subject to fluvial action by the Khakhra river. The real dispute between the parties is whether certain land, accreted to village Bakhshpur by alluvion through the action of the Khakhra river at this point, accrues to the muafi lands of the defendants and becomes a part of their muafi holding, or accrues to the village of Bakhshpur as a whole and becomes a portion of the village lands of which the plaintiffs are proprietors. This was the first point raised by the pleadings. The defendants further pleaded that the plaintiff's suit was barred by limitation, as they had never been in possession within 12 years of the institution of the suit of any portion of the land claimed.. The Court of ...
Kalika Prasad Tewari and ors. Vs. Inayat HusaIn and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-10-1912
Reported in: 16Ind.Cas.216
1. The only question in issue in this appeal is whether the plaintiffs are entitled to post diem interest. This was decreed by the Court of first instance but refused by the learned District Judge on appeal. The deed in suit is a mortgage by conditional sale, dated the 18th of August 1884. It commences with the recital that the mortgagor has received from the mortgagees a loan of Rs. 800, and with a general covenant to pay interest at 3 annas in the rupee per annum on the said loan. Then comes the further covenant that, as a consideration for this loan, the mortgagor undertakes to re-pay principal and interest on April the 29th, 1885, and mortgages by conditional sale certain specified property, the condition being that in the event of the mortgagor's failure to pay on due date, the deed shall take effect as a sale out and out from the above mentioned date of April 29th, 1885. The case has been fully argued before us and we have been referred to a number of rulings commencing with the ...
Ganga Prosad Vs. Lachman Das and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-09-1912
Reported in: 16Ind.Cas.404
1. The plaintiff in this case sues as the transferee of a reversioner under the Hindu Law. He bases his claim upon the allegation that his transferor, Makundi Singh, whom he has impleaded as a defendant in the case, was the nearest reversioner to the last male owner of the estate. He appended to his plaint a genealogical table showing the descent of Makundi Singh and the last male owner from a common ancestor, At a later stage of the suit, after issues had been fixed, but apparently before any evidence had been taken, the plaintiff presented a petition to the effect that daring the pendency of the suit, he had discovered a new piece of evidence, viz., a genealogical table of 1825, which had an important bearing on the case. He was prepared to show that, according to this genealogical table, Makundi Singh was the nearest reversioner, but the table differed in some respects from the table given at the foot of the plaint. The plaintiff accordingly asked for permission to amend his plaint ...
Muhammad HusaIn and anr. Vs. Ilahi Bakhsh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-08-1912
Reported in: 17Ind.Cas.92
Chamier, J.1. This is an appeal against an order of the District Judge of Gorakhpur, rejecting the petition of the appellants to be declared insolvent. The ground given for the rejection of the petition is that it was not presented in good faith and that the appellants' object was not really to surrender their property and to be cleared of their debts, but to evade payment by setting up a title in their father to certain property against the Receiver and to avoid imprisonment for debt. In appeal, it is contended that the case is covered by a decision of two Judges of this Court in F.A.F.O., No. 33 of 1912, delivered on May 31st last. In that case, the same learned District Judge had dismissed the petition of a debtor to be declared an insolvent on the ground that he had falsely pleaded that he was separate in estate from his father and brothers and his object was to 'prevent his creditors from touching certain family property of which he was, in fact, the manager. The District Judge ha...
Buddha Singh and ors. Vs. Laltu Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-06-1912
Reported in: (1912)ILR34All663
Banerji, J.1. This appeal raises an important question as to the order in which, according to the Benares school of the Mitakshara law, gotraja sapindas succeed. The first plaintiff claims the estate of Sahib Sahai as his next heir under the following pedigree:Nainsukh Mal._______________________|___________________________| |Narpat Singh. Kanji Mal.______|_____________ || | Buddha SinghPran Singh. Raja Gur Sahai. alias| Rani Kishori Kuar. Chaturi Singh,Buddha Singh. | Plaintiff.| Sahib Sahai.Laltu Singh,defendant No. 1.2. The correctness of this pedigree is not admitted on behalf of the defendants; but the case has been decided by the court below on the assumption that it is correct, and the appeal before us has been argued on the same assumption.3. The last male owner of the property in dispute was Sahib Sahai. After his death his mother, Rani Kishori Kunwari, was in possession till her death in 1907. It is claimed on behalf of the plaintiff Buddha Singh, alias Chaturi Singh, that he...
Buddha Singh and ors. Vs. Laltu Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-06-1912
Reported in: 16Ind.Cas.529
Banerji, J.1. This appeal raises an important question as to the order in which, according to the Benares School of the Mitakshara Law, gotraja sapindas succeed. The first plaintiff claims the estate of Sahib Sahai as his next heir under the following pedigree: NAINSUKH MAL, | | ------------------------| | | Narpat Singh, Kunji Mal, | | |-----------| Buddha Singh alias | Chaturi Singh, plaintiff. |---------------------------| Puran Singh, Raja Gur Sahai | Musammat Rani Kishri Budha Singh, kunwar, | | Laltu Singh, Sahib Sahai. defendant No. 1.2. The correctness of this pedigree is not admitted on behalf of the defendants but the case has been decided by the Court below on the assumption that it is correct and the appeal before us has been argued on the same assumption.3. The last male owner of the property in dispute was Sahib Sahai. After his death, his mother, Rani Kishori Kunwari, was in possession till her death in 1907. It is claimed on behalf of the plaintiff, Budha Singh alias ...
Jugal Kishore Sahu and anr. Vs. Kedar Nath and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-04-1912
Reported in: (1912)ILR34All606
Chamier and Piggott, JJ.1. This was a suit upon a mortgage made in January, 1888, in favour of the predecessor of the appellants. The mortgage covered shares in several villages, including a two anna share in a village called Haria. In May, 1895, the mortgagors sold a one anna six pie share in Haria to one Asuda Bibi, leaving with her Rs. 500, part of the purchase money, to be paid to the appellants. That sum was paid to the appellants in July, 1896, and a receipt was given by them, which shows that they accepted the money in reduction of the amount due on the mortgage. In 1906, the appellants released the |one anna six pie share from the mortgage, stating that they did so in consideration of the payment made to them in 1896, In the present suit instituted in 1910, the appellants claim to be entitled to bring the remainder of the mortgaged property to sale for the recovery of the whole amount remaining due upon the mortgage, after giving credit for the sum of Rs. 500 paid in 1896. The ...
Wajid Ali Vs. Safqat Husain
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-04-1912
Reported in: 16Ind.Cas.219
1. This appeal arises out of a suit for redemption of a mortgage. On the 30th of April 1897, one Mashuk Ali mortgaged his estate under two documents in favour of the defendant No. 1, On the 14th of May 1906, his heirs sold the equity of redemption to the defendant No. 2. Defendant No. 2, on the 23rd of April 1907, under a sale-deed, transferred the same right to the present plaintiff. The defendant No. 1, the mortgagee, was also apparently a co-sharer in the mahal in which this property was situate. In regard to the sales of the 14th of May 1906, and the 23rd of April 1907, he brought no suit to assert his right to pre-emption. When that right was finally barred, the plaintiff, on the 29th of April 1908, brought the present suit to redeem the mortgage of April 1897. There was a defence that the transaction was not a mortgage but a sale oat and out. That defence has been decided on second appeal in this Court against the defendant and it has bean held as between the parties that the tra...
Jamna Kuer Vs. Abdul Nabi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-04-1912
Reported in: 16Ind.Cas.353
1. The appellants and the respondents other than Abdul Nabi are the owners, i.e., ground landlords of kasba Kanth, which is a small town of about 8,000 inhabitants in the Moradabad District. Pir Bakhsh, a teli, was the occupier of four small houses in the town. He died and was succeeded by his son, Ajru, who, on December 26th, 1903, sold the houses including the sites to the respondent Abdul Nabi. The appellants brought this suit in April 1910 alleging that Ajru had left the kasba in 1907 and that they had thereupon entered into possession of the land and houses but had been dispossessed by Abdul Nabi early in April 1910 and they prayed for a decree for possession jointly with the respondents other than Abdul Nabi. Abdul Nabi pleaded that he was the owner of the land in question under his purchase from Ajru and had been in possession since December 1908. He denied that he or his predecessors had ever paid rent to the ground landlords of Kanth and he pleaded that the appellants had not ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »