Allahabad Court January 1913 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.
Behari Vs. Shib Sahai and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-16-1913
Reported in: 18Ind.Cas.324
Henry Griffin, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for redemption of a mortgage over certain plots of laud shown in schedule A attached to the plaint. According to the plaintiffs, the usufruct of the mortgaged property was to be applied to payment of interest. According to the allegation of the plaintiffs, there was a subsequent arrangement whereby certain plots mentioned in schedule B attached to the plaint were made over to the defendant on the understanding that the profits derived from those plots were to be applied to payment of the principal of the mortgage money. The plaintiffs claim possession of the mortgaged property and of the plots in schedule B on the allegation that the mortgage has now been satisfied. The defendant alleged that the plots shown in schedule B were in fact his own properly and further contended that the oral evidence as to the subsequent agreement was not admissible having regard to Section 92 of the Evidence Act, The Courts below have overruled the defen...
Bandey Ali Vs. Mohammad Ibrahim and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-16-1913
Reported in: 18Ind.Cas.769
Chamier, J.1. It appears to me that the decrees of the Courts below in this case are correct. As the Munsif has observed, the plaint filed by the appellant was drafted in such a way as to avoid all mention, of the partition proceedings, regarding the village, which were commenced in April 1910. The suit was instituted at a time when the partition proceedings had been struck off for default, but a few days later they were restored to the pending file and the case must, it seems to me, be treated as though the partition proceedings were pending at the time when the suit was filed. In the partition proceedings, the appellant made more than one application asking for exactly the same relief as that which he prayed for in the present suit, that is to say, that he is entitled to 719/43 out of 16 shares in two-thirds of 22 acres and that an entry in the village khewat showing him to be the owner of five shares only is wrong. The appellant alleges that his repeated applications in the Revenue ...
Melap Chand Vs. Meharban Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-15-1913
Reported in: 18Ind.Cas.226
Rafique, J.1. It appears that Sumer Singh, defendant-respondent No. 2, executed a deed of sale on March 3rd, 1897 in favour of Gulab Chand, father of the defendant-appellant, Seth Milap Chand, in respect of six pies share in Mauza Gurha entered in the khewat as No. 11. After the sale, an application for mutation of names was made by Gulab Chand and his name was entered in the revenue papers accordingly. On the death of Gulab Chand, the name of the defendant appellant, Milap Chand, was entered in the revenue papers in place of his father. On January 1st, 1910, Seth Milap Chand, the defendant-appellant in the present appeal, brought a suit for the recovery of his share of the profits. The suit was brought against Meharban Singh, the younger brother of Sumer Singh, as Meharban was at the time the Lambardar of the village. The latter resisted the suit denying the right of Milap Chand to claim any profits on the ground of the transfer in favour of Gulab Chand being invalid. The claim of Mil...
Radhe Lal Vs. Munnoo
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-15-1913
Reported in: 18Ind.Cas.280
George Knox, J.1. This second appeal arises out of a case instituted by one Munnoo, who brought a suit in which the prayer for relief is that Rs. 100 on account of damages may be awarded against the defendant. In the plaint, he set out that the defendant out of enmity had lodged a false complaint against him without any reasonable and probable cause in a Criminal Court under Sections 323 and 355 of the Indian Penal Code. The complaint was dismissed by the Criminal Court without any charge being framed. Both the Courts decreed the claim. The lower Appellate Court found that the evidence adduced by the defendant in support of the alleged assault and causing hurt was worthless and that the complaint in the Criminal Court was false. It considered the amount assessed as damages very reasonable. In appeal here, it is contended as there has been no finding by the Court below that the case was one for malicious prosecution, the claim ought to have been dismissed. There is also no finding that ...
Jamilunnissa and ors. Vs. Pitambar Das and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-15-1913
Reported in: 18Ind.Cas.704
1. On June 22nd 1883, Akbar Husain mortgaged a 7 1/2 biswas share in a village to Ram Charan and Bhola Nath on September 7th, 1886, he sold the share to one Asghar Ali Khan. At the time of the sale, the share was under attachment in execution of a money decree which had been obtained against Akbar Husain. The actual date of attachment appears to be August 28th, 1886. Shortly after purchasing the property, Asghar Ali paid off the mortgage of June 22nd, 1883. ON February 17th, 1888, he mortgaged the share to one Nazir Khan. A suit was brought on that mortgage and a decree was obtained in execution of which the share was sold to the present plaintiffs in April 1897. After the purchase by the plaintiffs, the share was put up for sale in pursuance of the attachment above mentioned, and six out of the seven and half biswas were purchased by defendants Nos. 1 to 9 or their ancestors. The defendants sued for possession of the property. The plaintiffs resisted the suit, but it was held that the...
Bhagwant Singh Vs. Bhola Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-11-1913
Reported in: 18Ind.Cas.465
1. The facts out of which this appeal arises are a little peculiar. It appears that the defendant obtained three mortgage decrees on foot of three separate mortgages against the property which the plaintiff now seeks to recover. There were three separate sales. The defendant himself purchased at two of the sales, He bid at the third sale but he was out-bid by the plaintiff and the plaintiff was accordingly declared the auction-purchaser. The sale to the defendant was on the 21st of February 1898, that to the plaintiff was on the 21st of April 1898. The defendant obtained either formal or actual possession on the 7th of November 1898. The sale to the plaintiff was confirmed on the 30th of May 1898 and he obtained formal possession on the 15th of May 1899. The present suit was not instituted until the 1st of June 1910. In any view of the case, the plaintiff slept on his rights for nearly 12 years. The only question which had to be decided was one of limitation. It has been urged with gre...
Bharat Indu and ors. Vs. Yakub Hasan and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-10-1913
Reported in: (1913)ILR35All159
Henry Richards, Kt. C.J. and Banerji, J.1. The facts out of which this appeal arises are very shortly as follows: There was a suit for partition. A preliminary decree was made. Appeals right up to a Letters Patent appeal were taken against that preliminary decree, but without success, and the decree of the court which made the preliminary decree for partition was confirmed. On the case going back to the court of first instance for the passing of a final decree an application was made by the plaintiff in which he asked to be allowed to abandon certain shares to which he had been declared entitled subject to a charge. His case apparently was that he would not press for these shares because they were not worth the charge. He also stated that, having regard to certain events which had happened whilst the appeals were pending, the shares of certain other persons had been acquired by him, and he asked that his share on partition might be augmented accordingly. The court of first instance wen...
Bachchan Lal and ors. Vs. Banarsi Das and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-10-1913
Reported in: (1913)ILR35All238
George Knox and Muhammad Rafiq, JJ.1. The appellants before us in this second appeal were plaintiffs in the court of first instance. They sued the respondent for a sum of money together with costs. The sum of money, they claimed, was alleged to have arisen out of certain dealings in wheat between the parties. The sum which they sued for was Rs. 3,200. The lower appellate Court went into the accounts and gave the appellants a decree for Rs. 374-0-6 with proportionate costs. Against this decree the appellants have brought the present appeal. In the memorandum of appeal they have raised several pleas. One of these pleas, namely, plea No. 6, has been abandoned, and the pleas urged before us really resolve themselves into two, the first being that the lower appellate Court was wrong in debiting the appellants with the amount of a rukka dated the 7th of December, 1903, inasmuch as the claim on that rukka was barred by limitation.2. The second point was that the account books produced by the ...
Bhartendu and ors. Vs. Yaqub HusaIn and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-10-1913
Reported in: 18Ind.Cas.701
1. The facts out of which this appeal arises are very shortly as follows: There was a suit for partition. A preliminary decree was made. Appeals right up to a Letters Patent Appeal were taken against that preliminary decree but without success and the decree of the Court which made the preliminary decree for partition was confirmed. On the case going back to the Court of first instance for the passing of a final decree, an application was made by the plaintiff in which he asked to be allowed to abandon certain share to which he had been declared entitled subject to a charge. His case apparently was that he would not press for these shares because they were not worth the charge. He also asked that having regard to certain events which had happened whilst the appeals were pending, the shares of certain other persons had been acquired by him and he asked that his share on partition might be augmented accordingly. The Court of first instance went into these matters and granted the plaintif...
Bachchan Lal and ors. Vs. Banarsi Das
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-10-1913
Reported in: 18Ind.Cas.763
1. The appellants before us in this second appeal were plaintiffs in the Court of first instance. They sued the respondent for a sum of money together with costs. The sum of money, they claimed, was alleged to have arisen out of certain dealings in wheat between the parties. The sum which they sued for was Rs. 3,200. The lower Appellate Court went into the accounts and gave the appellants a decree for Rs. 3740-6 with proportionate costs. Against this decree, the appellants have brought the present appeal. In the memorandum of appeal, they have raised several pleas. One of these pleas, namely plea No. 6, has been abandoned, and the pleas urged before us really resolve themselves into two, the first being that the lower Appellate Court was wrong in debiting the appellants with the amount of a ruqqa dated the 7th of December 1903, inasmuch as the claim on that ruqqa was barred by limitation.2. The second point was that the account books produced by the respondent before the lower Appellat...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »