Allahabad Court February 1915 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.
Khushhaliram Vs. Bholar Mal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-05-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All81(1); 28Ind.Cas.573
1. This is an appeal from an order passed by the Additional Judge of Meerut in tin insolvency proceeding. One Mutsaddi Lal applied to be adjudicated an insolvent, on the 10th of March 1914. His application was opposed by one of his creditors, named Khushhali Ram, on various grounds, but he was so adjudicated by an order of the same date. On April 6th, 1914, Khushhali Ram, who was a creditor shown on the insolvent's schedule, presented an application to the Court, the rejection of which has led to the present appeal. The application was badly drafted, it referred to no definite section of the Provincial Insolvency Act and it alluded in a confused manner to two separate transactions, with one of which we are not now concerned. In substance, however, the application was one which deserved more consideration at the hands of the Additional Judge than it has received. The allegation was that a mortgage deed executed by the insolvent on the 26th of November 1913 in favour of one Bholar Mal, f...
Afzal Shah Vs. Muhammad Abdul Karim Khan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-05-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All256; 29Ind.Cas.633
1. This is an appeal against an order of the Additional Subordinate Judge of Aligarh, setting aside a decree passed by the Munsif of Bulandshahr and remanding the suit to the Munsif's Court to be disposed of according to law. The Munsif had held that the suit was not cognizable by a Civil Court and had on that ground dismissed it. The plaintiff appealed to the District Judge who transferred the appeal to the first Additional Subordinate Judge for disposal. The latter officer was of opinion that the suit had been rightly instituted in the Civil Court and remanded the case to the Munsif for trial on the merits. In appeal to this Court it is contended that the suit was not cognizable by the Civil Court and that the Subordinate Judge had no power to make the order of remand. It is conceded thai if the order of remand had been made by the District Judge the case would have been covered by Section 197 of the Tenancy Act and no objection could have been taken to the order; but it, is contende...
Sukhdevi Kunwar Vs. Har Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-02-1915
Reported in: (1915)ILR37All241
Tudball and Rafiq, JJ.1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit for possession brought by the widow of the defendant's deceased brother, Ganga Prasad, for recovery of her husband's separate estate plus mesne profits. The court below decreed the claim. The following genealogical tree will assist the understanding of the case. It is not a complete tree of the whole family of Rai Chote Lal, but is sufficient for the case. RAI CHOTE LAL | ________________________________________________________ | | Rashk Lal. Manohar Lal. | | __________________ ______________________ | | | | Baldeo Prasad. Shiam Sundar. Lachmi Narain. | | | __________________ Anand Behari Lal Sons etc. | | | Ram Charan Lal Kali Charan | | ___________________________________________________________ | | | | Gur Prasad Har Prasad Ganga Prasad= Gur Prasad= (adopted). (defendant). Mt. Sukhdei (plaintiff). Hans | Mukhi. Mt. Dal Mukhi _________________ | | Mt. Jaggo. Mt. Rupo.2. Ram Charan Lal adopted Gur Prasad, the...
Har Prasad Vs. Sukhdevi Kunwar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-02-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All180; 28Ind.Cas.561
1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit for possession brought by the widow of the defendant's deceased brother, Ganga pershad, for recovery of her husband's separate estates, plus mesne profits. The Court below decreed the claim. The following genealogical tree will assist the understanding of the case, it is not a complete tree of the whole family of Rai Chote Lal, but is sufficient for the case: RAI CHOTE LAL. | |---------------------------------------| Rashk Lal Manohar Lal, | | Baldeo pershad, |--------------------| | Shiam Sunder, Lachmi |---------------------| | Narahi, Ram Kali Anand | Charan Lal Charan, Behari Sons, etc. | Lal, Gur Pershad, | (adopted). | |----------------------|-------------------------| Har pershad Ganga Pershad Gur Pershad (defendant). =Musammat =Hans Mukhia. Sukhdevi | (plaintiff). | | | Musammat | Bal Mukhi. | |-----------------| |--------------|-----------------| Musammat Jaggo. Musammat Rupo.2. Ramcharan Lal adopted Gur Pershad the son of ...
Najm-un-nissa Bibi Vs. Amina Bibi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-01-1915
Reported in: AIR1916All253(1); (1915)ILR37All233
Tudball and Rafiq, JJ.1. This and the connected appeal, No. 436 of 1912, arise out of one suit, being cross-appeals from the same decree. The main facts are not in dispute and are as follows:Sheikh Minnatullah died, leaving as his heirs, his widow, the present plaintiff, and his father, Khadim Husain. Under Muhammadan Law, the widow inherited a one-fourth share in his estate and the other three fourths went to the father. The latter died subsequently, leaving the present six defendants as his heirs.2. Under a mortgage-deed, dated the 14th of February, 1891, Nasratullah and Musammat Karamat Bibi borrowed Rs. 7,296 from Minnatullah. After the death of Khadim Husain, the first defendant, Musammat Amina Bibi, his widow, obtained a succession certificate in regard to this debt due from the mortgagor. Then she and the remaining defendants jointly sued to recover the mortgage-debt, impleading the present plaintiff as a pro forma defendant admitting that she was entitled to a one-fourth share ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›