Allahabad Court March 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.
Hakim Muhammad Hamid Ali Khan Vs. Muhammad Asghar Ali Khan and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-05-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All22; 28Ind.Cas.825
1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiff-appellant to enforce a mortgage said to have been given by Hakim Vilayat Ali Khan, a large landed proprietor of Aonla, to one Nazir Ali in 1895. The deed of mortgage purports to have been executed on August 80th, 1895, on behalf of Hakim Vilayat Ali Khan by Daud Ali under a special power-of-attorney. The plaintiff-appellant claims to have purchased the mortgagee rights of Nazir Ali by a sale-deed dated January 24th, 1900. Hakim Vilayat Ali Khan and Nazir Ali are both dead. The claim was brought against eight persons, the first two of whom are legal representatives of Hakim Vilayat Ali Khan, the third is the purchaser under a private sale-deed of a portion of the mortgaged property, the fourth, fifth and sixth are auction-purchasers of another portion, and the last two are the legal representatives of Nazir Ali. One of the latter died during the pendency of the suit and his heirs wore brought en the record by an order dated Fe...
Shanker Singh Vs. Musammat Rekha and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-05-1915
Reported in: 28Ind.Cas.969
Piggot, J.1. This is an application in revision by a plaintiff whose suit for the recovery of certain money has been dismissed by the Judge of the Court of Small Causes at Bareilly. The suit was on the face of it one for the balance of money advanced in payment of goods to be delivered, falling under Article 57 of the first Schedule to the Indian Limitation Act IX of 1908. The learned Judge of the Court below rightly appreciated this point, but wont on to hold that, inasmuch as there was nothing in the plaint to show that any date was fixed for delivery of the goods, the date of payment must be taken to be the date for delivery of goods. The learned Judge was, in my opinion, palpably wrong. The circumstances of the transaction were such, according to the allegation in the plaint, that the date of the payment of the money could not possibly he the date for the delivery of the goods. The principles which should govern the decision of the Court when a question of this sort arises appear t...
The Rohilkhand and Kumaun Railway Co. Vs. Ismail Khan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-05-1915
Reported in: 29Ind.Cas.207
Piggott, J.1. This is an application in revision on the part of the Rohilkhand and Kumaun Railway Company, against whom the opposite party, who was the plaintiff in the Court below, has obtained a decree for a sum of Rs. 311 from the Court of Small Causes at Bareilly. The case has been brought before this Court, because the defendant Company desires to obtain an authoritative decision as to the respective rights and liabilities of the parties in respect of goods consigned under what is known as a risk note, form A. The essential facts are simple. The plaintiff was the consignee of eleven tins containing ghi which were made over to the defendant Company at Tanakpur Railway Station for delivery to the plaintiff at Bareilly. When the consignment was tendered, it appeared to the Railway Company that the goods were so defectively packed as to be liable, to damage, leakage or wastage in transit. Accordingly the sender was required to sign the risk note above referred to. This document is in ...
Ram Naresh Lal and ors. Vs. Sadhu Saran Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-04-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All39; 28Ind.Cas.585
1. This appeal arises out of a suit for possession. The claim seems an unjust one devoid of merit. The pedigree of the family will be found at page 11. The property which is in dispute belonged to one Manogilal. The plaintiffs are very distant reversioners being some seven degrees removed. Manogilal died in the year 1858 leaving a widow Musammat Dakho and a daughter Musammat Raji Kumvar. Raji Kunwar had a son Adit Prasad who left a widow Musammat Pranpat Kunwar who died in the year 1911. The present suit was instituted on the 27tli of September 1912. Dakho Kunwar died in the year 1880. Her grandson, Adit Prasad, died also in 1880. It is not quite certain whether he died before or after his grandmother. Raji Kunwar died according to the plaintiffs in 1905. According to the defendants she died about 14 years before the institution of the suit. The plaintiffs' claim is that upon the death of Manogilal the estate vested in his widow Musammat Dakho for the ordinary estate of a Hindu widow, ...
Naikram Vs. Jawala Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-04-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All216; 28Ind.Cas.680
Chamier, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the appellant for possession of some plots of land which were made over of the respondent under a document, dated April 14th, 1883, and described as an ijazat nama waste lagane bagh ke.''' It appears that there has been other litigation between the parties in the Revenue Court. The appellant sued for ejectment of the respondent on the ground that he had allowed a certain person to hold possession as shihmi for a longer period than is permitted by the Tenancy Act, The respondent pleaded (hat he was the proprietor of the land. That question was not decided, for the Court dismissed that suit 01; the ground that the so-called shilemi was merely a servant of the respondent. Next the appellant brought a suit for recovery of rent from the respondent. The Assistant Collector held that the respondent was a proprietor and not a tenant. The Collector on appeal confirmed the dismissal of the suit, on the ground that the relationship of land...
Mahabir Prosad Vs. Ram Tawakal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-04-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All64(1); 28Ind.Cas.838
Rafique, J.1. The two appeals Nos. 426 and 427 are connected and they arise out of two suits brought by the appellant, who is the lambardar of the village. He sued as lambardar for the recovery of the entire rent due for the year 1319 fasli and part of the year 1320 Fasli. One of the pleas in defence was that under Section 194 of Act II of 1901 the plaintiff; could not sue alone. This objection was allowed by the first Court and the claim was decreed to the extent of the plaintiff's share. On appea the learned District Judge affirmed the decree of the first Court. The lambardar has come up in second appeal to this Court and contends that he can sue alone with out joining the other co-sharers of the village. He relies on the full Bench case of Gulzari Mal v. Jai Ram 24 Ind. Cas. 178 : 12 A.L.J. 606 : 36 A. 441 The contention for the appellant must prevail in view of the case relied on by him. I, therefore, accept the appeal, set aside the decree of the lower Appellate Court and remand t...
Ram Ugrah Pande and ors. Vs. Achraj Nath Pande and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-01-1915
Reported in: 31Ind.Cas.899
1. This is an appeal arising out of an application made in the Court below, which was primarily based on Clause 17 of the Second Schedule of the Code of Civil Procedure. While the matter was pending, an application for amendment was made and an alternative relief was asked for under Clause 20 of the same Schedule. The lower Court has refused both the reliefs. The first relief which was claimed under Clause 17, it rejected on the ground that an award had been made by the arbitrator on the basis of the agreement between the parties and that Clause 17 could not apply, the matter having attained a stage beyond that contemplated by that clause. With regard to the relief claimed under Clause 20, it rejected it on the ground that the application was barred by time under Article 178 of the first Schedule to the Limitation Act. The applicants have come here on appeal. The parties are the descendants of one Prag Pande. The latter had five sons, one of whom died childless. All the others have now...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›