Allahabad Court July 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.
Abdul Hakim Khan and ors. Vs. Karan Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-15-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All404; 30Ind.Cas.951
1. The facts which have given rise to this appeal are as follows: Rahim Ali Khan, one of the defendants, respondents, was the owner of 7f biswas in village Dastara. On the 5th of December 1902 he executed a sale-deed in respect of six biswas out of the 7j biswas in lieu of Rs. 14,000 in favour of Abdul Hakim Khan and his three minor sons. Out of the consideration money the sum of Rs. 12,000 was left with the vendees for the discharge of two prior mortgages, namely, Rs. 6,000, were to be paid on account of a usufructuary mortgage to the credit of Har Bhajan Lal and others, mortgagees, and Rs. 2,924-5 were to be paid to one Lala Sant Lal for a simple mortgage. It was further agreed that any balance left over, after payment to the two prior mortgagees, will be repaid to the vendor; the payments to the two prior mortgagees were to be made at stated times which were mentioned in the sale-deed. The prior mortgagees were admittedly not paid on the date mentioned in the saler deed. On the 12th...
Bilas Kunwar Vs. Desraj Ranjit Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-13-1915
Reported in: (1915)ILR37All557
George Farwell, J.1. This is an appeal from a Judgment and decree, dated the 10th of May, 1910, of the High Court at Allahabad, which reversed a Judgment and decree, dated the 26th of August, 1908, of the Judge of the Small Cause Court of Allahabad exercising the powers of a Subordinate Judge.2. Rai Bisheshar Bakhsh Singh was a taluqdar of Oudh; he was a man of some wealth, a Rajput of good position; he had two Rajput wives but no son; he had, however, one daughter by one of the wives. He had also a Muhammadan mistress named Jagmag Bibi, by whom he had two sons, and for whom he had made provision on a fairly liberal scale, and had given full possession thereof in 1876 and in 1888. On the 9th of June, 1887, the taluqdar purchased for Rs. 9,000 the bungalow in dispute in this action; he raised the purchase money by a mortgage on his own property and paid for it, and had the sole use and enjoyment of it for himself and his wives during his own life, but the deed of sale was made out and r...
Emperor Vs. Brikhbhan Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-13-1915
Reported in: (1916)ILR39All14
Henry Richards, C.J. and Muhammad Rafiq, J.1. Eighteen accused persons were put on their trial on charges of rioting, dacoity, wrongful restraint, and obstructing the police in discharging their duty the learned Additional Sessions Judge acquitted the accused and Government have appealed. It appears that a dacoity had taken place at a place called Nagla Murli in the Agra district. Some ort of a conference had taken place at which the Deputy Inspector-General of Police was present. The persons attending this meeting appear to have been the Circle Inspectors of the Agra district and he surrounding districts. It was there decided that searches should take place at the houses of persons who were suspected of having been concerned in the dacoity. The result of this meeting was hat Chunni Singh, one of the Circle Inspectors of the Mainpuri District, sent Muhammad Nairn Khan, a Sub-Inspector of Jasrana (in the Mainpuri district), to Mahfuz Ali, one of the Circle Inspectors of the Agra distric...
Sheo Nandan Ahir Vs. Ram Lagan Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-13-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All398(2); 30Ind.Cas.908
Tudball, J.1. This is a defendant s appeal and arises out of the following circumstances. The property in dispute is an occupancy holding. The appellant Sheonandan and one other brought a s it against the plaintiff in the Revenue Court for arrears of rent. Sheonandan's case was that the holding had been mortgaged to certain mortgagees who had sub-let the land to Ram Lagan Singh, that the mortgage had been redeemed, that Ram Lagan Singh remained on as a sub-tenant and that he was liable for arrears of rent. Ram Lagan's case was that he was not a sub-tenant but that he held the land as a mortgagee in possession on an old mortgage of 1920 Sambat. The Revenue Court went into the matter, held that Ram Lagan had failed to establish any mortgage and gave Sheonandan a decree for arrears of rent. Then Sheonandan and his companion brought another suit in the Revenue Court to eject Ram Lagan Singh (and one other) as being a sub-tenant. The latter again put forward his plea that he held as a mortg...
Jhunni Lal and anr. Vs. the Bombay, Baroda and Central India Railway C ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-13-1915
Reported in: AIR1916All256; 35Ind.Cas.265
Chamier, J.1. This is an application for revision of a decree passed by the Court of Small Causes at Farrukhabad. The facts found are that on March 26, 1913, the plaintiffs delivered 75 bags of potatoes to the Bombay, Baroda and Central India Railway at Farrukhabad, to be carried to Hinganghat on the Great Indian Peninsula Railway and there delivered to the consignors or to their order. The bags were duly carried to Khandwa Junction, where they were put into an empty waggon belonging to the Great Indian Peninsula Railway. They should have been taken out of this waggon or the waggon taken off the train at the Wardha Junction. But this was not done and the bags were carried on to Nagpur where they remained unno iced by the Railway Authorities from April 8 to April 25. When the bags were discovered they were despatched from Nagpur and reached their destination at Hinganghat on April 28. On examination at. Hinganghat they were found by the Railway Authorities to be in a stinking condition....
Tulshi Ram Vs. Abrar Ahmad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-10-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All377; (1915)ILR37All654; 30Ind.Cas.1002
Tudball, J.1. The applicant has come to this Court on revision in the following circumstances: - There is a certain house which is in dispute between him and the opposite party and he applied to a Magistrate to take action under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. On the 5th of December, 1914, the Magistrate passed an order under Section 145 calling upon the parties concerned in the dispute to attend his Court and to put in written statements of their respective claims. The Magistrate proceeded to make his enquiry and he came to the conclusion that Tulshi Ram had been wrongfully dispossessed on the 25th of November, 1914, by the opposite party. He accordingly treated him as having been in possession on the date of his order of the 5th of December, 1914, acting under the first of the provisos of Clause 4 of Section 145. He thereupon pissed an order under Clause 6 of that section declaring Tulshi Ram to be entitled to possession of the house until evicted therefrom in due cour...
Kundan Lal Vs. Jagannath
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-09-1915
Reported in: (1915)ILR37All649
Henry Richards, C.J. and Rafiq, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit upon foot of a simple money bond, dated the 10th of September, 1910. The defendant pleaded payment. The court of first instance decreed the plaintiff's claim. The lower appellate court found that the defendant had made a payment by a cheque; that the plaintiff had not made any appropriation of the payment, and that accordingly the payment should be credited to the earliest debt then due by the defendant to the plaintiff which was the bond sued upon. The lower court says that the way the accounts were kept between the plaintiff and the defendant was that on the one side all advances made by the plaintiff to the defendant were, entered and on the other side all the payments that were made to the plaintiff by the defendant. He seems to have been prepared to hold that from the way the account was kept the plaintiff must be deemed to have from time to time appropriated the payments to the earliest debts. The case, however...
Karan Singh and anr. Vs. Abdul Hakim,
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-09-1915
Reported in: (1915)ILR37All646
Tudball and Rafiq, JJ.1. The facts which have given rise to this appeal are as follows: Rahim Ali Khan, one of the defendants respondents, was the owner of 7 1/2 biswas in village Dastra. On the 5th of December, 1902, he executed a sale-deed in respect of six biswas out of the 7 1/2 biswas in lieu of Rs. 14,000, in favour of Abdul Hakim Khan and his three minor sons. Out of the consideration the sum of Rs. 12,000 was left with the vendees for the discharge of two prior mortgages, namely, Rs. 6,000 were to be paid on account of a usufructuary mortgage to the credit of Har Bhajan Lal and others, mortgagees, and Rs. 2,924-5-0 were to be paid to one Lala Sant Lal for a simple mortgage. It was further agreed that any balance left over, after payment to the two prior mortgagees, would be repaid to the vendor; the payments to the two prior mortgagees were to be made at stated times which were mentioned in the sale-deed. The prior mortgagees were admittedly not paid on the date mentioned in th...
Kundan Lal Vs. Jagan Nath
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-09-1915
Reported in: 30Ind.Cas.92
1. This appeal arises out of a suit upon food of a simple money-bond, dated the 10th of September 1910. The defendant pleaded payment. The Court of first instance decreed the plaintiff's claim. The lower Appellate Court found that the defendant had made a payment by a cheque, that the plaintiff had not made any appropriation of the payment and that accordingly the payment should be credited to the earliest debt then due by the defendant to the plaintiff which was the bond sued upon. The lower Court says that the way the accounts were kept between the plaintiff and the defendant was that on the one side all advances made by the plaintiff to the defendant were entered and on the other side all the payments that were made to the plaintiff by the defendant. He seems to have been prepared to hold that from the way the account was kept, the plaintiff must be deemed to have from time to time appropriated the payments to the earliest debts. The case, however, was really decided on the assumpti...
Seth Chand Mal Vs. Sarju and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-08-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All428(2); 30Ind.Cas.70
Chamier, J.1. In this case the tenant of an occupancy holding executed a mortgage in favour of the defendants in September 1901, that is, after the passing of the present Tenancy Act. The mortgage was, therefore, invalid. The plaintiff, who is the zemindar, might have taken action under Section 31 of the Tenancy Act, but he did not do so. He accepted rent from the so-called mortgagees for several years and lie has now brought tin's suit to have them ejected from the holding. Meanwhile in 1011 the occupancy tenant relinquished his holding. According to the decisions of this Court the occupancy tenancy has come to an end. The defendants are certainly not occupancy tenants and it appears to me that, they cannot call themselves mortgagees, in the events which have happened, it appears to mo that the defendants are the tenants of the plaintiff and may be ejected by him. was referred to two cases supposed to hear more or less on the present case, namely, Ram Sarup v. Kishan Lal 4 A.L.J. 306 ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »