Allahabad Court March 1916 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.
Muni Lal and ors. Vs. Jagannath, Minor, Through Sumirta Kuar and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-07-1916
Reported in: AIR1916All338(2); 33Ind.Cas.735
1. This is an appeal from an order refusing to appoint a Receiver during the pendency of a suit. A question has been raised before us whether the appeal lies. We find there is clear authority of the Calcutta High Court in two reported cases, namely Boidya Nath Adya v. Makhan Lal Adya 17 C.680 and Khagendra Narain Singh v. Shashadhar Jha 31 C. 495, in support of the proposition that an appeal does Lie, and the wording of the Code seems wide enough to admit a right of appeal. We see no good reason for dissenting from the above decisions.2. As regards the merits of this appeal, we have heard both parties. We think that the appellants in this Court have failed to show sufficient cause for the appointment of a Receiver and such appointment might, under the circumstances of the case, be practically inconvenient for both parties. At the same time, we think that cause has been shown for some sort of an order restraining the defendants from dealing with the property in suit during the pendency ...
Balli Vs. Nand Lal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-06-1916
Reported in: AIR1916All349; 33Ind.Cas.773
Piggott, J.1. This is an appeal by a creditor in an insolvency matter. It appears that one Raghunath was declared insolvent by an order of the 16th of November 1912. The appellant Balli was one of his creditors. On a subsequent date, which was apparently sometime in the year 1915, Balli presented a petition to the District Judge in charge of the insolvent's estate, to the effect that Raghu Nath was carrying on a business at a certain shop, the stock-in-trade of which included a considerable quantity of gold and silver ornaments. He asked that this stock-in-trade might be seized for the benefit of the creditors. There was no Receiver appointed, so that the property of the insolvent had vested in the District Judge, and the latter proceeded through an officer of the Court to seize the stock indicated in Balli's petition. Thereupon one Nand Lal filed an objection, to the effect that the stock belonged to him and that Raghu Nath was carrying on the business of the shop as his salaried agen...
Radhe Shiam Vs. Chunni and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-04-1916
Reported in: AIR1917All483(1); 35Ind.Cas.192
1. We think the view taken by the Court below was correct, namely, that the document, not being executed in the manner prescribed by Section 59 of the Transfer of Property Act, did not operate as a mortgage. The appellant asks us to give him a personal decree. He has not asked for such a decree in his plaint. What lie asked for there is the ordinary relief whish is granted under Section 90 in the event of the mortgaged property not being sufficient. We are prepared, however, to treat the case as one in which we were asked to amend the plaint and had allowed the amendment on the terms that plaintiff should confine his claim to the principal sum of Rs. 165, and simple interest at 12 per cent, per annum. We accordingly allow the appeal to this extent that we grant the plaintiff a personal decree for Rs. 165, with simple interest at the rate of 12 per cent, per annum from the 9th of August 1905 up to the present time. Hereafter the rate of interest will be 6 per cent, per annum simple inte...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›