Allahabad Court July 1918 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.
Chiranji Lal and anr. Vs. Behari Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-25-1918
Reported in: AIR1918All245; 48Ind.Cas.124
1. This is an application for leave to appeal to his Majesty in Council. It appears that the Court below decided partly in favour of the plaintiff and partly against. Both parties appealed. In so far as the Court below decided in favour of the plaintiff, this Court set aside the decree of the Court of first instance and dismissed the plaintiff's suit. There has been an application Jo this Court for leave to appeal against this decree of the High Court and by our order this day delivered we have given the usual certificate. The present application is for leave to His Majesty in Council against the decree of this Court which affirmed the decision of the Court below and dismissed the plaintiff's suit. It has been argued that inasmuch as both the appeals arose out of the same suit and that thin Court did not affirm in its entirety the decree of the Court of first instance, leave should be granted to appeal to His Majesty. It seems to us that inasmuch as the decree, which it is sought to ap...
Pule Bishunath Rai Vs. Bramhanand Swami
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-24-1918
Reported in: AIR1918All208; 47Ind.Cas.830
1. This application in revision arises under the following circumstances. A suit was brought to realise the amount of a mortgage. It appears that the plaintiff had made a sub-mortgage. The Court decreed the plaintiff's, claim. Reading the judgment it is absolutely clear that the Court intended that the property should be sold for the amount of the plaintiff's mortgage, interest and costs but finding that the plaintiff had made a sub mortgage it directed that the sub-mortgagee should get the amount of her mortgage out of the proceeds of the sale before the plaintiff was paid. There seems to be very little doubt that the decree as drawn up directed the property to be sold not only for the amount of the plaintiff's mortgage but also for the amount of the submortgage, that is to say, the defendant and the defendant's . property . was being made liable not only for the mortgage which the defendant had made but also the sub-mortgage which the plaintiff had made. Nothing could possibly be mor...
Muhammad Abdul Rashid Ali Khan Vs. Budh Sen and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-24-1918
Reported in: AIR1918All367; 47Ind.Cas.885
1. The facts connected with this appeal are as follows:--There had been a mortgage decree. The property was advertised and put up to sale in the usual way and actually sold. After the sale one of the decree-holders purchased it (in all probability on behalf of himself and the other decree-holder). It appears that there had been some attempt at a compromise before the sale actually took place, which fell through. It is alleged that the property was sold considerably below its value, because possible bidders were kept away thinking that the matter had been compromised between the parties. That something of this kind occurred is strongly corroborated by the fact that when an application to set aside the sale was made, the Pleader for both decree-holders signed the petition in taken of the agreement of the decree-holders that the sale should be set aside. The learned Judge has not disputed the matters that we have mentioned in his judgment. On the contrary his judgment simply says that the...
Chunni Lal Birj Lal Vs. Makhan Lal Parsotam Das
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-23-1918
Reported in: (1919)ILR61All42
Abdul Raoof, J.1. A preliminary objection is raised on behalf of the opposite party to the hearing of this application. The facts of the case are these:The plaintiff brought a suit in the Court of Small Causes at Agra, claiming compensation for an alleged breach of contract by the defendant. The suit was contested by the defendant on two grounds, namely, (1) that the suit was not cognizable by the Small Cause Court at Agra as the alleged breach of contract had taken place at Allahabad, and (2) that there was no breach on the part of the defendant and that the suit was not maintainable against him. As regards the first point the learned Judge of the court below took evidence and came to the conclusion that the suit was rightly instituted in the Court of Small Causes at Agra. It appears that the parties had requested the court to decide the first point at that stage before taking up the question raised on the second plea in defence. The defendant has filed this application for revision a...
Makhan Lal Parsottam Das Vs. Chunni Lal Brij Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-23-1918
Reported in: AIR1918All11; 47Ind.Cas.610
Abdul Raoof, J.1. A preliminary objection is raised on behalf of the opposite party to the hearing of this application. The facts of the case are these:--The plaintiff brought a suit in the Court of Small Causes at Agra, claiming compensation for an alleged breach of contract by the defendant. The suit was contested by the defendant on two grounds, namely, (1) that the suit was not cognizable by the Small Cause Court at Agra as the alleged breach of contract had taken place at Allahabad; (2) that there was no breach on the part of the defendant and that the suit was not maintainable against him. As regards the first point the learned Judge of the Court below took evidence and came to the conclusion that the suit was rightly instituted in the Court of Small Causes at Agra. It appears that the parties had requested th6 Court to decide the first point; at that stage before taking up the question raised on the second plea in defence. The defendant has filed this application for revision ag...
Chet Ram and anr. Vs. Nanhe Mal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-20-1918
Reported in: (1919)ILR61All40
Henry Richards, Kt., C.J. and Tudball, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit instituted on foot of a hundi. It appears that the appellant Nanhe Mal sent certain potatoes to Hari Kishore a firm in Calcutta. Nanha Mal drew a bill payable at sight on Hari Kishore at Calcutta, The bill was in favour of Mathura Dass Mohan Lal, who sold it the very same day to the plaintiffs, that is, on the 2nd of April, 1913. The plaintiffs sent the hundi in an unregistered letter to their agent at Cawnpore. The letter and the bill appears to have miscarried in the post; but owing to the carelessness of the plaintiffs the loss was not discovered for nearly fourteen months afterwards, Some negotiations proceeded between the plaintiffs and Nanhe Mal with a view to getting a duplicate. Exactly what form those negotiations took is not clear, but it would seem that if the plaintiffs had given satisfactory evidence of the loss and had offered an indemnity to Nanhe Mal, the latter might have been compelled by pro...
Nanhey Mal Vs. Chait Ram and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-20-1918
Reported in: AIR1918All20; 48Ind.Cas.364
1. This appeal arises put of a suit instituted on foot of a hundi. It appears that the appellant Nanhey Mal sent certain potatoes to Hari Kishore, a firm in Calcutta. Nanhey Mal drew a bill payable at sight on Hari Kishore at Calcutta. The bill was in favour of Mathra Das Mohan Lal, who sold it the very same day to the plaintiffs, that is, on the 2nd of April 1913. The plaintiffs sent the hundi in an unregistered letter to their agent at Cawnpur, The letter and the bill appear to have miscarried in the post, but owing to the carelessness of the plaintiffs the loss was not discovered for nearly fourteen months afterwards. Some negotiations proceeded between the plaintiffs and Nanhey Mal with a view to getting a duplicate. Exactly what form those negotiations took is not clear, but it would seem that if the plaintiffs had given satisfactory evidence of the loss and had offered an indemnity to Nanhey Mal, the latter might have been compelled by proper proceedings to give a duplicate. No s...
Ramzan Vs. Bhukhal Rai and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-19-1918
Reported in: AIR1918All226(1); 47Ind.Cas.852
1. In this case it appears that the plaintiff purported to make a usufructuary mortgage of an occupancy tenancy, which was illegal having regard to the provisions of Section 20 of the Agra Tenancy Act. The present suit was instituted by the plaintiff in effect to redeem the property. The Court of first instance decreed the claim. The lower Appellate Court reversed the decree of the Court of first instance and dismissed the plaintiff's suit upon the ground that the mortgage was null and void. It seems to us that this decision is wholly wrong and inequitable. It might be that if the plaintiff came into Court and asked to get back his property without payment of the mortgage money at all on the ground of the illegality of the transaction, that the Court would put him upon terms of paying the mortgage money. Even this view is not universally taken, for one learned Judge at least has held that in such a case the owner of the occupancy tenancy could get back the property without paying the m...
Surajbali Singh and ors. Vs. Mohammad Nasir and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-17-1918
Reported in: AIR1918All227; 48Ind.Cas.220
1. This appeal arises out of a suit for pre-emption. The plaintiff alleges that a custom of pre-emption prevailed and adduced in evidence an extract from the wajib-ul-arz of 1872. This is the only evidence adduced on behalf of the plaintiff of the existence of the custom. One has only to peruse the entry to come to the conclusion that it was almost impossible that this could have been a record of a custom. It provides amongst other things that as soon as a stranger has bought or mortgaged the property, the co-sharers in a certain order are entitled to take the property in the case of a sale at sixteen years' purchase and in the case of a mortgage at eight. It further goes on to record a right of a person to redeem a mortgage in which he has no interest whatever. As against this piece of evidence (if it can be so called), the defendant vendee adduced a decree of the year 1878. In that litigation the plaintiff, who now seeks pre-emption, had purchased a share in the village as a stranger...
Anchal Vs. Dalip Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-16-1918
Reported in: AIR1918All428; 47Ind.Cas.400
1. This appeal arises out of a suit for pre-emption. The plaintiff was, a co-sharer as also were the vendees, hut the plaintiff was own brother of the vendor whilst the vendees were distant connections. The vendees pleaded various defences. They denied the custom; They -denied the plaintiff's preferential right and alleged that the sale was made with the consent and knowledge of the plaintiff The Court of first instance held the custom of pre emption prevailed and that the plaintiff had a preferential right, and it held against the defendants on the issue of the acquiescence. The lower Appellate Court held that the entry in the wajib-ul-arz was insufficient to establish the existence of the custom and, that the weight to be attached to the record was greatly diminished by the fact that a number of other matters were recorded, which could not possibly be customs, in the very same clause.2. The plaintiff has appealed. We may mention here that the lower Appellate Court has not dealt with ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »