Allahabad Court January 1921 Judgments
Sarju Prasad Vs. Ram Sarup
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-24-1921
Reported in: AIR1921All34; 60Ind.Cas.755
Tudball, J.1. This is an application in revision. The facts are these: Two persons, Ram Sarup and Manni Lal, were partners in a shop, A debt was due to the shop from the present applicant, Sarju Prasad, The two partners brought a suit against him and against another person. The applicant admitted the justice of the claim but the case had to continue as against the other defendant. It was finally withdrawn as against the latter and a decree .was passed in favour of Ram Sarup and Manni Lal on the 17th of July 1917. Ram Sarup has now put the decree into execution as a surviving partner of the firm. An objection was taken by the judgment debtor that the other partner of Manni Lai bad actually died on the 7th of July 1917, that is, prior to the date of the decree and, therefore, the decree could not be executed. The Court below did not go into the question of fact as to whether Manni Lal did or did not die prior to the 17th of July 1917. It has held that, assuming that he did die on the 7th...
Tag this Judgment!Jeoni Vs. Kallu and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-23-1921
Reported in: (1921)ILR43All448
Ryves and Gokul Prasad, JJ.1. This appeal arises out of the following circumstances. A Nawab gave a lease of a certain Mahal to two persons, the present plaintiff Musammat Jeoni, and one Mubarak Ali. Mubarak Ali died some time ago leaving as ii and a widow Musaumnt Januat. The sou has since died and the widow Jannatis alive. The plaintiff as a lessee brought a suit for recovery of the rent for certain years from Kallu a tenant. The defence pleaded by Kallu was that he had all along paid the rent to Mubarak Ali during his life time and since his death Musammat Jannat has been collecting rent from the defendant. Up to this duty this defendant has had no concern with Musamtnat Jeoni. It will appear from the statement of defence above referred to that the defendant nowhere pleaded that he had paid the rent in good faith to Musammab Jannat. The learned Assistant Collector dismissed the suit and the dismissal has been confirmed by the lower appellate court. After he had filed his defence the...
Tag this Judgment!Sat NaraIn Singh and ors. Vs. Kayastha Trading and Banking Corporation ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-22-1921
Reported in: (1921)ILR43All433
Piggott, J.1. The appellant in this case is the Official Liquidator of a Company known as the Kayastha Trading and Banking Corporation, Limited. This Company was brought into liquidation on a winding up application presented to this Court by a creditor on the 26th of February, 1920, and the winding up order was made on the 29bh of May, 1920. Long previouly to this the immovable property belonging to the Company with which we are concerned in this appeal had been attached at the instance of certain creditors. During the year 1919 the property was repeatedly proclaimed and put up for sale. For reasons with which we are not now concerned the Court had seen fit to fix a reserve price of Rs. 30,000, and at one sale after another no one came forward prepared to bid this price. The judgment-debtor, that is to say, the Company, had in the meantime more than once represented to the Court that there was a reasonable prospect of their being able to dispose of the property to greater advantage by ...
Tag this Judgment!The Official Liquidator of the Kayasth Trading and Banking Corporation ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-22-1921
Reported in: 60Ind.Cas.763
Piggott, J.1. The appellant in this Case is the Official Liquidator of a Company known as the Kayasth Trading and Banking Corporation Ltd. This Company was brought into licudation on a winding-up application presented to this Court by a rector on the 26th of February 1920 and long previously was made on the 29fch of May 1920. Long previously to this, the immoveable property belonging to the Company with which we are concerned in this appeal had been attached at the instance of certain creditors. Daring the year 1919 the property was repeatedly proclaimed and put up for sale. For reasons with which we are not now concerned the Court had seen fit to fix a reserve, price of Rs. 30,000 and at one sale after another no one came forward prepared to bid this price The judgment-debtor, that is to say, the Company, had, and the meantime, more than once represented to the Court that there was a reasonable prospect of their being able to dispose of the property to greater advantage by, private tr...
Tag this Judgment!Bhagwan Das and Company Vs. Chuttan Lal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-21-1921
Reported in: AIR1921All41; (1921)ILR43All427
Piggott and Walsh, JJ.1. This is BD appeal from an order of the District Judge, sitting in insolvency, declaring invalid a transaction by which the insolvent transferred to one Bhagwan Das, a b inker, his interest in a payment warrant due to the insolvent from the Divisional Disbursing Officer, for the month of June, in respect of the transport services rendered by motor cars by the insolvent. The transaction has been declared invalid as a fraudulent preference under Section 54 of the Provincial Insolvency Act. The only point decided by the District Judge was whether a new creditor, who only became a creditor in respect of the transaction which gave rise to the question as to whether it was a fraudulent preference, can be a creditor within the meaning of Section 54. We agree with the District Judge that he could be a creditor within the meaning of that section, as for example, where a transaction consists of two independent parts, firstly, the consideration passing to the debtor, there...
Tag this Judgment!Saiyid Ahmad Beg and anr. Vs. Dharmun Rai and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-21-1921
Reported in: AIR1921All71; (1921)ILR43All424
Ryves and Gokul Prasad, JJ.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiffs in a suit for redemption. The facts are not at all complicated and are, shortly, these: The predecessors in title of the plaintiffs made a usufructuary mortgage of certain property on the 15th of July, 1882. On the 22nd of June, 1910, the last date of Jeth, the plaintiffs deposited in court the requisite amount of the mortgage money for payment to the mortgagees defendants. That being the last date of Jeth, as stated above, notice could not be served on the mortgagees within the month of Jeth. The mortgagees did not appear and those proceedings fell through. The money, however, remained in court all along. The plaintiffs mortgagors brought a suit, in the year 1915 for redemption of the mortgage and they claim damages for the last three years preceding the institution of the present suit. The defendants contended, inter alia, that the amount of the tender in the proceedings under Section 83 of the Transfer of Property Act...
Tag this Judgment!Messrs. Bhagwan Dass and Co. Vs. Chuttan Lal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-21-1921
Reported in: 62Ind.Cas.732
1. This is an appeal from an order of the District Judge, sitting in insolvency, declaring invalid a transaction by which the insolvent transferred to one Bhagwan Das, a banker, his interest in a payment warrant due to the insolvent from the Divisional Distributing Officer for the month of June in respect of the transport services rendered by motor ears by the insolvent. The transaction has been declared invalid as a fraudulent preference under Section 54 of the Provincial Insolvency Act. The only point decided by the District Judge was whether a new creditor, who only became a creditor in respect of the transaction which gave rise to the question as to whether it was a fraudulent preference, can be a creditor within the meaning of Section 54. We agree with the District Judge that he could be a creditor within the meaning of that section, as for example, where a transaction consists of two independent parts, firstly, the consideration passing to the debtor, thereby creating a debt from...
Tag this Judgment!Mirza Syed Ahmad Beg and anr. Vs. Dharmun Rai and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-21-1921
Reported in: 60Ind.Cas.760
1. This is an appeal by the plaintiffs in a suit for redemption. The fasts are not at all complicated and are shortly these: The predecessors in title of the plaintiffs made a utufrustuary mortgage of certain property on the 15th of July 1862. On the 22nd of June 1910, the last date of thah, the plaintiffs deposited in Court the requisite amount of the mortgage-money for payment lo the mortgagees-defendants that being the last date of Jeth as slated above, notice could not served on the mortgagees within the month of Jeth. Tie mortgagees did net appear aid those proceedings fell through. Tie money, but, remained in Court all along. The plaintiffs mortgagers brought a suit in the dear 1915 for redemption of the morfgage act they claim damages for the last three years preceding the institution of the present suit. The defendants contended inter claim that the amount of the tender in the proceedings under sec 83 of the Transfer of Property Act was not enough and they further contended tha...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Ghulam and anr. Vs. Musammat Menda
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-21-1921
Reported in: AIR1921All52(1); 60Ind.Cas.869
1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought for the compulsory registration-of a sale-deed which was said to be executed by one Harjas on the 2nd of January 1916. The first Court decreed the suit. On appeal however, the learned District Judge held that Harjas did not execute the sale-deed of his own free-will and he allowed the appeal and dismissed the suit. There was no dear finding in his judgment as to whether, as a matter of fact, Harjas had or had not executed the sale deed. We referred this issue to the Court below and the finding has been returned to the effect that Harjas did execute the sale deed. No objection has been taken to this finding. It seems to us that all that the Civil Court has to consider is the genuineness and not the validity of the deed. See Kanhaya Lal v. Sardar Singh 29 A. 284 : 4 A.L.J. 171 A.W.N (1907) : 46. In this view of the case, we allow the appeal and, setting aside the degree of the lower Appellate Court, restore that of the Court of first instance w...
Tag this Judgment!Radah Madho Lalji Vs. Ram Sewak and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-18-1921
Reported in: (1921)ILR43All422
Tudball and Muhammad Rafiq, JJ.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for rent and the dispute before us relates to what is known in the case as gaon kharoh. The parties to this appeal are the zimindar and certain agricultural tenants. The plaintiff, who is the appellant before us, brought a suit in the Revenue Court seeking to recover arrears of rent from the defendants on account of their holdings of cultivatory land. In his statement of account the plaintiff put down the rent of the land at a certain figure and added to that amount another figure under the head of village expenses, which is sometimes calculated at the rate of three pies and sometimes at the rate of four pies a rupee on the rental of the laud. There was also a claim for acreage cess with which we are not concerned in this appeal. The court of first instance gave the plaintiff a decree for rent and also for the gaon kharch. On appeal, the learned District Judge has held that it has not been established before him that th...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »