Allahabad Court February 1921 Judgments
Binda Pershad Vs. Ramchander and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-01-1921
Reported in: 60Ind.Cas.821
1. This is a plaintiff's appeal arising oat of a suit for damages. The plaintiff's case was that he and one Abdul Haq became partners in a brink kiln basinets in August 1913; that a deed of partnership was drawn up on the 16th of October 1913; that the plaintiff supplied Rs. 2.000 and Abdul Haq Rs. 300 worth of capital, and that the plaintiff not having the necessary technical knowledge, Abdul Haq ran the business, but the plaintiff discovering that Abdul Haq was heavily involved in debt decided to separate from him and on the 26th of March 1914 a deed of dissolution of partnership was drawn up under which the plaintiff paid to Abdul Haq Rs. 300 his share of the capital and Rs. 950 his share of some of the produce of the kiln, Apparently, this sum of Rs. 1,250 was distributed to certain creditors of Abdul Haq. Among the creditors were the respondents to the present appeal. Abdul Haq applied to the District Judge to be declared an insolvent and a Receiver was appointed to take possessio...
Tag this Judgment!Magan Lal Vs. Muhammad Zia-ud-dIn Certificated Guardian of Ajodhya Nat ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-01-1921
Reported in: 61Ind.Cas.804
1. This appeal relates solely to the question of costs. An application on behalf of a minor for Letters of Administration to the estate of his father was filed by his guardian, the Central Nazir of the District Judge's Court. Objections were taken by Magan Lai, the appellant before us, and after contest the application was granted on the 18th of May 1917, and the objections were dismissed with costs. Rupees 389 8-0 were allowed in the decree for costs, which included Rs. 370 as Pleader's fee, and this was charged against the other side, the objector Mangal Lal. An application was made to the lower Court by the objector, defendant-appellant, to amend the decree by expunging the sum of Rs. 370, Pleader's fee, on the ground that, under the rules framed by the High Court, it was inadmissible, inasmuch as the payment had been made not only after the first hearing but even after the decision of the case. The learned District Judge disallowed this application, hence this appeal. It is argued ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›