Allahabad Court March 1921 Judgments
Darbari Lal Vs. Gobind Ram and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-31-1921
Reported in: AIR1921All237; (1921)ILR43All558; 63Ind.Cas.524
Muhammad Rafiq and Stuart, JJ.1. In this case the plaintiff appellant, who was entitled to succeed to the estate of one Hoti Lal on the death of the widow of Hoti Lal, Musammat Mul Kunwar, sued for recovery of possession of a house sold by Hoti Lal's widow, Musammat Mul Kunwar, to the ancestors of the defendants on the 20th of January, 1889. The courts below have found that this house was purchased by Musammat Mul Kunwar in 1869, eleven years after the death of Hoti Lal. They found further that there was nothing on the evidence to establish that the house had been purchased with the funds of Hoti Lal's estate in the hands of his widow or to establish that the widow had shown any intention to make the house an accretion to her husband's estate. They found further that there was nothing to establish even that the house had been purchased with the proceeds of savings out of the estate. The above findings are findings of fact which cannot be traversed in second appeal. The only point that ...
Tag this Judgment!Firm Sitaram Nathmal Vs. Firm Sushil Chandra Das
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-31-1921
Reported in: 64Ind.Cas.706
1. This is an appeal from an order of the District Judge of Cawnpore directing an award to be filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act of 1899, In our opinion the appeal fails. Several objections were raised to the filing of the award at the hearing before the learned Judge. Some of them necessarily involved questions of fact which could only be satisfactorily determined upon hearing the evidence. There is reason to suppose that applications of this kind and similar applications, for example, to stay a suit under the Arbitration Act, which are dealt with in the District Court as what is known as miscellaneous matters, sometimes receive somewhat rough and ready treatment. We say this based upon our own experience. Sometimes almost insuperable difficulties are felt, both at the hearing and on the Bench in this Appellate Court, in grappling with the merits of a question upon which the record throws little or no light, or which necessitates a frantic struggle to extract from the recor...
Tag this Judgment!Nand Ram Vs. Shiam Sarup and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-30-1921
Reported in: (1921)ILR43All555
Muhammad Rafiq and Stuart, JJ.1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought on foot of a mortgage, dated the 25th of October, 1912, for the recovery of the mortgage money. It appears that Chheda Lal and Kanhaiya Lal executed a prior mortgage on the 10th of March, 1908, in favour of Bhagwan Das. That mortgage remained unpaid until the execution of the mortgage in suit on the 25th October, 1912, in favour of Nand Ram. Both the executants of the two mortgages, i.e., Chheda Lal and Kanhaiya Lal, were declared insolvents on the 6th of May, 1912, i.e., a few months before the execution of the mortgage in suit. On the 13th of November, 1917, the suit out of which this appeal has arisen, was instituted by Nand Ram for recovery of the money due on his mortgage-deed and Chheda Lal and the heirs of Kanhaiya Lal (the latter having died) were impleaded as defendants. The claim was resisted on several pleas; but the two chief pleas were that, the mortgage in suit having been given after the order of a...
Tag this Judgment!Sushil Chandra Das and Co. Vs. Sita Ram Nath Mal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-30-1921
Reported in: (1921)ILR43All553
Walsh and Ryves, JJ.1. The question raised in this appeal is something more than academic, because the learned Judge, although granting a stay, has clearly indicated by his judgment that he retains seisin and control over the suit, and it is impossible not to read his order of stay as being no more than a temporary stay, namely, an adjournment of the suit for further orders of some kind. The appellant has come here and objects that this order is wrong in substance and in form, and that the learned Judge ought to have stayed the action absolutely under Section 19 of the Arbitration Act, inasmuch as the parties had referred their disputes to arbitration. We agree with that view. We agree further with the court below, firstly, that either party interested in getting this matter disposed of by arbitration, should move the District Judge under Section 8(f) of the Arbitration Act to appoint an umpire. The learned Judge rather suggeses by the language which he used, that he was ordering the d...
Tag this Judgment!Harbans Nath Tewari and ors. Vs. Achraj Nath and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-30-1921
Reported in: 65Ind.Cas.16
Walsh, J.1. This is an appeal raising a question which also governs Appeals Nos. 113 and 114, Nice questions are raised by the appeal, but we do not think it necessary to express any opinion about them, it is one of those cases where possibly not entirely owing to the feelings of the parties themselves, the parties have been engaged for some years' in a technical quarrel during which the real substance between them has been lost sight of and, we propose, as far as in us lies, to make an end of this technical dispute and to endeavour to make an order which will eventually dispose of the litigation and decide the rights of the parties finally. The present application was brought before the Subordinate Judge on the 11th of July 1919. The whole matter arose out of a decree on three mortgage-bonds. On a petition to the High Court by one of the transferees of the judgment-debtors, the High Court held that one sale was objectionable and that each properly separately mortgaged ought to have be...
Tag this Judgment!Shiam Sarup and anr. Vs. Nand Ram
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-30-1921
Reported in: AIR1921All232; 63Ind.Cas.366
1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought on foot of a mortgage, dated the 25th October 1912, for the recovery of the mortgage-money. It appears that Chheda Lal and Kanhaiya Lal had executed a prior mortgage on the 10th of March 1908 in favour of Bhagwan Das. That mortgage remained unpaid until the execution of the mortgage in suit on the 25th October 1912 in favour of Nand Ram. Both the executants of the two mortgages, i.e., Chheda Lal and Kanhaiya Lal, were declared insolvents on the 6th of May 1912, i.e., a few months before the execution of the mortgage in suit. On the 13th November 1917 the suit out of which this appeal has arisen was instituted by Nand Ram for recovery of the money due on his mortgage deed and Chheda La land the heirs of Kanhaiya Lal (the latter having died) were impleaded as defendants, The claim was resisted on several pleas, but the two chief pleas were that the mortgage in suit having been given after the order of adjudication had been passed under the Prov...
Tag this Judgment!Firm Sita-ram-nathmal Vs. Sushil Chandra Das and Co.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-30-1921
Reported in: AIR1921All219; 63Ind.Cas.813
1. The question raised in this appeal is something more than coademis, because the learned Judge, although granting a stay, has dearly indicated by his judgment that he retains seisin and control over the suit, and it is impossible not to read his order of stay as being no more than a temporary stay, namely, an adjournment of the suit for further orders of some kind. The appellant has come here and objects that this order is wrong in substance and in form, and that the learned Judge ought to have stayed the action absolutely under Section 19 of the Arbitration Act inasmuch as the parties had referred their disputes to arbitration. We agree with that view. We agree further with the Court below, firstly, that either party interested in getting this matter disposed of by arbitration, should move the District Judge under Section 8(f) of the Arbitration Act to appoint an Umpire. The learned Judge rather suggests, by the language which he used, that he was ordering the defendant forthwith to...
Tag this Judgment!Mathura Prasad Vs. Jamil-un-nissa Bibi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-29-1921
Reported in: (1921)ILR43All550
Walsh and Ryves, JJ.1. This is an execution appeal arising out of execution proceedings on a mortgage decree passed as long ago as the 30th of August, 1910. The suit was for sale on a mortgage, and a preliminary decree on that date directed that a sum of Rs. 8,712 representing the amount then due for principal, interest and costs was to be paid on or before the 28th of February, 1912. In default of payment it was directed that the property would be sold. The preliminary decree directed that after that date, namely, the 30th of August, 1910, interest would run at 6 per cent., per annum up to the date of realization. The final decree for sale of the property was made on the 1st of February, 1913, and the amount then due was declared to be Rs. 9,973-2-0. The decree was against two brothers Shah Junaid Alam and Shah Badre Alam. Shah Junaid Alam died and his heirs were brought on the record. One of them, his daughter, is the appellant before us. The first application for execution was made ...
Tag this Judgment!Musammat Jamilunnissa Bibi Vs. B. Mathura Parshad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-29-1921
Reported in: AIR1921All208; 63Ind.Cas.362
1. This is an, execution appeal arising out of execution proceedings on a mortgage decree passed as long ago as the 30th of August 1910. The suit was for sale on a mortgage and a preliminary decree on that date directed that a sum of Rs. 8,712, representing the amount then due for principal, interest and costs, was to be paid on or before the 28th of February 1912. In default of payment it was directed that the property would be sold. The preliminary decree directed that after that date, namely, the 30th of August 1910, interest would run at Rs. 6 per cent, per annum up to the date of realization. The final decree or sale of the property was made on the 1st of February 1913 and the amount then due was declared to be Rs. 9,973-2-0. The decree was against two brothers, Shah Junaid Alam and Shah Badre Alam. Shah Junaid Alam died and his heirs were brought on the record. One of them, hid daughter, is the appellant before us. The first application for execution was made on the 18th of Marsh...
Tag this Judgment!Mr. J.N. Cocolas Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-29-1921
Reported in: AIR1921All229; 61Ind.Cas.225
Rafique, J.1. This is an application in revision from the conviction of the applicant under Section 41(a) of the Indian Factories Act (XII of 1911), sentencing: the applicant to pay Rs, 10, The facts which gave rise to the precaution of the applicant are as follows: The applicant is the proprietor of a factory known as Juggi Lil Kimalpat Ginning and Pressing Mills in cancer, Of the 10th of July 1920 the Inspector of Factories issued a Circular letter to the factories in the Province in the following words:Sir, I have the honour to ask you to please note that no permission can be given this season to any cotton Ginning & Pressing Factory in which women are employed to work more than 11 hours a day.2. On the 13th November 1920 the applicant started night work on his Ginning and Cotton Pressing Factory. On the 16th November 1920 ha wrote a letter to the lnspector of Factories to the following effectSir, We have the honour to inform you that Messrs, Juggi Lal Kamalpat's Ginning and Pressin...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »