Allahabad Court June 1922 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.
Basdeo Ram Sarup Vs. Dilsukhrai Sewak Ram
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-05-1922
Reported in: AIR1922All461; 68Ind.Cas.783
1. Second Appeal No. 862 and Second Appeal No. 960 of 1921 are connected appeals arising oat of the same snit. The plaintiff's firm brought a suit to recover a Bum of Rs. 1,265-13-0 with interest, on the following allegations, Their case, devoid of all unnecessary details was that the plaintiffs, as agents of the Standard Oil Company, sold 900 tins of Karosine oil to the defendants the price of which was Rs. 3,982-13-0, that the defendants paid only a sum of Rs. 2,717 and that the balance of Rs. 1,265-13-0 was still due. The plaintiffs' claim to recover this amount with interest.2. On behalf of the defendants it was son-tended that the sum of Rs. 2,717 had been paid in full payment of the plaintiffs' claim and that having accepted that amount, the plaintiffs are no longer entitled to claim any balance. It was further pleaded that a sum of Rs. 500 had been paid by the defendants as advance money for the oil contract and should be deducted.3. The Court of first instance decreed the plain...
Kunj Behari Lal and anr. Vs. Abdul Hadi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-05-1922
Reported in: 77Ind.Cas.1032
1. These appeals arise out of two suits for profits Brought by two plaintiffs, Kunj Behari Lal and Baldeo Prasad. In both cases the defendant Abdul Hadi is the Lambardar.2. It appears from the evidence on record, and is also admitted by Counsel here that the two plaintiffs and the defendant joined together in purchasing the village in execution of a decree. They bought the property for a sum of Rs. 141. It seems that the proprietors were persons whose estate was very heavily encumbered and this probably accounts for the small sum which was paid for the purchase of the property.3. The plaintiffs came in to Court suing for their share of the profits for the years corresponding to 1916, 1917 and 1918. The defendant joined issue and the result of the trial in the First Court was that the plaintiffs were given decrees, the learned Assistant Collector assessing the sum which was due to them on the gross rental of the village.4. The reason why the Assistant Collector did this was that in his ...
Kaltan Singh Vs. Dharam Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-05-1922
Reported in: 68Ind.Cas.794
1. This is a defendant's appeal, arising out of a suit for a declaration that the order of the 14th of February 1920, disallowing the plaintiffs' object on to the attachment of the property in suit, was wrong and that the property, being the ancestral property of the family, was not liable to be attached and sold in execution of a decree, in suit No, 178 of 1918, passed against the plaintiffs' father. The Court of first instance dismissed the suit, but on appeal the learned District Judge has allowed the appeal and reversed the decree of the Court of first instance.2. It appears that on the 18th of February 1914 Chhidu Singh, defendant No. 2, who is the father of the plaintiffs, executed a mortgage-deed, in respect of the ancestral property, in favour of Kalyan Singh, the present defendant-appellant. On the 11th August 1917 a suit was instituted on behalf of the tons for a declaration that the said mortgage-deed was not binding on them, inasmuch as the debt had not been contracted for ...
Puttu Lal and ors. Vs. Daya Nand
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-05-1922
Reported in: AIR1922All499; 68Ind.Cas.786
1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by {he plaintiff-respondent for a declaration that the plaintiff' was entitled to act as the Sarbarahkar of a certain temple and of the property appertaining thereto and for possession of the said properly. The allegation of the plaintiff was that he had been appointed Sarbarahkar of the said property and temple by Ganga Prasad, the founder of the trust, by a deed executed by him and registered on the 27th February 1801. By virtue of that deed Ganga Prasad had dedicated certain properly for the benefit of the temple which he had constructed in his lifetime and appointed himself a trustee for his life and nominated the plaintiff as his successor in that office. By a subsequent document, executed by him on the 22nd May 1919, he appointed his nephews as trustees after him. These nephews are the defendants to the present suit. They succeeded in getting mutation of names effected on the death of Ganga Prasad in the revenue papers. The plaintiff co...
Amba Prasad Vs. Wahid-ullah and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-02-1922
Reported in: AIR1922All405; (1922)ILR44All708
Stuart and Kanhaiya Lal, JJ.1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiff (appellant) for the redemption of a two-thirds share of Katra Gulab Singh situated in Kashmiri Bazar, Agra. The Katra originally belonged to Dhumi Singh, who left three sons, Jwala Prasad, Bhawani Shankar and Debi Shankar. On the 28th of November, 1877, these three brothers mortgaged two stables and a house situated in Katra Gulab Singh in favour of Sukhdeo Rai. The mortgage was simple. On the 6th of March, 1878, the three brothers mortgaged the said Katra Gulab Singh with other properties with possession in favour of Sheikh Abdullah. On the 30th of May, 1878, two of them, Bhawani Shankar and Jwala Prasad, mortgaged their two-thirds share of Katra Gulab Singh in favour of Durga Prasad.2. On the 15th of August, 1879, Sukhdeo Rai sued on his mortgage of the 28th of November, 1877, without impleading Sheikh Abdullah or Durga Prasad, and obtained a decree for sale, in execution of which the mortgaged p...
Roshan Lal and ors. Vs. Lallu and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-02-1922
Reported in: AIR1922All443; (1922)ILR44All714; 68Ind.Cas.790
Stuart and Sulaiman, JJ.1. This is a plaintiffs' appeal arising out of a suit for foreclosure on the basis of a mortgage-deed, dated the 30th of August, 1907. It appears that the defendant held a simple money decree, in suit No. 192 of 1898, which was in execution. On the 30th of July, 1907, the property in dispute in this case was attached in execution of the simple money decree; while this attachment was subsisting, the judgment-debtor, on the 30th of August, 1907, executed the mortgage-deed which is the subject-matter of dispute in this appeal. On the 20th of August, 1908, the subsequent mortgagee seems to have made an application to the execution court, praying that his mortgage should be notified. An order of the 14th of November, 1908, passed by the execution court, shows that inasmuch as no objection was preferred, notification was ordered. The property was put up for sale on two Occasions, but those sales were set aside. On the 20th of August, 1909, the property was again put u...
Musammat Fahiman and ors. Vs. Kammu and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-02-1922
Reported in: (1922)ILR44All712
Stuart and Sulaiman, JJ.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for damages brought in the following circumstances: The plaintiffs, who alleged themselves to be successors in interest of a certain Badlu, claimed title to a house in Agra city. This house had been sold to the predecessors in interest of the defendants in 1884. The plaintiffs contested the validity of the transfer. A previous suit had been brought by the plaintiffs against the defendants to obtain an injunction to restrain them from pulling down his house. This suit was brought in the court of the Munsif of Agra. An appeal was filed in the court of the District Judge who, by his appellate decree, found in favour of the plaintiffs' title. The suit out of which this present appeal arises was filed subsequently by the plaintiffs on the allegation that the defendants had nevertheless pulled down the house. They therefore claimed for damages against them. This suit was filed in the court of the Subordinate Judge, Agra, the valuati...
Kammu and ors. Vs. Musammat Fahiman and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-02-1922
Reported in: AIR1922All445; 76Ind.Cas.932
1. This appeal arises out of a suit for damages brought in the following circumstances:--The plaintiffs, who alleged themselves to be successor-in-interest of a certain Badlu, claimed title to a house in Agra city. This house had been sold to the predecessors-in-interest of the defendants in 1884. The plaintiffs contested the validity of the transfer. A previous suit had been brought by the plaintiffs against the defendants to obtain an injunction to restrain them from pulling down this house. This suit was brought in the Court of the Munsif of Agra. An appeal was filed in the Court of the District Judge who, by his appellate decree, found in favour of the plaintiffs' title. The suit out of which this present appeal arises was filed subsequently by the plaintiffs on the allegation that the defendants had nevertheless pulled down the house. They, therefore, claimed for damages against them. This suit was filed in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, A;ra, the valuation being beyond the j...
Amba Prasad Vs. Wahid Ullah and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-02-1922
Reported in: 68Ind.Cas.261
1. This appeal arms oat of a suit brought by the plaintiff-appellant for the redemption of a two-thirds share of Katra Gulab Singh situated in Kashmiri Bazar, Agra, The Katra originally belonged to Dhami Singh who left three sons, Jawala Prasad, Bhawani Shankar and Debi Shunkar, On the 28th November 1877 these three brothers mortgaged two stables and a house situated in Katra Gulab Singh in favour of Sakhden Rai. The mortgage was simple. On the 6th March 1878 the three brother mortgage the said Katra Galab Singh with other properties with possession in favour of Sheikh Abdullah. On the 30th May 1878 two of them, Bhawani Shankar and Jawala Prasad, mortgaged their two-thirds share of Katra Gulab Singh in favour of Durga Prasad.2. On the 15th August 1879 Sakhdeo Rai sued on his mortgage of the 28th November 1877 without impleading Sheikh Abdullah or Durga Prasad and obtained a decree for sale, in execution of whish the mortgaged property, namely, two stables and a house in Katra Gulab Sin...
Sarju Prasad and ors. Vs. Gajadhar Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-02-1922
Reported in: AIR1922All497; 77Ind.Cas.527
Kanhaiya Lal, J.1. This appeal arises cut of a suit brought by the plaintiffs for a declaration that they were not bound by a decree obtained collusively by the, defendants, Gajadhar Lal and others, against Musammat Puna, the widow of Mangli, and that a sale held in execution of that decree did not effect anything more than the life-interest of the said lady.2. The 4th of August 1919 was fixed for the hearing of the suit. On that date a the defendant, Gajadhar Lal, applied for an adjournment on the ground that he had summoned his witnesses, but they had not been served. The Court in which the suit was pending granted the adjournment and fixed the 21st August 1919 for its hearing. On that date the plaintiffs were present and the evidence adduced by them was recorded. The contesting defendant, Gajadhar Lal, was not present. His Pleader stated that his client had not turned up till then, that the witnesses summoned by him were also not present; and that he did not know what had happened t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »