Allahabad Court April 1924 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.
Gulzari Lal Vs. Har Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-03-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All97; 85Ind.Cas.99
Daniels, J.1. Gulzari Lal the plaintiff-appellant in these two appeals, is the mortgagee of one fourth share in two groves. The mortgage was executed in the year 1916 by Bhola Chamar. The mortgaged share has now passed into the possession of the Zamindar by a sale executed by Bhola's widow, Mfc. Umrai, in the year 1920. The plaintiff sues for recovery of his mortgage money by sale, if necessary, of the mortgaged share, against Mt. Umrai and the legal representatives of the Zamindar Bhawani Prasad who is now dead. The suit was resisted by the latter set of defendants. They are the respondents to these appeals. The real question in the appeals is whether it was competent to Bhola to mortgage his share in the groves. The two plots in question were originally his occupancy holding. In the year 1901, long before the mortgage in suit, the Zamindar entered into a formal agreement with him permitting him to convert the plots into groves. This agreement provided that he was to be the owner of o...
Hazari Vs. Ram Dular and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-02-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All702
Daniels, J.1. This case is somewhate extreme instance of the Law's delays. The suit was filed in the year 1917, but owng to various appeals and remands by this Court it is only now coming up for final decision in the year 1924. The suit is one for ejectment of sub-tenant of sir land. The points in dispute are quite simple. The memorandum of appeal consists of five paragraphs, but the points urged in appeal are only two. The first is that the defendant-appellant has acquired occupancy rights. If the land is sir land occupancy rights cannot be acquired in it, and there is a finding of fact of the Court below based on the Settlement records that this land is sir. The finding disposes of the first plea.2. The second plea is that the defendant has acquired the status of a grove holder by reason of his planting a number of guava trees on the land. The learned District Judge may be wrong in saying that guava trees cannot constitute a grove, but his substantial finding is that in the current c...
Lachman Pande and ors. Vs. Tribani Sahu
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-02-1924
Reported in: AIR1924All719; 79Ind.Cas.538
Walsh, Acting C.J.1. We find ourselves unable to agree with the view taken by the learned Judge of this Court who heard this appeal. I desire merely to say this. The whole of his judgment is based upon the legal hypothesis that the mortgagee, the plaintiff, is a dispossessed mortgagee. The facts to which this expression is applied are that the mortgagee, having been unable or unwilling--it really does not matter which to--obtain possession by occupation, himself leased the mortgaged property to the mortgagor for a term of seven years and during those seven years remained in 'possession by the receipt of the rents. Since those seven years expired the mortgagor has continued to remain in possession. The mortgagee has taken no active steps to turn him out. The ordinary presumption is that the mortgagor has remained in possession with the mortgagee's consent without an express agreement. All I can say, is I find myself entirely unable to accept the description of dispossessed mortgagee app...
Todar Mal Vs. Kishen Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-02-1924
Reported in: 79Ind.Cas.1007
Daniels, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit to set aside a sale-deed executed by Mst. Shib Dei the mother of the plaintiff in the year 1909. Mst. Shib Dei inherited the property in suit from her father. Prior to this transaction she bad married and had become a widow. Prior to the deed in suit she had entered into a karao marriage with a second husband. At the time when the deed was executed she had no children, but a son, the plaintiff, was subsequently born to her. At the time of the transaction the presumptive reversioner was one Hans Ram. The sale-deed was executed in favour of Hans Ram's son Rati Ram.2. In both the Courts below a case was put forward on behalf of the plaintiff that the deed was obtained from Mst. Shib Dei by fraud. This case has been rejected by both Courts and is now abandoned. The second defence is that the deed was executed without legal necessity. On behalf of the defendants it was objected that the plaintiff was incompetent to challenge the deed on the gro...
Lagan Rai Vs. Raja Rai
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-02-1924
Reported in: AIR1924All507; 79Ind.Cas.1025
Daniels, J.1. The two plots in suit situated in khata Nos. 1 and 2 of a joint mahal were originally the joint sir of the plaintiff Lagan Rai, and the defendant Raja Rai. The plaintiff sold his share to a third party and became ex-proprietary tenant in the plots in suit under an order passed under Section 36 of the Land Revenue Act. The defendant Raja Rai contested the order right up to the Court of appeal but the matter was finally decided in the plaintiff's favour in 1919 only one year before the present suit. It appears, however, that Raja Rai managed to retain possession of the plots and the plaintiff brought the present suit to eject him as a sub-tenant under Section 58 read with Section 34 of the Tenancy Act. I have always entertained doubts whether Section 34 was really intended to support a suit for ejectment but this appears to be the accepted view of the law since the decision of Balli v. Naubat Singh 16 Ind. Cas. 120 : 9 A.L.J. 771, and has not been contested before me. The d...
Phool Singh Vs. Mt. Gobind Koer and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-01-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All37
1. This is an unfortunate case on the facts found. The plaintiff was the minor son of one Gitam Singh. During his minority his father granted a perpetual lease of certain agricultural land on terms highly favourable to the lessee and unfavourable to himself. It seems to have been also found by two Courts that undue influence was used by two of the defendants in obtaining this lease from the plaintiff's father. After the death of his father the plaintiff acting through his next friend endeavoured to obtain from the Revenue Court the ejectment of the defendants admitting them to be his tenant but claiming that they had no higher right than those of tenants at will. When this lease was set up the attempt at ejectment in the revenue Court failed.2. The plaintiff then brought the present suit asking for a declaration that the lease is not binding upon him either on the ground that it was obtained by undue influence exercised upon his father or even if that plea should fail on the ground tha...
Hoti Lal Vs. Jwala Prasad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-01-1924
Reported in: (1924)ILR46All625
Mukerji and Dalal, JJ.1. This is an appeal from a final decree passed by the learned Subordinate Judge of Aligarh in a suit for accounts. The grounds of appeal are:(1) That the amount of profits alleged to have been recovered by the defendant between the years 1904 to 1907 as fixed by the Commissioner who took accounts was excessive.(2) That the defendant was wrongly refused credit for three items:--(a) of Rs. 2,791, (b) of Rs. 1,505 and (c) of Rs. 608-10.(3) That the defendant was not liable to pay interest on the taking of accounts and he was wrongly saddled by the lower court with the payment thereof. The ground of appeal No. 5 was abandoned.2. As regards the calculation of profits of the two markets which, it is now decided, were received by the defendant, we think that the Commissioner has correctly assessed them. The Commissioner did not trust for valid reasons the account books produced by the defendant, and his opinion was that the safest way of assessing the income for the per...
Dr. Moti Lal Vs. Agent, O.R. Railway and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-01-1924
Reported in: AIR1924All617; 79Ind.Cas.893
Dalal, J.1. This is an application in revision against a decree dismissing the suit of the plaintiff for damages for the loss of a cask of methylated spirit consigned to him by the Managing Proprietor of the Indian Distillery, Cawnpore. The claim is brought both against the railway and the consignor and has been dismissed against both. The facts set out in the plaint are that the cask in question was consigned from Cawnpore to the plaintiff at Roorkee on 25th July 1921, that it was lost by the railway staff in transit and never reaohed its destination, and that in June 1922 the plaintiff was given delivery of a cask which, on being opened, was found to contain water. The railway pleaded seotion 77 of the Indian Railways Aot, in bar of the suit againsfc them. It is admitted that no notioe in accordance with the seotion was given to the Agent of the Railway. The plaintiff urges that the seotion is not applicable beoause he did nob disoover the substitution of the methylated spirit for wa...
Harpal Kurmi and ors. Vs. Mohan Kurmi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-01-1924
Reported in: AIR1924All844; 79Ind.Cas.1047
Daniels, J.1. The plot in dispute in this case originally formed part of an agricultural holding. The defendants took it on lease from the Maharaja of Benares to whom it belonged in the year 1887. During the currency of the lease the defendants built a house for agricultural purposes and they subsequently converted it into a residential house. In the year 1915 the Maharaja ejected them and on 9th July 1915 delivery of possession was made to him through an amin, I have read the dakhalnama and it purports to convey actual possession. The finding is that notwithstanding this the defendants never really gave up possession of the house. The question for decision is whether delivery of possession under the decree interrupts adverse possession and gives a fresh starting point for limitation. The present plaintiffs are lessees from the Maharaja under a lease subsequent to the ejectment of the defendants. Both the Courts below have found in their favour and I agree with this finding. There is n...
Lala Jwala Prasad and ors. Vs. Hoti Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-01-1924
Reported in: AIR1924All711; 79Ind.Cas.1049
1. This is an appeal from a final decree passed by the learned Subordinate Judge of Aligarh in a suit for accounts. The grounds of appeal are:That the amount of profits alleged to have been recovered by the defendant between the years 1904 to 1907 as fixed by the Commissioner who took accounts was excessive.2. That the defendant was wrongly refused credit for three items:(a) of Rs. 2791.(b) of Rs. 1505 and(C) of Rs. 608-10.(3) That the defendant was not liable to pay interest on the taking of accounts and he was wrongly saddled by the lower Court with the payment thereof.2. The ground of appeal No.5, was abandoned.3. As regards the calculation of profits of the two markets which it is now decided was received by the defendant we think that the Commissioner has correctly assessed them. The Commissioner did not trust for valid reasons the account books produced by the defendant and his opinion was that the safest way of assessing the income for the period from 1st January 1904 to 30th Ap...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›