Allahabad Court April 1925 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.
Azmatulla Khan Vs. Ahmad Ali
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-01-1925
Reported in: AIR1925All379
Stuart, J.1. The main point for decision in these two revisions is whether there has been substantial compliance with the provisions of Section 17 of Act IX of 1887. A decree had been passed by the Small Cause Court ex parte against Ahmad Ali for Rs. 483-9 and Rs. 56-11 costs. This decree was passed on the 6th September, 1924. On the 14th October, 1924 Ahmad Ali applied under Section 17 to set aside the ex parte decree and, at the time of presenting his application, filed a bond by which he hypothecated a house which he asserted was worth Rs. 4,000 as security for the performance of the decree but in this application he estimated the decretal amount at Rs. 530 instead of Rs. 540-4. The explanation which he gives for this error is that he had miscalculated the costs. He thus professed himself ready to give security for more than seven times the decretal amount, and actually had done so.2. It was ordered that the security should be verified but before steps were taken by the Court to ver...
Sri Newas Vs. E.i.R. Co. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-01-1925
Reported in: AIR1925All823
Stuart, J.1. The decision of the Full Bench in Chunni Lal v. Nizam's Guaranteed State Railway Co. Ltd. (1907) 29 All. 228, is authority for the proposition that there was one contract with the East Indian Railway Company who were liable for the over-charge (if any) wrongfully demanded from the consignees.2. The next question is as to the interpretation of the words 'within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the cause of action wholly or in part arises. Code of Civil Procedure Section 20(c) I adopt the interpretation adopted by Knox, J., in East Indian Railway Co. v. Binda (1915) 13 A.L.J. 66. I am of opinion that, if the suit be regarded as a suit for compensation for breach of contract, the cause of action arose in part at Khurja - the place where the contract was made.3. The plaintiff has come into Court demanding relief for a breach of contract, and such being the case, I consider that the Khurja Small Cause Court has jurisdiction. It will, of course, be open to the defendant Co...
Lala Sri Niwas Vs. the East Indian Railway Company and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-01-1925
Reported in: 88Ind.Cas.575
Stuart, J.1. The decision of the Full Bench in Chuni Lal v. Nizam's Guaranteed State Railway Co. Limited 29 A. 228 : A.W.N. (1907) 21 : 4 A.L.J. 80 : 2 M.L.T. 42 (F.B.) is authority for the proposition that there was one contract with the East Indian Railway Company who were liable for the overcharge (if any) wrongfully demanded from the consignees.2. The next question is as to the interpretation of the words 'within the local limits bf whose jurisdiction the cause of action wholly or in part arises' (C.P.C. Section 20(c). I adopt the interpretation adopted by Knox, J., in East Indian Railway Co. v. Binda 26 Ind. Cas. 620 : 13 A.L.J. 66. I am of opinion that, if the suit be regarded as a suit for compensation for breach of contract, the cause of action arose in part at Khurja the place where the contract was made.3. The plaintiff has come into Court demanding relief for a breach of contract and, such being the case, I consider that the Khurja Small Cause Court has jurisdiction. It will...
Azmatullah Khan Vs. Ahmad Ali
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-01-1925
Reported in: 88Ind.Cas.581
Stuart, J.1. The main point for decision in these two revisions is whether there has been substantial compliance with the provisions of Section 17 of Act IX of 1887. A decree had been passed by the Small Cause Court ex parte against Ahmed Ali for Rs. 483-9 and Rs. 56-11 costs. This decree was passed on the 6th September 1924. On the 14th October 1924 Ahmad Ali applied under Section 17 to set aside the ex parte decree and at the time of presenting his application filed a bond by which he hypothecated a house which he asserted was worth Rs. 4,000 as security for the performance of the decree, but in this application he estimated the decretal amount at Rs. 530 instead of Rs. 540-4. The explanation which he gives for this error is that he had miscalculated the costs. He thus professed himself ready to give security for more than seven times the decretal amount and actually had done so.2. It was ordered that the security should be verified but before steps were taken by the Court to verify ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›