Allahabad Court March 1926 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.
Hari Chand Rai Vs. Moti Ram
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-02-1926
Reported in: AIR1926All470; 94Ind.Cas.428
Sulaiman, J.1. This is an appeal by Hari Chand Rai who holds a lease dated the 27th February 1922 and registered in June following from the insolvent Lachhman Das, who executed it for himself and as guardian of his minor nephew. So far as the interest of the minor is concerned that does not at all arise in these insolvency proceedings. We have to confine our attention to the interest of the insolvent in the property covered by the lease. Originally the receiver moved the Court under Section 53 of the Provincial Insolvency Act for the annulment of this lease. In the petition however he alleged that the insolvent, in order to defeat and delay his creditors, had executed a fictitious thekanama of a major portion of his property for a nominal sum in favour of his brother-in-law for a period of 20 years. He further alleged that this thekanama was only a paper transaction and was fraudulently executed. The original prayer asked for was its annulment. The lessee however objected that no such ...
Ram Devi and ors. Vs. Ganeshi Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-02-1926
Reported in: AIR1926All501; 95Ind.Cas.416
Dalal, J.1. This is an appeal from an order of the Second Additional Subordinate Judge of Aligarh, ordering an award by an arbitrator without the intervention of a Court to be filed, under para. 21 of the 2nd Schedule of the Civil Procedure Code. Ganeshi Lal, one of the parties to the reference to arbitration, applied for the filing of the award, while Mt. Ram Devi, widow of Sheo Prasad, for herself and her minor son, a second Mt. Ram Devi, wife of Bhola Nath, Jai Deo Prasad for himself and his minor nephews and Ganga Prasad, showed cause why the award should not be filed. The objectors other than Mt. Ram Devi, wife of Bhola Nath, have appealed and the applicant Ganeshi Lal has contested the appeal.2. The property in dispute, which is revenue paying and ancestral property, belongs to Bijai Indar Singh. He was adjudged an insolvent and a receiver was appointed of his property. The contesting parties to this appeal are all his secured creditors. He had unsecured creditors also, who are r...
Raj Bahadur Vs. Narayan Prasad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-02-1926
Reported in: 94Ind.Cas.157
1. The suit of the plaintiff Narain Prasad was dismissed by the Trial Court of the Subordinate Judge on the ground that it was barred by the principle of res judicata. On appeal the learned Additional District Judge disagreed with this finding and remanded the suit for trial on the merits. This appeal is filed from the order of remand. One Chhotey Lal had two sons and the widow of one of them Musammat Ganeshi by name made certain transfers in favour of the defendant of this suit Raj Bahadur. Musammat Ganeshi had a daughter Musammat Katori who was an heir to the property on the death of her mother the life holder. She instituted a suit in 1917 (Suit No. 117 of 1917) for a declaration that the transfers were beyond the power of a Hindu widow and sought a declaration that they were not binding on her. During the pendency of the suit she died on the 12th November 1917. The plaintiff of this suit Narain Prasad applied to the Court to be brought on the record as representative in interest of...