Allahabad Court March 1927 Judgments
Bansi Dhar and ors. Vs. Sampat Kumar Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-31-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All287
Lindsay, J.1. The question to be decided by this Full Bench is set out in the referring order of the 2nd December 1926 in the following terms:Whether the contract for sale, as embodied in the document No. 387 dated the 1st of September 1918, printed at page 155 of the paper book, required to be registered.2. The paper book mentioned is the printed record of First Appeal No. 445 of 1923, and the document at page 155 purports to be a contract for the sale of immovable property consisting of a 14 anna share in Mahal No. 1 of Mauza Dudhai for a sum of Rs. 86,000. In the body of the deed it is recited that the executants (the proposed vendors) being in need of Rs. 500 for the purpose of the stamp for the sale deed and for other necessary expenses have taken this sum from the proposed purchasers, credit for which is to be allowed to the purchasers against the settled price of Rs. 36,000. In the concluding portion of the deed this sum of Rs. 500 is spoken of as being earnest money but the pay...
Tag this Judgment!Tej Singh and anr. Vs. Ghasi Ram and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-31-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All563; 102Ind.Cas.236
Ashworth, J.1. This is an appeal by two persons against whom a decree has been given according to an arbitration award. One of the appellants was no party to the application for reference. After the award was made by the arbitrators he filed an objection to it on this ground. That objection was rejected by the trial Judge on the ground that he had been absent up to the time when the award was given. It is argued that paragraph 16(2) of the Second Schedule to the Civil P.C. debars him from setting up as a ground of appeal the fact that he was no party to the reference. Paragraph 16 states that where a Court sees no cause to remit an award and no application has been made to set aside the award or the Court has refused such application the Court shall after the time for making such application, proceed to pronounce the judgment according to the award, Sub-clause (2) of that paragraph provides that upon the judgment so pronounced a decree shall follow and no appeal shall lie from such dec...
Tag this Judgment!Mitthu Lal Vs. Deojit and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-31-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All589
1. A suit for sale was brought and a preliminary decree was passed by the trial Court on 6th December 1920. This is an appeal from the final decree. One of the mortgagors, Radhe Singh, died, and his successors-in-interest were not brought on the record within the period of limitation. It is represented that Radhe Singh was dead at the time of the passing of the preliminary decree on the 6th December 1920, and that, therefore, when the final decree was passed the amount of the decree ought to have been reduced proportionate to the share of Radhe Singh in the property. Radhe Singh's share was one-ninth, so the appeal is valued at Rs. 775, one-ninth of the amount of Rs. 6,973 entered in the final decree. In support of his contention the learned Counsel quoted the ruling in the case of Imam Ali v. Baij Nath Ram Sahu (1906) 33 Cal. 613. In that case, on account of the failure of the decree-holder to bring on the record the legal representatives of one of the judgment-debtors, the decree-hol...
Tag this Judgment!Bansidhar and ors. Vs. B. Sampat Kumar Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-31-1927
Reported in: 103Ind.Cas.417
Lindsay, J.1. The question to be decided by this Full Bench is set out in the referring order of the 2nd December, 1926, in the following terms:Whether the contract for sale, as embodied in the document No. 387, dated the 1st of September, 19l8, printed at page 155 of the paper-book, required to be registered2. The paper-book mentioned is the printed record of First Appeal No. 445 of 1923, and the document at page 155 purports to be a contract for the sale of immoveable property consisting of a 14-annas share in Mahal No. 1 of Mouza Dudhai for a sum of Rs. 36,000. In the body of the deed it is recited that the executants (the proposed vendors) being in need of Rs. 500. for the purchase of the stamp for the sale-deed and for other necessary expenses have taken this sum from the proposed purchasers, credit for which is to be allowed to the purchasers against the settled price of Rs. 36,000. In the concluding portion of the deed this sum of Rs. 500 is spoken of as being earnest money brat...
Tag this Judgment!Phul Singh Vs. Bhojraj and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-29-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All488a
Kendall, J.1. This second appeal arises from a suit which was based on a simple mortgage-deed executed by one Sadho Singh in 1902. The plaintiffs are the descendants of the original mortgagee, and according to them the property mortgaged was joint family property and the mortgage was executed by the manager of the family for legal necessity. The following genealogical table will show how the various members of the family are affected: HEMANCHAL SINGH ________________________________|_________________________________ | | | Bachan Singh Burdat Singh Daulat Singh _____|_______ = ______|______ | | | Deo Kuar | |Mahabal Madho Sadho _________________|______________________ Udhan Bhure = | | | | | | | Phul Koer Kamal D.6 D.12 D.8 D.9 D.10 D.11 D 1 | (Phul Singh) _______|_______ D.7 | | | | (Jang Bahadur.)D.2 D.3 D.4 D.52. In 1910 there was a dispute in the family about the liability of the various members for this and other debts, and the question was referred to arbitration, apparently on th...
Tag this Judgment!NaraIn Das Vs. King-emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-29-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All555
Iqbal Ahmad, J.1. This criminal revision and Criminal Revisions Nos. 35 and 36 of 1927 are connected and arise out of one and the same case. The applicants in all the three cases were convicted by a Magistrate of the first class under Section 193 Indian Penal Code and Narain Pas applicant in Criminal Revision No. 34 of 1927 was sentenced to six months rigorous imprisonment and to a fine of Rs. 200, and Chuttan Lal and Nand Kishore the applicants in the other two cases were sentenced to three months rigorous imprisonment and to a fine of Rs. 100 each. The conviction and the sentences passed on the applicants have been upheld by the learned Sessions Judge.2. Narain Das applicant is a resident of village Pilakhwa and is a substantial zemindar and money-lender. In the same village resides another zemindar named Nathu Mal. The case for the prosecution was that on the 1st February 1925, Nathu Mal agreed to sell to Narain Das 35 bighas 6 biswas of land of a certain village for Rs. 6,500 but f...
Tag this Judgment!Nand Kishore Vs. Ram Sarup
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-29-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All569
1. There was a decree against the defendant, who is appellant here, as a result of which the property was put up for sale, and on the 20th February 1919, the plaintiff purchased it. He did not get possession till some time in June 1919. The defendant made certain collections on account of the Rabi of 1918. The plaintiff, therefore, was entitled to be recouped something by the defendant, and the only difficulty that has arisen in this case has been on what basis he was entitled to recover. The plaintiff having purchased the property on the 20th February 1919, and the Rabi rent falling due on the 1st May 1919, by Section 36 of the Transfer of Property Actall rents...upon the transfer of the interest of the person entitled to receive such payment be deemed, as between the transferrer and transferee to accrue due from day today and to be apportionable accordingly, but to be payable on the days appointed for the payment thereof.2. The Kharif and Rabi payments were due in a proportion of 10 ...
Tag this Judgment!Lala Nand Kishore Vs. Babu Ram Sarup
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-29-1927
Reported in: 102Ind.Cas.144
1. There was a decree against the defendant, who is appellant here, as a result of which the property was put up for sale, and on the 20th February, 1919, the plaintiff purchased it. He did not get possession till sometime in June, 1919. The defendant made certain collections on account of the Rabi of 1919. The plaintiff, therefore, was entitled to be recouped something by the defendant, and the only difficulty that has arisen in this case has been on what basis he was entitled to recover.2. The plaintiff having purchased the property on the 20th February, 1919, and the Rabi rent falling due on the 1st May, 1919, by Section 36 of the Transfer of Property Act 'all rents...upon the transfer of the interest of the person entitled to receive such payment be deemed, as between the transferor and transferee, to accrue due from day to day and to be apportionable accordingly, but to be payable on the days appointed for the payment thereof'. The Kharif and Rabi payments were due in a proportion...
Tag this Judgment!NaraIn Das Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-29-1927
Reported in: 102Ind.Cas.485
Iqbal Ahmad, J.Missing Tiff Page No. 485note for Rs. 1,500 vis., the difference between the real and the bogus price before the execution of the sale-deed and accordingly Nathu Mal passed a pro-note duly signed by him for the said amount in favour of Narain Das, but ante-dated the same to the 25th of January, 1925. A draft of the sale-deed was also prepared. It is alleged that Narain Das then went to consult his local lawyer Babu Duli Chand, and took with him the pro-note, the stamp paper and the draft of the sale-deed. When Narain Das did not return Nathu Mal went in his search and was informed that Narain Das had left for his village, Nathu Mal followed Narain Das and found him in the village, and asked him either to have the sale-deed executed or to return the pro-note. It is said that Narain Das put off the matter and did not get the sale-deed executed nor returned the pro-note. Then Nathu Mal reported the matter to the District Magistrate, but the District Magistrate took no actio...
Tag this Judgment!Phul Singh Vs. Bhojraj and ors. and Jang Bahadur Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-29-1927
Reported in: 102Ind.Cas.181
1. This second appeal arises from a suit which was based on a simple mortgage-deed executed by one Sadho Singh in 1902. The plaintiffs are the descendants of the original mortgagee and according to them the property mortgaged was joint family property and the mortgage was executed by the manager of the family for legal necessity. The following genealogical table will show how the various members of the family are affected: Hemanchal Singh _________________________|__________________________ | | | Bachan Singh Gurdut Singh=Deo Kuar Daulat Singh ______________________ _____________|________ | | | | | | Mahabal. Madho. Sadho= Udhan. Bhure. Phul Koer, defendant No. 1 __________________________________ | | | |Defendant Defendant Defendant Defendant No. 2. No. 3. No. 4. No. 5. ____________________________________________________________________________ | | | | | | | Kamal Defendant Defendant Defendant Defendant Defendant Defendant | No. 6 No. 12. No. 8. No. 9. No. 10 No. 11 Defendant (Phul S...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »