Allahabad Court June 1927 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.
Bohra Kanhaiya Lal and ors. Vs. Gendo
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-09-1927
Reported in: AIR1928All51
Sulaiman, J.1. This appeal arises out of a probate proceeding and relates to the costs which have been taxed in the decree of the Court below. It raises a question of principle affecting the practice in subordinate Courts. An application for probate was made on the 18th January 1924, and on the 1st March a caveat was entered. On the 30th August evidence was recorded and probate was ordered to be granted to the applicant. The office of the District Judge taxed the costs on the scale fixed for original suits. An objection was raised by the caveator to the amount taxed, but the learned Judge, relying upon Chap. 16, Rule 2, High Court Rules, dismissed the objection.2. In our opinion Chap. 16, Rule 2, High Court Rules had no direct application to the case at all. The suits and applications spoken of there refer to suits and applications which are tried on the original side by the High Court itself and do not refer to suits tried by subordinate Courts. The case had to be decided in accordanc...
Hukum Chand and ors. Vs. Sital Prasad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-09-1927
Reported in: AIR1928All52
Ashworth, J.1. These two appeals arise out of two suits brought by the plaintiffs-appellants against the respondents for possession of certain property. The property belonged to one Amolak Ram, who died in 1879, leaving a widow Mt. Bir Kunwar. She died in 1881, leaving three daughters. Two of these daughters jointly in 1882 alienated a portion of the property in suit. The third daughter in 1885 alienated the rest of the property in suit. All three daughters are now dead, and the plaintiffs claim that they are entitled to the property as reversionary heirs of Amolak Ram, and that the alienations mentioned are ineffective against them now that the daughters are dead. The appeal No. 546 deals with the O. Section 164 of 1923. In that suit the District Judge hold that the alienation of 1882 by Mt. Lachhmi and Mt. Barfi was for necessity. This was a finding of fact, and the appellants have not been able to show that it was based on any mistake of law. Their suit-therefore, No. 164 must fail,...
Shikar Chand Vs. Jagmandar Das and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-09-1927
Reported in: AIR1928All29
Sulaiman, J.1. This is a plaintiffs appeal arising out of a suit for a declaration that certain revenue Court partition proceedings were fraudulent and are not binding on the plaintiff. The facts of the case are that the plaintiff's father owned a ten biswas out of 19 biswas share in village Bhat Kheri, and died leaving the present plaintiff as the sole surviving son who was then a minor. The other co-sharer was Hoshyar Singh, the father of defendant 1. In 1909 Mt. Jia, the mother of the plaintiff, was appointed the certificated guardian of the plaintiff during his minority by the District Judge. In 1912 Hoshyar Singh, the co-sharer, filed an application for partition of the village in the revenue Court. The Court, however, did not itself get the lots prepared, but acted upon two lots which wore filed in the case signed by Hoshyar Singh and purporting to have the thumb-impression of Mt. Jia. The village was divided into two separate mahals, one of which was allotted to the plaintiff, S...
Shikar Chand Alias Sri Chand Vs. Jagmandar Das and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-09-1927
Reported in: 106Ind.Cas.519
1. This is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of a suit for a declaration that certain Revenue Court partition proceedings were fraudulent and are not binding on the plaintiff. The facts of the case are that the plaintiff's father owned a 10 biswas out of 19-biswas share in village Bhat Kheri, and died leaving the present plaintiff as the sole surviving son who was then a minor. The other co sharer was Hoshyar Singh, the father of defendant No. 1. In 1909 Musammat Jia, the mother of the plaintiff, was appointed the certificated guardian of the plaintiff during his minority by the District Judge. In 1912 Hoshyar Singh, the co-sharer, filed an application for partition of the village in the Revenue Court. The Court, however, did not itself get the lots prepared, but acted upon two lots which were filed in the case signed by Hoshyar Singh and purporting to have the thumb-impression of Musammat Jia. The village was divided into two separate mahals, one of which was allotted to the plaintiff,...
Maksud Ali Khan and anr. Vs. Sheikh Abdullah Khan and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-08-1927
Reported in: AIR1928All77; 108Ind.Cas.728
Iqbal Ahmad, J.1. This is a defendants' appeal and arises out of a suit for sale on a mortgage, dated the 4th August 1919. The mortgage was executed by Mt. Nazir un-Nisa, defendant 1, on her own behalf and on behalf of her minor son Sayed Ahmad Khan, defendant 2. The mortgage was for a sum of Rs. 500, and the mortgaged property consisted of shares in two villages, Nagla Rumi and Asafpur, which belonged both to Mt. Nazir-un-Nisa and to Sayed Ahmad Khan. Though Mt. Nazir-un-Nisa was a certificated guardian of her minor son, she executed the mortgage-deed without taking the permission of the District Judge.2. About a month after the execution of the mortgage-deed, viz., on the 10th September 1919, Mt Nazir-un-Nisa, with the sanction of the District Judge, sold the share belonging to her and to her minor son in Nagla Rumi to defendants 3 and 4, who are the appellants before us, and, out of the sale consideration, left with the vendees the amounts due on the basis of a prior mortgage and of...
Secretary of State and ors. Vs. Rishi Ram Jagdish Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-08-1927
Reported in: AIR1928All145; 108Ind.Cas.457
Ashworth, J.1. This second appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiff-respondent firm against the Secretary of State for India in Council as representing the North-Western Railway and against the Agent of the B.B. & C.I. Ry. Co. Ltd. (which defendants will in this judgment be called 'the Railway Company') for the value of sacks of wheat which the plaintiff alleged to have been wrongly delivered by the railway company concerned to a person not entitled to them at Bombay.2. The facts of the case, so far as they are necessary for deciding the present appeal are as follows: The goods were consigned from Saharanpur on the 13th May 1921, and reached Bombay on the 29th May 1921. They were unloaded on the 30th May 1921, and delivered on the 31st May, 1921 to the Prince of Wales Flour Mills. The railway receipt at Saharanpur was handed over to the plaintiff, the plaintiff himself being entered both as consignor and consignee. Without endorsing the same he sent it by post to one Shiv R...
Salig Ram Misir Vs. Lachhman Das
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-07-1927
Reported in: AIR1928All46
Sulaiman, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of a suit brought by Salig Ram Misir, creditor, to recover the amount due from his principal debtor, the suit being brought against Luchhman Das surety. It appears that on the 28th March 1912, a mortgage-deed was executed by Mt. Tulsa Kunwar and Lachhmanji, respondent, acting for himself and guardian of his minor son Dauji, for a sum of Rs. 2,000 under which a house in Benares was mortgaged. The deed stood in the name of Mt Sumitra, wife of Salig Ram, but it is the case of both parties that she was a mere benamidar. On the same date a security bond was executed by Lachhman Das, the present defendant in the suit, as a surety undertaking that if the amount of the mortgage money was not recovered from the property mortgaged under the deed or from the mortgagors, the mortgagee would be entitled to recover the whole of the amount together with the costs and the damages from the personal property of the surety. Under this bond the suret...
Mathura Kurmi Vs. Jagdeo Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-07-1927
Reported in: AIR1928All61
Lindsay, J.1. This is an application for leave to appeal to His Majesty in Council against the decree of a Bench of this Court in First Appeal No. 459 of 1.923, decided on the 21st December, 1926. The appeal was dismissed and the decree of the trial Court was affirmed. The value of the subject-matter in the first Court was over Rs. 10,000 and the value of the subject-matter of the proposed appeal to His Majesty is also above that sum. But we are asked to certify that the case fulfills the conditions of Section 110, Civil P.C., on the ground that the appeal involves a substantial question of law, or, in the alternative, to certify that it is otherwise a fit case for appeal.2. The question which arose for decision in the Court below and in this Court was with regard to the legal relation of the parties arising out of the execution of three documents executed on the 22nd May 1915. The case for the plaintiffs was that they were mortgagors and that the defendant, Mathura Kurmi, was their mo...
(Diwan) Balwant Singh and ors. Vs. Kunwar Partap Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-06-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All665
Ashworth, J.1. This second appeal arises out of an application for partition made by the respondent under Section 107, U. P. Land Revenue Act (3 of 1901).2. The applicant applied for partition stating that he was a co-sharer in a certain mahal to the extent of two annas, that the mahal was divided into several khatas, and that his two-anna share was in khata No. 1, (which was held in severalty by certain of the cosharers in the whole mahal). He also stated that there was a shamilat khata No. 5 in which he had a common interest along with the other co-sharers. He went on to say that there were always disputes between the parties (he had made all the co-sharers in the mahal parties as non-applicants to the case) in connexion with the collection of rent and payment of Government revenue. He, therefore, prayed for a complete mahal to be formed by partition of his two-anna share along with his interest in the shamilat land. Now a mahal is defined as local area under a separate engagement fo...
Nisar HusaIn and anr. Vs. Sundar Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-06-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All657
Sulaiman, J.1. This is a defendants' appeal arising out of a suit for ejectment. The plaintiffs and defendant 3, who formed a joint Hindu family, obtained a decree on the basis of a mortgage-deed for sale against Basharat Husain. While this decree was in execution Basharat Husain executed a lease, dated 29th September 1919, in favour of the father of Nisar Husain, defendant 1, for a period of 10 years. This lease comprised a number of khewats in three villages out of several, which were included in the mortgage. In 1921 the decree-holders purchased the mortgaged properties at auction and later obtained formal delivery of possession against the mortgagor. They have now brought this suit for ejectment of the lessee in the civil Court. The main defence of the lessee consisted of a plea that there was relationship between the parties of zamindar and lessee, and the civil Court has no jurisdiction to eject the defendant, and a further plea was that in view of certain proceedings in 1920 the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »