Allahabad Court December 1936 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.
Mahant Ram Kishan Das Vs. Badri Bishal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-04-1936
Reported in: AIR1937All337
1. This appeal is connected with first appeals No. 572 of 1930, No. 90 of 1931 and No. 109 of 1931. We shall dispose of all these appeals by means of this judgment. They all arise out of a suit instituted on 7th September 1929 by Mahant Ram Kishan Das in order to redeem a usufructuary mortgage. This transaction was evidenced by three documents, viz., a lease dated 29th October 1919, a kabuliyat dated 30th October 1919 and an agreement dated 24th November 1919. The lease was executed by Mahant Ram Kishan Das in favour of Badri Bisal, Ajodhya Prasad and Gauri Shankar. It was for a period of ten years from 1327-F to 1336-F. The lessees were to remain in possession of the property and collect profits and were to credit the amounts collected after deducting expenses towards a debt said to be due from Mahant Ram Kishan Das. The kabuliyat was merely a counterpart of this lease. The agreement recited that certain sums of money were due to Bhairon Prasad, Seth Ganpatji and the lessee Ajodhya Pr...
Sardar and anr. Vs. B. NavIn Chandra and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-03-1936
Reported in: AIR1937All226
Niamatullah, J.1. This is an appeal arising, out of insolvency proceedings. The appellants are two brothers, who were adjudged insolvents. On 31st March 1935, the Official Receiver attached their house and sold' it on 26th May 1935. The appellants objected on 31st May 1935, alleging that they were agriculturists and occupied the-house as such, which was exempt from, sale in insolvency proceedings. They also objected on the ground that there were material irregularities in the sale. The insolvency Court so far allowed the objection as to set aside the sale but directed that it should be re. sold. The appellants preferred an appeal to the District Judge under Section 75, Insolvency Act, impugning, the correctness of the order of the insolvency Court. The District Judge held that on the merits the appellants' appeal was entitled to succeed, but their objection, to the insolvency Court, which should be considered to be an appeal under Section 68 from an order or action of the Official Rece...
Murari Lal and ors. Vs. Muhammad SamiuddIn Ahmad Khan and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-03-1936
Reported in: AIR1937All273
1. This is a plaintiffs' appeal arising out of a suit for the recovery of the sum of Rs. 5,250 alleged to have been due on a mortgage bond. The mortgage in suit was executed on 12th April 1919 by one Mohammad Sami-uddin Ahmad Khan and his wife Mt. Hidayat-un-nissa Begam in favour of Nand Kishore. In the deed it is recited that the property which was mortgaged had belonged to the husband, Mohammad Sami-uddin Ahmad Khan, and that he had transferred it to his wife Mt. Hidayat-un-nissa Begam on 3rd January 1919. The deed concludes with these words:In case of non-payment of the amount the creditor shall at every time have power to realise the amount mentioned in this bond, through the Court, by means of auction sale of the property hypothecated, as well as the person and the other not mortgaged property of every kind of us, the executants.2. Earlier in the deed there is a recital that it is the female executant who actually hypothecates the property. The suit upon the basis of the bond was ...