Allahabad Court September 1937 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.
Ram Kishan Vs. Pahlad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-13-1937
Reported in: AIR1938All36
Allsop, J.1. This second appeal arises out of a suit for the recovery of possession of an area of '11 acre which according to the plaintiff has been seized by the defendants. The parties are tenants of two adjoining plots and the only question at issue is whether defendants have in fact made any encroachment upon the plaintiff's plot. The learned Judge of the lower Appellate Court has found in favour of the defendants and has dismissed the suit. The argument in appeal is that he has ignored a decision in a previous suit, No. 523 of 1928, which is res judicata between the parties.2. It appears that the plaintiff's plot in the settlement before the present one was recorded as having an area of '8 acre and the defendants' adjoining plot as having an area of '31 acre. In the present settlement the plaintiff's plot was shown as having an area of '62 acre and the defendants' plot as having an area of '38 acre. That was in the year 1900. In 1928 the plaintiff instituted a suit saying that the...
Mt. Kamla Bai Vs. B. Chitra Prasad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-13-1937
Reported in: AIR1938All59; 173Ind.Cas.875
Iqbal Ahmad, J.1. The question that arises for consideration in the present application in revision is whether the sale of property in execution of a decree passed against a person in his capacity as a legal representative of a deceased person amounts to an act of insolvency within the meaning of Section 6(e), Insolvency Act, Act 5 of 1920. The question was answered in the negative by the Madras High Court in Nagasubrahmania Mudaliar v. Krishnamachariar (1927) 14 A.I.R. Mad. 922. It was held in that case that until there is a personal decree under Section 52, Civil P.C., a decree against a person as the legal representative of another does not make him liable to adjudication under the Provincial Insolvency Act. There are also certain observations in Baij Nath v. Gajadhar Prasad (1935) 22 A.I.R. Oudh 406 that are in consonance with the view taken by the Madras High Court. It is provided by Section 6(e), Insolvency Act, that:A debtor commits an act of insolvency, (e) if any of his proper...
Mt. Champa Devi Vs. Mt. Asa Devi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-10-1937
Reported in: AIR1938All8
ORDER1. The question of law that arises for consideration in the present application in revision is whether a suit filed by Mt. Asa Devi, plaintiff opposite party, in the circumstances to be presently stated, offends against the provisions of Section 7(1)(b), U.P. Encumbered Estates Act (Act No. 25. of 1934). The Act was passed with the professed object of making provision 'for the relief of encumbered estates in the United Provinces' and the machinery provided for by the Act for the purpose is set in motion by an application to the Collector in accordance with Section 4 of the Act. It is enacted by that section that any land, lord who is subject to or whose immoveable property or any part thereof is encumbered with private debts, may make an application in writing to the Collector of the district in which his land or any portion of his land is situated stating the amount of such private debts and also of his public debts both decreed and un-decreed and requesting the Collector to appl...
Kabul Chand Vs. Badri Das
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-09-1937
Reported in: AIR1938All22; 173Ind.Cas.130
Niamatullah, J.1. These two appeals arise out of a suit for sale on foot of a mortgage deed, dated 2nd July 1919, executed by Raja Ram, who is now represented by his sons, and by Lajja Ram who is defendant 3. The sum secured by the deed was Rs. 200 carrying interest at the rate of Re. 1-8-0 per cent, per mensem, compoundable every year. The plaintiff, in whose favour the deed was executed, brought the ?suit, which has given rise to these appeals against the sons of one of the mortgagors and the other mortgagor (defendant 3), impleading also, among others, defendants 4 and 8, the appellants in the two appeals before us, who were described as subsequent mortgagees. The suit was contested by some of the defendants on the ground that the property mortgaged by Raja Ram and Lajja Ram belonged to a joint Hindu family consisting of the executants and other members of their family, and that there was no legal necessity for the loan evidenced by the mortgage deed in suit. Defendants 4 and 8, the...
Budhsen Vs. Asharfi Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-08-1937
Reported in: AIR1938All28
Thom, Ag. C.J.1. This is a second appeal from an order of the learned District Judge of Bareilly in an insolvency matter. The appellant was declared insolvent, and finally a scheme was propounded by the Official Receiver, which scheme received the approval of the Insolvency Court and of the District Judge in appeal.2. Learned Counsel for the appellant has contended that in the scheme a higher rate of interest is allowed on the debts than is permissible under the provisions of the Provincial Insolvency Act. In the view we take of this case, it is not necessary for us to make any pronouncement upon this point. Learned Counsel for the respondents took the preliminary plea that no appeal lay to this Court. In support of this contention he referred to the pro-visions of Section 75, Provincial Insolvency Act, Section 75(1) provides that:The debtor, any creditor, the receiver or any other person aggrieved by a decision come to or an order made in the exercise of insolvency jurisdiction by a C...
Nand Ram Vs. Hakim Saraj HussaIn Khan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-08-1937
Reported in: AIR1938All42; 173Ind.Cas.153
Niamatullah, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit for ejectment, The plaintiff-respondent claimed to be the owner of the site of a house which was in possession of the appellant at the time of the institution of the suit. He alleged that the site was originally let to one Abdul Ghani at a monthly rent of 2/6 and that one of the terms of the lease was that Abdul Ghani could be ejected on payment by the landlord of the value of the materials of the house which he was entitled to build under the lease. The plaintiff went on to allege that Abdul : Ghani continued in possession and that i after his death his heirs transferred the materials of the house to one Badlu from whom the same were purchased by the appellant under a deed dated 17th June 1921. The plaintiff gave a notice to quit, but the defendant refused to vacate the site by removing the materials therefrom. The defence was a denial of the plaintiff's right in toto.2. The lower Court has found on evidence that the...
Lala Chatar Sen Vs. Raja Ram and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-08-1937
Reported in: AIR1938All44; 173Ind.Cas.916
Allsop, J.1. On 25th August 1921 one Mutaoaddi Lal executed a deed of simple mortgage in favour of the appellant Lala Chatar Sen. On 28th January 1926 Mutasaddi and Thakur, a member of his family, exeoui.ed a usufructuary mortgage in favour of the defendants.respondents 2 and 3 who are fathers of the plaintiffs-respondents. One of the terms of this deed of usufructuary mortgage was that the mortgagees should pay a sum of Rs. 1,580 to Lala Chatar Sen in order to redeem the simple mortgage of 25th August 1921. On 17th September 1927 defendants-respondents 2 and 3 executed a simple mortgage in favour of L. Chatar Sen for a sum of Rs. 1,390 in order to fulfil their obligation to pay the debt due to him from Mutasaddi. A suit was instituted on the basis of this last mortgage of 17th September 1927 and a decree was passed. The suit which has given rise to the present appeal was instituted by the plaintiffs in order to obtain a declaration that the mortgage executed by their fathers, defendan...
Syed Mohammad Anis and anr. Vs. Iqbal HusaIn and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-07-1937
Reported in: AIR1938All29; 173Ind.Cas.642
1. This appeal has been instituted against an order by the Additional Subordinate Judge of Fatehpur directing that a plaint should be returned to the plaintiffs for presentation to the proper Court. The plaintiffs alleged that one Chaudhri Afzal Husain had executed a zare poshgi lease in their favour. Under the terms of this lease they were to pay him a sum of Rs. 35,000 in advance. They wore also to make annual payments and had the right to remain in possession of the property leased for a period of 224 years. They paid the sum of Rs. 35,000. A short time afterwards, Chaudhri Afzal Husain died and was succeeded by the defendants. The defendants according to the plaint denied the validity of the lease and took possession of the property. The plaintiffs therefore claimed the return of the sum of Rs. 35,000 paid by them in advance upon the ground that consideration for the contract had failed. One of the defences taken in the Court below was that the suit should have been instituted in t...
Lala Shyam Lal Vs. Lala Ram Gopal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-06-1937
Reported in: AIR1938All31
1. This purports to be an appeal against an order passed by the learned Subordinate Judge of Pilibhit. The appellant was a judgment-debtor. He made an application under Section 5, Agriculturists' Belief Act of 1934 that the decree should be converted into an instalment decree. Thereafter he made an application to the Court executing the original decree that the sale in execution of that decree should be stayed. The Court executing the decree was also that of the Subordinate Judge of Pilibhit. The learned Judge passed this order, 'No good ground. Rejected'. A preliminary objection has been taken that there is no appeal provided against an order refusing to stay a sale in execution of a decree. It seems to us, however, although the contention of the respondent is good upon this point, that we should interfere in this matter in exercise of our jurisdiction by way of revision. The result of the order refusing to stay the sale was this that once the sale had taken place and had been confirm...
Prabhu Lal Upadhya Vs. Dist. Board and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-04-1937
Reported in: AIR1938All276
Harries, J.1. These are three connected appeals against a decree of the learned Additional Civil Judge of Agra granting the plaintiff Rs. 3000 damages against defendant 1, the Agra District Board, and Rupees 1000 damages against defendant 2, Rai Bahadur Amba Prasad, the Chairman of the said Board. The suit was brought by the plaintiff against the said District Board and its Chairman claiming the following reliefs:(a) A declaration that a meeting of the Board held on 29th October 1931 was not held in accordance with the rules and that the proceedings thereof were conducted in an illegal and high handed way and that it be further declared that the resolution passed at the said meeting purporting to dismiss the plaintiff from his office as Secretary of the said Board was null and void, illegal, wrongful, unjustifiable, ultra vires and incapable of being given effect to. (b) That an injunction be granted to the plaintiff restraining the said Board from giving effect to the said resolution ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »