Allahabad Court February 1939 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.
Seth Tara Chand Vs. Collector of Aligarh in Charge of Estate of Raja K ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-14-1939
Reported in: AIR1939All552
Iqbal Ahmad, J.1. This appeal arises-out of a suit filed by the Collector of Aligarh as representing the Court of Wards (in charge of the estate of Raja Kishori Raman Singh Bahadur of Mursan) under Section 33, U.P. Agriculturists' Relief Act (Act 27 of 1934). The suit was for accounts and for a declaration as to the amount which was payable by the plaintiff to the defendant Rai Bahadur Seth Tara Chand. It appears that on 20th June 1924 the Raja of Mursan executed a mortgage deed in favour of the defendant for a sum of Rs. 5,11,000. The interest stipulated in the bond was at the rate of Re. 0-9-9 percent, per mensem compoundable with six* monthly rests. Again on 23rd May 1929 the Raja of Mursan executed another mortgage deed in favour of the defendant for a sum of Rs. 1,35,000 and the rate of interest provided in this deed was at the rate of Re. 0-9-4 per cent, per mensem compoundable with six-monthly rests. It is common ground that the interest accruing due on the amounts advanced unde...
Jit Singh and ors. Vs. Ghetlu and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-13-1939
Reported in: AIR1939All446
Bennet, J.1. This is a second appeal by the plaintiffs whose suit was decreed by the trial Court, the Civil Judge, but dismissed by the learned District Judge of Kumaon in appeal. The plaint sets out that the plaintiffs have a reservoir of water (naula) in a certain plot and that the defendants deceived an Assistant Collector and stated that this reservoir was a water spring (dhara) and the Assistant Collector did not understand it and further stated that they, the defendants, used to draw water from this 'naula' and that the Assistant Collector gave a wrong judgment and the Board of Revenue struck off the appeal of the plaintiffs. The relief asked for was a decree embodying the order for setting aside the decree for getting water from the 'naula' of the plaintiffs obtained from the Court of the Assistant Collector on 23rd February 1931 which was upheld by the Court of the Commissioner. The learned District Judge held that the Water Rules of 1917 covered the case and gave the Revenue C...
Mt. Rahmat Bibi and ors. Vs. L. Chandu Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-13-1939
Reported in: AIR1939All497
Verma, J.1. The facts, as stated by learned Counsel appearing for the parties, are these. The opposite party, Lala Chandu Lal, had taken a deed of simple mortgage from the applicants before us. The property mortgaged was a house. This house stood on nazul land which was not transferable. The mortgagee, Lala Chandu Lal, brought a suit for sale on foot of his mort. gage and obtained a decree. He applied for the execution of that decree and the execution Court held that all that had been mortgaged to him and all that was covered by the decree obtained by him, and therefore all that could be sold in execution of the decree, was the materials of the house. Ho submitted to that order and applied for leave to bid. Leave was granted to him. His was the last bid for Rs. 4000 and the sale was concluded in his favour. He certified that his decree has been satisfied to the extent of Rs. 4000. He then obtained possession over the property under the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code. Subsequent...
Ahmad HusaIn Vs. Mt. Amir Bano
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-13-1939
Reported in: AIR1940All63
Iqbal Ahmad, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit brought by the plaintiff-respondent for a declaration that the marriage of the plaintiff with the defendant stood dissolved in consequence of the exercise of the 'option of puberty' by the plaintiff. It is common ground that the parties to the present litigation are Sunni Mahomedans and that they were married in July 1926. The plaintiff's case was that she was nine years of age at the time of her marriage with the defendant and that her brother Zahiruddin acted as her guardian for the marriage. She further alleged that, some time before the institution of the suit, she became aware of the fact of the marriage and at once exercised the 'option of repudiation' and intimated the fact of the repudiation of the marriage to the defendant by means of a written notice. The defendant contested the suit on the allegation that the plaintiff had attained puberty at the time of the marriage. He denied that the plaintiff had the op...
Surajpal Singh and ors. Vs. Shri 108 Puja Pad Udit Panch Parmeshwar Pa ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-08-1939
Reported in: AIR1939All486
Bennet, J.1. This is a first appeal by certain defendants against a decree by a learned civil Judge in favour of the plaintiff on a simple mortgage deed. The family tree of the defendants is as follows: HANUMAN SINGH _________________________________|_____________________________________ | | |Mahabal Singh (d. 1919)=Mt. Brijmangal Singh Sheo Mangal Singh Lakshpati Kunwar (d. 1905) (defendant 1) (defendant 7.) | | Surajpal Singh (defendant 2.) | _________________________________|______________________________ | | | | | |Sheopratap Singh Lal Pratab Singh Rudra Pratab Singh alias Har Pratab Singh | (died issueless) (defendant 4.) Chhutaku (defendant 6.) (defendant 5.) | _________________________________________________| | | Baramdin Singh Dharampal Singh (alive in 1931 now dead)=Mt. Sheonath Kunwar2. The plaintiff sued on this mortgage executed by defendant 1, Sheo Mangal Singh and defendant 2, Surajpal Singh. It was also executed by Mt. Lakhpati Kunwar, the widow of Mahabal Singh, but in...
Qabul Singh Vs. Jai Prakash
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-08-1939
Reported in: AIR1939All503
ORDERThom, C.J.1. This is an application in civil revision under Section 25, Small Cause Courts Act. The application is directed against an order dismissing an application for restoration, and decree passed against the applicant in his absence and without his knowledge. The application for restoration, the learned Judge in the Small Cause Court has held to be time-barred, inasmuch as it was not presented within 30 days of the decree. The learned Judge has proceeded upon the assumption that the 30 days must in all circumstances run from the date of the decree. Under Article 164, Limitation Act, time begins to runeither from the date of the decree or where the summons was not duly served when the applicant has knowledge of the decree.2. Learned Counsel states that his client has filed an affidavit in which it is alleged that he did not receive knowledge of the decree, until 28th May 1936. If this statement be true then the application for restoration was clearly within time. The learned ...
Bishnath Singh and ors. Vs. Collector in Charge of Court of Wards Esta ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-07-1939
Reported in: AIR1939All299
Thom, C.J.1. The question which has been referred to us may be stated thus:In an appeal to His Majesty in Council, has the Court power to extend the time for furnishing the security and making the deposit required by Order 45, Section 7, Civil P.C., beyond the period mentioned therein2. Order 45, Rule 7 enjoins that:Where the certificate is granted, the applicant shall, within ninety days or such further period, not exceeding sixty days, as the Court may upon cause shown allow, from the date of the decree complained of, or within six weeks from the date of the grant of the certificate, whichever is the Inter date,(a) furnish security in cash or in Government securities for the costs of the respondent, and(b) deposit the amount required to defray the expenses of translating, transcribing, indexing and transmitting to His Majesty in Council a correct copy of the whole record....3. Order 45, Rule 7 was subject to an amendment by Act 26 of 1920. This amendment substituted the words 'within...
Mohammad Anwar Ali Khan Vs. L. Nawal Kishore and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-07-1939
Reported in: AIR1939All444
Mohammad Ismail, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit brought by the plaintiffs for recovery of Rs. 945 as damages and Rs. 101 on account of refund of money advanced. The plaintiffs alleged that they entered into a contract with defendant for the supply of molasses under a deed of agreement dated 21st December 1936, The plaintiffs advanced Rs. 101 to the defendant as earnest money and the defendant agreed to supply 700 maunds of molasses to the plaintiffs during the running season, la case the defendant failed to supply the requisite quantity of molasses he stipulated that ho will be liable to the plaintiffs at the rate of Re. 1 per maund for the quantity of molasses that remain unsupplied. The defendant contested the suit and pleaded inter alia that the suit was not cognizable by the Court and that the plaintiffs were not entitled to any damages. The Courts below have decreed the suit. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that according to the case of the plai...
Firm Bankey Lal Nanhey Mal Vs. Bhagirath Mal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-07-1939
Reported in: AIR1940All95
Iqbal Ahmad, J.1. This is an application in revision by an unsuccessful plaintiff against the decision of a Small Cause Court Judge. The plaintiff is a firm of commission agents carrying on business at Moradabad. The plaintiff's case was that Bhagirath Mal, defendant, entered into forward contracts for the purchase and sale of wheat through the agency of the plaintiff's firm and that there was a loss in those transactions to the extent of Rs. 398-13-6. This amount included the commission charges to which plaintiff's firm was entitled. The plaintiff accordingly claimed a decree for the said amount and for Rupees 70-2-6 as interest, viz. in all a decree for Rs. 469. In the plaint it was distinctly stated that the defendant entered into these forward contracts through the agency of the plaintiff's firm. There was however no allegation in the plaint that the losses consequent on those contracts were actually paid by the plaintiff's firm. Bhagirath Mal, defendant, filed a written statement ...
Tulshi Ram and anr. Vs. Gobind Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-06-1939
Reported in: AIR1939All529
Verma, J.1. The suit which has given rise to this appeal was brought by the appellants for possession of certain zamindari property situated in different khewats, mahals and pattis of four villages. The Court below has dismissed the suit. The material facts, about which there is no serious controversy, are these. One Natha Earn had two sons, Dharajit and Churaman. Dharajit's son is the defendant-respondent, Gobind Singh. Churaman had a son, Earn Prasad, and three daughters, Jiva Kunwar, Karai Kunwar and Chunni Kunwar. The property in dispute belonged to Earn Prasad. The two plaintiffs-appellants are the sons of his sister Jiva Kunwar. The son of another sister of his, namely Karai Kunwar, is Tikam Singh. Chunni Kunwar has left no children. Earn Prasad died in June 1894 without any male issue, leaving two widows Mt. Parbati and Mt. Inchha Kunwar, surviving. It is common ground that the property in dispute was entered in the name of Earn Prasad as long as he was alive and that on his dea...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »