Allahabad Court April 1939 Judgments
Qazi Mohammad Bashir UddIn and anr. Vs. Haji Sheikh Waheed UddIn Sahib ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-28-1939
Reported in: AIR1939All600
Ganga Nath, J.1. This is a plaintiffs' appeal and arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiffs against the defendants-respondents for redemption of a usufructuary mortgage dated 17th June 1873. The mortgage was executed by Abdul Bari, the predecessor-in-interest of the plaintiffs. Abdul Bari had three sons, Abdul Hadi, Abdul Wahid and Abdul Halim, and one daughter Mt. Sharifunnissa. The plaintiffs are the heirs of Abdul Hadi and Mt. Sharifunnissa and their ahare is 3/7ths. Abdul Halim and Abdul Wahid have sold their 4/7ths share to defendants 1, 2 and 7. The plaintiffs' case was that the integrity of the mortgage was broken on account of the purchase of 4/7ths share of Abdul Halim and Abdul Wahid by defendants 1, 2 and 7. The plaintiff therefore prayed for redemption of his proportionate share or in the alternative for redemption of the whole of the mortgaged property. The mortgage was in favour of Blahi Bux. All his heirs were impleaded in the suit. The property of Mt. Aziz Fatirna,...
Tag this Judgment!Ranbir Prasad Vs. Sheobaran Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-28-1939
Reported in: AIR1939All619
Bajpai, J.1. This is an application for review. The judgment which is sought to be reviewed was delivered by us on 25th March 1938 and is to be found in Sheo Baran Singh v. Ranbir Prasad : AIR1938All477 . It might be mentioned at the very outset that there is a clerical error at page 542 in the tenth line from the bottom where Sheo Baran Singh ought to be read for Ranbir Prasad, and to that extent the judgment will be corrected. The facts of the case are stated at length in our previous judgment. It might however be mentioned that Sheo Baran Singh had applied under Section 30, Clause 2, U.P. Agriculturists' Belief Act, for reduction in the amount of interest calculated in a decree which had been passed against him at the instance of Ranbir Prasad on 9th August 1932, and the Court below rejected that application on 6th February 1937. In revision we set aside the order of the Court below and disagreed with the views entertained by that Court. The Court below had held that the decree whic...
Tag this Judgment!Rama Prasad and ors. Vs. Rameshwar Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-27-1939
Reported in: AIR1939All646
ORDERMulla, J.1. This is an application in revision under Section 115, Civil P.C., arising out of a proceeding under the Encumbered Estates Act. The applicants in this Court were the applicants in that proceeding. The Collector passed an order upon their application in due course and submitted it for decision to the Special Judge of the Second Grade at Ghazipur. A notification under Section 9, Encumbered Estates Act, was issued in due course and the creditors of the applicants who were invited to put in their claims filed their written statements. One of them was the opposite party, Rameshwar Lal. He was shown in the application under the Encumbered Estates Act as a creditor and if; was admitted that a sum of Rs. 500 had been borrowed from him by the applicants. In his written statement he claimed a sum of Rs. 746-15-6 with past and future interest on the basis of bahi-khata account. He alleged however that a sum of Rs. 500 had originally been borrowed from him by the applicants in Sam...
Tag this Judgment!Govind Ram and anr. Vs. Major A.U. John
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-27-1939
Reported in: AIR1939All668
Thom, C.J.1. This is an application in civil revision under Section 115, Civil P.C., The applicants Govind Ram Gordhandass and Ramnath Gordhandass are the proprietors of Messrs. Govindram Ramnath & Co. On 5th July 1934 the applicants entered into a contract with Major A.U. John and Mr. G.A. John who are owners of certain mills at Agra. This contract took the form of a mortgage deed and a finance agreement both of which were executed on the same day. Under the mortgage deed the mortgagees agreed to advance the sum of seven lakhs upon the mills belonging to Major A.U. John and Mr. G.A. John (now deceased). The applicants, under the finance agreement undertook to finance the mills up to a figure of four lakhs. The negotiations which culminated in the execution of the mortgage deed and the finance agreement wore conducted in Bombay and the mortgagors, under the terms of the mort-gage dead, were taken bound to repay the amount due under the mortgage at Bombay. The mortgage deed included the...
Tag this Judgment!Saiyed Shaban Ali Vs. Sheikh Mohammad Ishaq
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-27-1939
Reported in: AIR1939All724
Bajpai, J.1. This is a reference under Section 61, Stamp Act, and the question that we have got to decide is whether paper No. 7-C is a lease as well as an agreement or only an agreement. The learned Judge of the Small Cause Court was of the opinion that the document was an agreement only, whereas the Inspector of Stamps held the view that it was a lease as well as an agreement. We have perused the document and we have come to the conclusion that it is a lease as well as an agreement. It is executed not by the lessor but by the lessee, and the latter covenants that he would take certain premises from the lessor, make certain alterations in the premises at his own cost, pay Rs. 9 a month as rent and the period of occupation was fixed as five years. It was also stipulated that the executant will not leave the premises for five years and if he did vacate the premises within five years he would be liable for the rent of five years. The document was executed on 11th December 1927 on a gener...
Tag this Judgment!Ch. Bhim Sen Vs. Raghubir Saran
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-26-1939
Reported in: AIR1939All641
ORDERRachhpal Singh, J.1. The sole question for the determination in this case is whether or not the transaction in question can be said to be a loan as defined by the Agriculturists' Belief Act. If the answer to this question is in the affirmative, then this revision application must fail. The defendant executed a promissory note in favour of the plaintiff some time before the Agriculturists' Relief Act came into force. After that Act had come into force, the defendant on 16th May 1935 executed a fresh promissory note in satisfaction of the debt due on the first promissory note. The point for consideration before the Court below was whether the second transaction amounted to a loan. The learned Judge of the Court below has hold that it was. On behalf of the plaintiff, applicant it is urged that the view taken by the trial Court was not correct. I have arrived at the conclusion that the transaction does amount to a loan. Section 2, Clause (10)(a) defines that:'Loan' moans an advance to...
Tag this Judgment!Pandit Ram Chander Vs. Pandit Maharaj Kunwar and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-25-1939
Reported in: AIR1939All611
Thom, C.J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal and arises out of a suit in which the plaintiff prayed that (a) a perpetual injunction may be issued to defendants 1 and 2 restraining them from doing anything towards the demolition of the house and from doing anything as might interfere with the plaintiff's rights as lessee; Laid at Rs. 25; (b) defendants 1 and 2 may be ordered to restore the demolished portion of the house to its original condition, otherwise, it may be caused to be reconstructed at the expense of defendants 1 and 2 through the Court Amin. In case defend, ants 1 and 2 do not pay the cost of construction, the house may be restored to its original condition at the expense of the plaintiff and the amount spent may be awarded to the plaintiff against defendants 1 and 2. This second appeal has been referred to a Bench by a learned Single Judge in this Court and is in his opinion one in which an important question of law was involved. On 8th August 1931, Brij Lal sold a house to t...
Tag this Judgment!Municipal Board, Through the Chairman B. Ram Prasad Vs. Banwari Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-25-1939
Reported in: AIR1939All623
ORDERMulla, J.1. This is an application under Section 25, Small Cause Courts Act, by the Municipal Board of Jaunpur seeking revision of a decree passed by the learned Munsif, Jaunpur, in the exercise of Small Cause Court powers in a suit brought by the opposite party Banwari Lal to recover a certain amount as refund of octroi under the rules laid down in the Municipal Accounts Code. The circumstances which led to the institution of the suit may briefly be stated. Between 14th and 18th May 1937, a number of merchants in Jaunpur despatched goods outside the municipal limits. As octroi duty would have been leviable on those goods if they had been imported within the Municipal limits, the exporters became entitled to receive payment of a sum equivalent to that duty as refund under Section 178, Municipal Accounts Code which runs as follows:A person who exports from a municipality any goods on which if they were being imported octroi would be leviable shall be entitled to receive payment of ...
Tag this Judgment!Firm Tundi Ram-sheo Shanker Ram Through Sheo Shanker Ram Vs. Ghure Lal ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-24-1939
Reported in: AIR1939All598
ORDERBajpai, J.1. This is an application in revision by firm Tundi Ram Sheo Shankar Ram, who are the decree-holders of a per. son by the name of Sheo Shanker Lai. The decree was obtained on 13th March 1934 and it was put into execution on 11th August 1937. Some property was attached on 8th September 1937 and on 16th October 1937 it was notified that the sale will take place on 20th December 1937. On 11th December 1937 Ghure Lai, the bro-ther of the judgment-debtor Sheo Shanker Lai, preferred a claim under Order 21, E. 58, Civil P.C., to the attachment, and the Court passed the following order:Sale shall not be postponed. Only confirmation will await the decision of the objection which I order to be registered. Fix 22-1-38 for hearing of objection.2. The sale did take place on 20th December 1937 and the claim case was heard on 22nd January 1938 when the Court below passed the following order:I am satisfied that the disputed house, one shop, to which the objection relates, belongs to obj...
Tag this Judgment!Kanhai Lal Vs. Bhorey Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-24-1939
Reported in: AIR1939All655
Bajpai, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendant Kanhai Lal. Reference may be made to a map which is a part of the decree of the lower Appellate Court. The plaintiffs are the owners of a certain house indicated in the map and to the west of the plaintiffs house is a rasta to the north of the plaintiffs' house is the house of Bhorey Lal, defendant 2, to the west of the rasta are the shops of Hasan Lohar and Asharaf Lohar and to the west of these two shops-are two chabutras belonging to these two shops. To the north of these two shops was a certain shop and chabutra marked X which defendant 1 purchased. To the further north of this plot marked X are the houses of defendant 1. The plaintiffs' case was that a portion of the rasta to the west of the plaintiffs' house had been usurped-by the defendant and a chabutra had been built thereon. This portion is towards the north-west and by this construction of the chabutra the defendant has made his house compact and the way has been blocked to wa...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »