Allahabad Court February 1941 Judgments
Radha Kishen and anr. Vs. Ikram-uddin
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-26-1941
Reported in: AIR1941All217
Collister, J.1. This is a defendants' second appeal. It appears that the appellants ara the proprietors of a firm of military contractors. They gave a sub-contract to the plaintiff-respondent for the supply of leather goods and the arrangement between the parties was that the plaintiff should submit his bills to the defendants and the latter should realize the money from the military department and should thereafter pay it to the plaintiff, after deducting a commission of 5 per cent. On 1st November 1934 the plaintiff-respondent instituted a suit (Suit No. 725 of 1934) for recovery of a specific sum of money, amounting to Rs. 1066-10-0, which admittedly had reference to specific bills submitted by the plaintiff to the defendants. The suit was originally dismissed, but was decreed in first appeal, and the decree of the appellate Court was affirmed by this Court in second appeal on 28th March 1938.2. Meanwhile on 30fch August 1936 the plaintiff filed the suit out of which this second app...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Jairaj Behari Vs. U.P. Electric Supply Co. Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-19-1941
Reported in: AIR1941All301
Ismail, J.1. The following points have been referred to us for decision by the learned Judge of the Small Cause Court, Allahabad, under Order 1 of Order 46, Civil P.C.:1. Whether a person entitled to supply of energy Under Section 22, Electricity Act of 1910, has a cause of action for a suit for damages on account of the ; licensee's failure to supply energy according to Section 22 and para. 6 to the Schedule? 2. Whether the civil Court including the Judge, Small Cause Court, has jurisdiction to entertain such a suit? 2. It appears that the plaintiff, Dr. Jairaj Bihari, recently built a house in a locality which is known as George Town Extension Scheme. The defendant, the U. P. Electric Supply Co. Ltd., is the licensee for the distribution of electric energy in the town of Allahabad. It is admitted that the house of the plaintiff is within the 'area of supply.'3. In January 1989 the plaintiff sent a requisition to the defendant to supply electric energy. The defendant was informed that...
Tag this Judgment!Suraj Kuar Vs. Sant Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-17-1941
Reported in: AIR1941All219
ORDERCollister, J.1. This is a plaintiff's application in revision under Section 115, Civil P.C., arising out of an order demanding security for the costs of a suit. The applicant is a woman, and she instituted a suit for possession of property, the valuation being Rs. 6000. The opposite party applied to the learned Judge demanding security for costs from the applicant. Admittedly, the provisions of Order 25, Rule 1, Civil P.C., do not apply in terms, but the learned Judge, purporting to act in the exercise of his inherent powers under Section 151, Civil P.C., has allowed the application of the opposite party and has called upon the applicant to deposit security in the amount of Rs. 1000 for the costs of defendants 1 and 2. Learned Counsel for the applicant contends that this order was without jurisdiction. Alternatively, it is pleaded that the amount demanded was far in excess of what was required as security for costs, and this is conceded. It appears that litigation in respect to th...
Tag this Judgment!Thakur Prasad Chaudhari Vs. Official Liquidator, Benares Bank Ltd. (In ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-14-1941
Reported in: AIR1941All278
Braund, J.1. This is an application by a creditor of the Benares Bank Limited by way of appeal from a decision of the Official Liquidator. The applicant was admittedly a person who on 3rd August 1939, the date ?of the commencement of this winding up, was a depositor with the Bank by way of fixed deposit to the extent of Rs. 190 odd. He, accordingly, in due course submitted a proof to the Official Liquidator claiming to be a creditor of the company in this amount. The Official Liquidator admitted that he was a creditor on fixed deposit to the extent he claimed, but went on to assert that the applicant was at the same time a guarantor of the overdraft account of another client of the Bank, which account stood in debit on 3rd August 1939 to the extent of over Rs. 2000. The Official Liquidator, therefore, claimed to appropriate the Rs. 190 owing by the Bank to the applicant in part satisfaction of the liability of upwards Rs. 2000 due from the applicant to the Bank on the guarantee. Althou...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Kishore Vs. Yashpal Kunwar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-12-1941
Reported in: AIR1941All224
Mohammad Ismail, J.1. The two connected appeals arise out of two orders of the Court below holding that no appeal lay to the District Judge from the orders of the execution Court staying the execution proceedings. It appears that the appellant obtained a decree on 16th April 1937 against the respondent on the basis of two pronotes, one dated 10th August 1936 and the other dated 11th January 1937. The decree-holder proceeded -with the execution of the decrees. Before the decrees were passed, the judgment-debtor had made an application under Section 4, Encumbered Estates Act. An order under Section 6 was passed by the Collector on 30th October forwarding the application to the Special Judge. The judgment-debtor made an application to the execution Court praying for the stay of execution proceedings under Section 7, Sub-clause (2), Encumbered Estates Act. The decree-holder objected and contended that for certain reasons Section 7(2) was not applicable, and that the judgment-debtor was not...
Tag this Judgment!Firm Surajbali Ram Harakh Vs. Mohar Ali and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-12-1941
Reported in: AIR1941All212
Dar, J.1. Firm Surajbali Ram Harakh instituted a Suit No. 437 of 1933 in the Court of Munsif of Bansi for recovery of a sum of money against Munishwar Kolapuri and others. During the pendency of the suit, on the application of Firm Surajbali Ram Harakh, the Munsif of Bansi, on 12th May 1933 passed an order of attachment before judgment, of certain immovable property owned by Munishwar Kolapuri and others. This property was situated outside the jurisdiction of the Munsif of Bansi. Accordingly a request was made by the Munsif of Bansi to the Munsif of Gorakhpur, within whose jurisdiction the said property was situated, to attach the property and on 21st May 1933 the Munsif of Gorakhpur carried out the attachment. After the attachment and in due course the suit was tried by the Munsif of Bansi and resulted in a decree in favour of Firm Surajbali Ram Harakh who after obtaining the decree proceeded to execute the decree against the property which had already been attached. In this they were...
Tag this Judgment!Pt. Shiva Shankar Lal Sharma Vs. Ramji Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-12-1941
Reported in: AIR1941All285
Braund, J.1. This appeal raises a little point which may possibly be one of some practical interest. The facts are that in September 1922, the defendant lent a sum of Rs. 10,000 to the plaintiff at interest at a certain rate. In 1934, the United Provinces Agriculturists' Relief Act was passed. Among other provisions, the Act by Section 33 gave to an agriculturist debtor a right to come to the Court and obtain from the Court a declaration, as between himself and his creditor, as to the outstanding amount of the debt. Upon such an application, the Court is enjoined, after taking the necessary accounts, to declare the amount of debt accordingly and, if the creditor so desires, to pass a decree in his favour for the sum so found. In October 1935 the debtor was minded to avail himself of Section 33 of the Act, and he started a suit under that section by a plaint of 2nd October 1935. He admitted that he had borrowed the money in 1922 and claimed to be an agriculturist. Then, by para. 3 of hi...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›