Allahabad Court April 1944 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 Gopal Vs. Govind Das
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-18-1944
Reported in: AIR1944All196
ORDERSinha, J.1. These two are cross-cases and their facts are necessarily the same. I shall first take up Civil Revn. No. 445 of 1943. Firm Kunji Lal Ram Gopal was a firm of commission agents in Jhansi. In August 1937 Govind Das contracted to purchase 30 bales of cotton through the above firm, in Bombay. They were so purchased by Kunji Lal from a firm in Bombay named Parshotam Kunwarji. About April or May 1938 the Bombay firm made an inquiry from firm Kunji Lal Ram Gopal as to whether delivery was to be made and if so when. Firm Kunji Lal Ram Gopal, in their turn, inquired from Govind Das if he would make the necessary purchase and take the necessary delivery. The reply of Govind Das, according to firm Kunji Lal Ram Gopal, was that Govind Das was not prepared to take delivery, but that the sale could be made in the market and the gain or the loss adjusted according to the conditions of the market. This was done, with the result that firm Kunji Lal Ram Gopal suffered a loss of Rs. 753-...
Madan Mohan Vs. Raghunandan Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-18-1944
Reported in: AIR1944All208
Malik, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal under Section 6A, Court-fees Act. To understand the facts of the case it will be necessary to set out a short pedigree:Kamta Prasad_________________________|_____________________| | |Sheonandan (dead) Raghunandan Jadunandan= def. 1 def. 5Ram Piare | def. 4 Madan Mohan| plff. _____|_______________________________| |Radha Kishan def. 2 Hari Kishan def. 3.2. One Beni Madho had obtained a decree for sale on the basis of a mortgage against defendants 2 to 4. In execution of the mortgage decree the property included in the mortgage, house No. 61/14 and plot No. 65/20, were put to sale on 3rd July 1941, and were purchased at auction by defendant 7, Laxmi Narain. After the auction sale but before the confirmation of the sale Madan Mohan filed this suit. His allegation in the plaint was that the family was joint, that his father Raghunandan was not in his proper senses and the joint family was not bound by the mortgage or by the decree on the basis of th...
Reaz UddIn and ors. Vs. Mir Sajid HusaIn and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-18-1944
Reported in: AIR1944All224
ORDERSinha, J.1. This is a civil revision under Section 115, Civil P.C., and directed against an order of the learned District Judge of Ghazipur by which he permitted a suit to be withdrawn with liberty to bring a fresh suit.2. An application for redemption of three mortgages was made by the opposite party in the Court of the Assistant Collector, 1st class, of Ghazipur under Section 12, Agriculturists' Relief Act.3. The defence in the main was a denial of the execution of two and the bar of limitation with respect to the third.4. The learned Assistant Collector decreed the suit by his judgment of 19th September 1941.5. Against this an appeal was preferred by the defendants.6. It appears that there were certain lacunae in the plaintiffs' case which came to light in the course of the arguments in appeal and the plaintiffs, therefore, made an application to the learned Judge for permission to withdraw the suit with liberty to bring a fresh suit. He allowed this application by the followin...
Wahid UddIn Vs. Ramji Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-17-1944
Reported in: AIR1944All254
Ismail, J. 1. This is an appeal from an order of the Special Judge of Meerut against a decree passed under Section 14, Encumbered Estates Act. A preliminary objection has been taken to this appeal by learned counsel for the respondent to the effect that no appeal is competent to this Court under Section 45 of the Act. We have decided to dispose of this matter as an application under Section 46. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant at some length. The sole point for consideration is whether the learned Special Judge was right in calculating interest on the amount found due under Section 14 (4) of the Act which included principal and interest. It is urged that pendente lite and future interest should be calculated only on the principal amount due from the landlord and not on the aggregate amount of principal and interest. Section 14 of the Act is self-contained and lays down the procedure to be followed by the Special Judge in the examination of claims and determination of the...
L. Radhey Shiam and anr. Vs. L. Jugal Kishore
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-14-1944
Reported in: AIR1944All223
Mohammad Ismail, J.1. This and the connected appeals arise out of five separate suits that were brought by the plaintiffs for profits under Section 230, U.P. Tenancy Act (17 of 1939), against the defendant who is the lambardar. The suits were contested on a variety of grounds. The Courts below upon a consideration of the evidence have decreed the suits. The plaintiffs have now come to this Court in appeal.2. Learned Counsel for the appellants has stressed two points. He contends that the Court below had erred in law in granting interest at the rate of only 6 1/4 per cent, per annum. He has urged that according to the correct reading of the relevant section, the plaintiffs are entitled to charge interest at the rate of 12 per cent, per annum. The suit in this case was brought with respect to arrears of years 1344 to 1346F. The suit was instituted on 9th February 1940, that is, a few days after the new Act had come into force. It is not disputed that Section 225 of Act 3 of 1926 allowed ...
Mt. Maseetunnisa Vs. Mahesh Chander and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-14-1944
Reported in: AIR1944All228
Sinha, J.1. This is an appeal by defendant l, Mt. Masitunnissa, arising out of a suit for a declaration that the sale made by Mt. Renka Kuer on 28th March 1938 in her favour is not binding upon the plaintiffs. The relationship of the parties to this litigation, barring the appellant, who is a stranger purchaser, will appear from the pedigree set forth below:CHET RAM_______________________|______________________| | Khader Mal (died 15-3-1904) Tola Ram= Mt. Paran Kuer = Mt. Khushali_______|______________________________________________| | |Jamna Kuer Renka Kuer (deft. 2) Durga Kuer(deft. 3). | = Brij Mohan dead)| Lal (husband) ____________________|__________________________| | |Mahesh Chander Kailash Chander Harish Chander(plff. 1). (plff. 2). (plff. 3).2. It appears that Khader Mal was a very substantial man and he left a considerable fortune on his death. Mt. Paran Kuer made a will on 1st November 1911 in favour of her three daughters in respect of a number of properties including a tw...
Balwant Singh Vs. Ram Charan Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-13-1944
Reported in: AIR1944All188
Malik, J.1. This appeal has been filed by one Chaudhri Balwant Singh who had filed an application under Section 33, Arbitration Act, Act 10of 1940, challenging the validity of an award. On 8th March 1941 the parties referred certain disputes to one Kunwar Sardar Singh arbitrator. On 30th April 1941 the arbitrator delivered a copy of the award to each of the parties. On 22nd May 1941 the arbitrator registered this award. On 23rd May 1941 the appellant Ch. Balwant Singh filed an objection under Section 33 of the Act and his grounds were that the award registered on 22nd May 1941 was materially different from the award dated 30th April 1941. He further urged that the award was written out on a stamp paper on 22nd May and was invalid and certain other objections were taken which it is not necessary to set out here. The Court dismissed the application under Section 33 of the Act on 25th September 1941. It is against the order dismissing the application that this appeal has been filed. The l...
Mt. Samiunnissa Vs. Mt. Saida Khatun
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-13-1944
Reported in: AIR1944All202
Malik, J.1. This is an appeal against the order passed by the learned District Judge of Bulandshahr under the Guardians and Wards Act (Act 8 of 1890). The appellant Mt. Samiunnissa applied that she be appointed guardian of the person of the minor Rashida Khatun, who at the time of the application in the year 1941 was a girl ten years old. The application was opposed by the mother of the minor Mt. Saida Kha-toon. During the pendency of the contest between the mother and the grandmother of the minor, Sayeed Ahmad brother of the appellant filed an application on 3rd August 1941 supporting the application of Mt. Samiunnissa for guardianship and praying in the alternative that in case the Court was not willing to appoint Mt. Samiunnissa the Court may appoint him, Sayeed Ahmad, as the guardian. The learned District Judge by an order dated 30th August 1941 appointed the mother as guardian of the person of the minor and directed that the mother should make proper arrangements for secular and r...
Bhagwati Prasad and anr. Vs. Collector of Etah and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-13-1944
Reported in: AIR1944All218
ORDERMalik, J.1. This is a judgment-debtors' application in revision under Section 115, Civil P.C.2. On 21st September 1935, the Collector of Etah as President of Mt. Chunni Kunwar Trust Committee obtained a decree against the applicants for arrears of rent.3. The decree was put into execution in due course, but on 27th January 1939, the execution application was dismissed for default. The decree-holder, however, applied for restoration and on 6th June 1939, the execution application was again restored. On 26th March 1940, the application for execution was again dismissed for default, but on an application by the decree-holder the executing Court again restored it. For the third time on 6th July 1940, the application for execution was dismissed for default. The decree-holder again applied for restoration but this time the application for restoration was dismissed by the executing Court on 30th September 1940, on the ground that sufficient ground had not been made out and the decree-hol...
Collector of Moradabad Vs. Kanhaiya Lal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-13-1944
Reported in: AIR1944All225
Sinha, J.1. This is an appeal by a judgment-debtor against an order under Section 47, Civil P.C. The facts very briefly are these. On 30th November 1932, the respondents obtained a decree from the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Moradabad for Rs. 7878. Against thi3 decree an appeal was preferred by the appellant to this Court. During the pendency of the appeal an application for stay of execution of the decree of the trial Court was made by the decree-holder. The judgment-debtor applied for stay of the proceedings in execution and the learned Subordinate Judge acceded to this prayer, but directed that Rs. 2000 be deposited by the appellant 'as security in this Court within a month of this date to cover any loss which may possibly accrue to the decree-holder owing to the sale being stayed.' He, however, made it clear that 'an appeal is pending in the Hon'ble High Court from the decree which is being executed. 1 must, therefore, stay the sale under Order 41, Rule 6(2), Civil P.C.'2. Th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »