Allahabad Court January 1947 Judgments
B. Budhram Rai Vs. Benarsi Rai and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-31-1947
Reported in: AIR1948All31
Sinha, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of a suit for declaration. The facts of this case are rather complicated but Mr. Pande, the learned Counsel for the appellant, has stated, them with great clarity. They are briefly these:2. One Swarath Ri died in 1874, leaving a widow Mt. Lachmina, a son named Rm Daur and a daughter Mt. Bihansa. Ram Daur's wife was Mt. Rano. Bihansa was married to a man named Raji Rai, who had, by her two sons - Sagar Rai and Banarsi Rai - defendants 1 and 2 in this action. After Ram Daur's death the property came in the possession of Mt. Rano. After her death, it went to Mt. Lachmina.3. Some time, prior to 1890, Mt. Lachmina sold half of the estate to Mahabal, the father of the plaintiff. On 11-4-1897 she executed a mortgage by conditional sale in favour of Raji Rai, the father of defendants 1 and 2 and the predecessor in title of defendants 3 to 10. She died in 1910. In 1917, Mt. Bihansa brought a. suit for cancellation not only of the sale in. fav...
Tag this Judgment!Abu Obaida Vs. Jami Hasan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-24-1947
Reported in: AIR1948All49
ORDERMootham, J.1. The facts of this case are peculiar. Jamil Hasan, the respondent, was adjudicated an insolvent in the year 1935. In November 1936, an order was made by the Insolvency Court which was assumed by all concerned to be an order annulling the adjudication. In 1939 Abu Obaida, the present applicant, in execution of a decree which he had obtained against the respondent, attached a sum of money belonging to him which was then in the hands of the Official Receiver. The Official Receiver deposited the money in Court whence it was withdrawn by the applicant. Five months later this Court by an order dated 6th June 1940, held that the respondent's adjudication had never been annulled and that consequently he had throughout remained an insolvent. Although the applicant had not in 1939 obtained the leave of the Court to execute his decree against the respondent, no steps appeared to have been taken by the Official Receiver, after it had become clear that the adjudication had not bee...
Tag this Judgment!Subhan Ali and anr. Vs. Mt. Makhdomulnissa
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-02-1947
Reported in: AIR1948All11
Raghubar Dayal, J.1. The sole question for determination in this second appeal is whether the waqf deed executed by Hidayat Ullah on 16th September 1919 is a valid waqf deed under the provisions of the Mussalman Waqf Validating Act, (6;VI. of 1913). Both the Courts below have held it to be a valid waqf deed. I agree with their view.2. Under this deed Hidayat Ullah abdicated the property detailed therein to God, subject to certain conditions for obtaining spiritual benefit. The conditions provided that the income from the property would be spent in the first instance 1 on the expenses of Girhwin sharif Fatiah and milad and the balance after defraying the expenses on these items would be divisible among the beneficiaries. In the earlier part of the waqf deed it was mentioned that half the income of the property would go to his elder daughter for the expenses of herself and her children and the other half of the income would similarly go to the second daughter for smilar purposes. Lastly,...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›