Allahabad Court December 1953 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.
Munshi Lal and anr. Vs. Vishnu Das and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-01-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All450
Malik, C.J.1. This is a defendant's appeal against a decree passed by the lower courts for specific performance of a contract dated 10-4-1942. The property agreed to be sold consisted of shares in Khewat No. 1 in Mauza Kishorepur, Mahal Durga Prasad, Pargana Jewar, and in Mauza Alawalpur, Mahal Durga Prasad, in the same Pargana. The facts are that defendant No. 5, Lala Raghubar Dayal, had applied under the Encumbered Estates Act and on 7-4-1942, he filed an application under Section 20 for the quashing of the proceedings. On 10-4-1942, he entered into an agreement with the plaintiffs to sell the property to them for Rs. 2,600/-. The plaintiffs paid a sum of Rs. 1,600/- as earnest money and the balance was to be paid at the time of the execution of the sale deed. On 18-7-1942, the application under Section 20 was granted and the proceedings under the Encumbered Estates Act were quashed. The plaintiffs served a notice on 13-8-1943, for specific performance of the contract and on 18-12-19...
Sheo Ram and ors. Vs. Gauri Shankar and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-01-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All452
Randhir Singh, J.1. This is a plaintiffs' appeal against the concurrent findings of the trial court and the Civil Judge in a Suit for possession.2. Gauri Shankar defendant executed a sale deed in, favour of Ram Bir on 31-5-1935 in respect of the property which was the subject of the suit which has given rise to this appeal. On the basis of this sale deed a suit for pre-emption was instituted by the appellants and this suit was decreed on 3-1-1936. The amount found to have been paid by the vendee as consideration was deposited by the plaintiffs, but they were unable to obtain possession as vendee was not in possession. On 3-1-1936, Smt. Ram Piari a member of the family of Gauri shanker, instituted a suit against Gauri Shanker for a declaration that the property belonged to her and could not be subject of transfer by Gauri shanker. The allegations on which the suit for a declaration was based are not material for the purposes of this appeal, and they need not be mentioned. This suit resu...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›