Privy Council Court April 1931 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.
Egyptian Salt and Soda Co., Limited Vs. Port Said Salt Association, Li ...
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Apr-21-1931
Lord Macmillan: The sole question at issue in this appeal is whether it is permissible for the appellant company, having regard to the terms of its Memorandum of Association, to engage in the business of exporting salt from Egypt. The respondent company is a shareholder of the appellant company and as such asks and has obtained from His Britannic Majesty's Supreme Court for Egypt, an injunction restraining the appellant company from engaging in this branch of business. The present appeal is against the order so obtained. To place the controversy in its due setting it is necessary to refer to the agreed documents in the case. From these the essential facts may be briefly extracted. It appears that by decree of 26th August 1886, the Khedive established a monopoly in Egypt of the extraction, manufacture and sale of salt and natron or native sodium carbonate. In 1897 an Egyptian limited company, the Societe Anonyme des Soudes Naturelles d'Egypte, which it will be convenient to call "the Eg...
Jagmohan Das Vs. Jugal Kishore and Another
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Apr-20-1931
Stuart, C.J. and Nanavatty, J: This appeal has been presented by a certain Jagmohan Das, brother of Indar Prasad. The brothers are money-lenders in Lucknow. Jagmohan Das in these proceedings represents the interest of both brothers. The appeal has come into being in the following manner: A lady called Bakhtawar Begum, together with her husband Muhammad Hadi, had executed four deeds in favour of Jugal Kishore and Parsotam Das, the sons of Lala Har Narain, money-lenders of Lucknow. The first of these deeds is a registered deed of simple mortgage dated 12th March 1915 (Ex. 1) and the remainders are a deed of further charge dated 21st August 1915 (Ex. 2), a second deed of further charge dated 5th October 1915 (Ex. 3), and a second deed of mortgage dated 5th October 1915 (Ex. 4). The position of the appellant was this: He held deeds of mortgage prior to the deeds Exs. 1 to 4. He was further entitled to put up by subrogati .on previous mortgages which he had satisfied as a shield and he was...
(Mahanth) Krishna Dayal Gir Vs. Rani Bhubneshwari Kuar and Others
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Apr-17-1931
Sir Dinshah Mulla: This is an appeal from a decree of the High Court at Patna, dated 28th June 1927, which reversed a decree of the Subordinate Judge of Gaya dated 11th June 1923. The dispute between the parties is as to the exact area of the lands demised under a mukarrari patta made in 1835 by the 7 annas Tikari Raj, now represented by the plaintiff-respondent, to Sib Dayal Gir, the then mohant of a math at Mahodah, and the predecessor-in-title of the defendant-appellant. The lands are situated in Mauza Bodh Gaya, also known as Mahabodh. The appellant contends that the area was 300 bighas, while the plaintiff-respondent admits only 200 bighas, or at the most 231. Neither the patta nor the kabuliyat is forthcoming, and it is this that has caused the difficulty of the case. The math at Mahodah was subordinate to another math situated at Bodh Gaya. It has been alleged by the appellant that the late mohant of the math at Mahodah was Rangpal Gir, that he died without a chela to succeed hi...
Manmohan Das and Others Vs. Mt. Ramdei and Another
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Apr-16-1931
Lord Macmillan: This is an appeal against a decree of the High Court of Allahabad reversing a decree of the Additional Subordinate Judge of Allahabad. The question at issue is whether a deed of gift dated 2nd August 1919, and executed by Behari Lal, respondent 2, in favour of his wife, Mt. Ramdei, respondent 1, represented a genuine transaction or was fictitious and benami. The Subordinate Judge found that the transaction was benami. The High Court held that it was genuine. Their Lordships have now to determine which of these two decisions was right. The circumstances which have given rise to the action may be briefly summarized. It appears that the respondent Behari Lal and his brother Lala Gaza Prasad at one time, owned in its entirety : a house, No. 15, situated in Chowk, Allahabad. Sometime previous to the date of the deed of gift under challenge the eight annas share of Lala Gaza Prasad was purchased by the plaintiffs, Lala Madho Prasad and his son Lala Manmohan Das alias Bachchaj...
Srijukta Saraju Bala Debi and Others Vs. Srimati Jyotirmoyee Debi and ...
Court: Privy Council
Decided on: Apr-14-1931
Sir Dinshah Mulla: This is an appeal from a decree of the High Court of Calcutta affirming the decision of the Subordinate Judge of Dacca. The question for their Lordships' consideration is whether on a true construction of three leases executed by Raja Kali Narayan Roy Chowdhury in favour of his daughter Kripamoyee Debi she took an absolute estate or an estate for life. Both the Courts in India agreed in holding that she took an absolute estate of inheritance which she could dispose of by deed or will. All the three leases are described as miras talukdari puttas and putni talukdari puttas. The words "miras talukdari putta" imply a permanent and heritable estate. The words "putni talukdari putta" import a permanent heritable estate subject to a fixed rent. The leases comprised properties forming part of the Raja's zamindari estate. The first lease was executed on 22nd March 1865. It begins with a description of the properties and after reciting the annual income thereof proceeds as fol...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›