Privy Council Court January 1938 Judgments

Lala Karam Chand and Another Vs. Firm Mian Mir Ahmad Aziz Ahmad and An ...

Court: Privy Council

Sir George Lowndes: The suit out of which this appeal arises was instituted by the appellants in the Court of the Senior Subordinate Judge of Peshawar, claiming payment by the respondent, sued both as a firm and individually, of Rs. 27,867-8-0 with further interest until realisation. The foundation of the claim was alleged in the plaint to be a sitta or agreement for sale in the following terms : That on the 5th of Asuj (a Hindu month) Sambat (Hindu era), 1986, corresponding to 27th September, 1929, the parties entered into an agreement as given in the sitta (agreement to sell) (copy attached) through Sant Amir Chand, broker, as under : 'Sale to R. B. L. Karam Chand Jagat Ram of 200 boxes of tea to be imported from Shanghai. Tea to be sent for by the receiver (of money) himself. Receiver himself to be responsible for profit and loss. Interest at the rate of Rs. 11-4-0 p. a. Time ten months.' This document in itself, the meaning of which is, to say the least of it, obscure, obviously la...

R. Shanmuga Rajeswara Sethupathi Vs. Chidambaram Chettiar and Others

Court: Privy Council

Sir George Rankin: In this case three appeals have been consolidated : two of these relate to minor questions as to interest, but the main appeal [C. M. P. No. 4220 of 1928] raises questions of more importance. These arise out of a mortgage suit brought on 15th April 1905, in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Madura. The appellant in the main appeal (herein called "the appellant") is the grandson of the original mortgagor, whose eldest son, the appellant's father was defendant 1 to the suit. This defendant died pending suit and the appellant now represents the mortgagor: on one point, to be mentioned later, he has independent interests of himself and of his father to defend. Respondents 8 to 11 are the contesting respondents to the main appeal. They are the representatives of the original plaintiff in the suit. Subramaniam Chettiar who had succeeded his father Ramanathan Chettiar the original mortgagee. The decree dated 12th September 1917 of the trial Judge was modified in certain...

Thakur Gaya Bakhsh Singh Since Deceased (Now Represented by Rani Suraj ...

Court: Privy Council

Sir George Rankin: This appeal was brought by Thakur Gaya Bakhsh Singh, who will be referred to herein as "the appellant," though he assigned part of his interest to appellant 2 and has died since the appeal was brought. He was defendant 1 to a suit filed on 16th February 1931, in the Chief Court of Oudh in its original jurisdiction by respondent 1, Deo Singh, a minor (herein called "the respondent"). The plaint claimed a number of properties and impleaded four defendants, but this appeal relates only to three estates and defendant 1 is the only party disputing this claim before the Board. These estates are taluqdari estates in Oudh, and may be considered as one taluqas the main estate goes by the name of Bharawan and is situated in the District of Hardoi: included in it are two smaller estates called Basantpur and Marhapur in the Districts of Lucknow and Unao. The respondent's claim was that he had become entitled to these estates upon the death on 12th December 1930 of a lady called ...

Mohammad Hatibul Haq and Others Vs. Seth Tikam Chand

Court: Privy Council

Reported in: AIR1938PC110

Lord Roche: This is an appeal from a decree, dated 6th July 1932, of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad setting aside the decree, dated 29th May 1928, of the Subordinate Judge of Agra. The dealings between the original parties to the suit or their predecessors in business extended over very many years and litigation or disputes culminating in litigation have been in progress for nearly 20 years. Of the matters litigated between the parties only two points remained for decision upon the hearing of this appeal. Those points are : First : Whether a deed bearing date 25th January 1918, executed by the original plaintiff in favour of the original defendant remained effective notwithstanding a compromise between the parties made in 1921 or was cancelled by such compromise. Second : Whether the original plaintiff was or was not entitled to the benefit of certain Government promissory notes of the face value of Rs. 13,000 which had been deposited by him with the said defendant as securi...

MartIn CashIn and Others Vs. Peter J. Cashin

Court: Privy Council

Lord Maugham: This is an appeal from the judgment of the Supreme Court of Newfoundland (Sir William H. Horwood C.J. Kent J. and Higgins J.) given on 8th January 1937, dismissing by a majority (Kent J. dissenting) an appeal from the judgment of Sir William H. Horwood C. J. given on 21st July 1936. By the judgment it was ordered that an agreement under seal dated 8th September 1927, to which the appellants and the respondent were parties be set aside, and declared to be null and void. The agreement under seal dated 8th September 1927, (which will be referred to as "the deed") related to the estate of Sir Michael P. Cashin who died on 30th August 1926. He left surviving him his wife, the appellant Gertrude C. Cashin (Lady Cashin) and four adult children, the appellants Lawrence V. Cashin, and Martin Cashin, the respondent Peter J. Cashin, and a married daughter Mrs. Mary Fox. Sir Michael Cashin had made his last will on 15th November 1925. By it the appellants Lady Cashin and Lawrence Cas...