Privy Council Court May 1940 Judgments

M.L.M. Mahalingam Chettiar Vs. Ramanathan Chettiar and Others

Court: Privy Council

LORD ROMER: This is a consolidated appeal against the orders dated 2nd October 1934, and 1st February 1935, of the High Court of Madras affirming two orders dated 23rd December 1931, of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Ramnad at Madura. The appeal arises out of certain execution proceedings, and the principal question to be determined is whether in the case of cross decrees for money the right of the party holding the decree for the larger amount to set off the smaller decree against him is defeated by reason of the smaller decree having been attached by third parties. The facts that give rise to the appeal are not in dispute and can be stated with reasonable brevity. On 37th November 1911, the appellant's father, one Ramanathan Chettiar, obtained a decree for a sum of Rs. 46,253 odd with further interest and costs against respondent 1 and his father Subrahmanyam Chettiar in Original Suit No. 77 of 1911 in the Court of the Temporary Subordinate Judge of Ramnad. On 12th September 1...

Mirza Akba Vs. King-emperor

Court: Privy Council

LORD WRIGHT: This is an appeal in forma pauperis by special leave from a judgment and order of the Court of the Judicial Commissioner, North-West Frontier Province dated 10th July 1939. The learned Judicial Commissioner dismissed the appellant's appeal from his conviction of an offence punishable under S. 302/120-B, Penal Code, i. e., conspiracy to murder in consequence of which conspiracy murder was committed, and confirmed the sentence of death passed on him by the Additional Sessions Judge, Peshawar Division, on 8th May 1939. The appeal raises two main points, which are the only points calling in their Lordships' judgment for consideration here. They are independent of each other. The first is a question as to the jurisdiction of the Court by which the sentence was confirmed. It was contended on behalf of the appellant that the Court was not legally constituted, because the appeal to the Court was dismissed and the sentence confirmed by a single Judge of the Court of the Judicial Co...

Nathu Lal and Others Vs. Mt. Gomti Kuar and Others

Court: Privy Council

MR. M.R. JAYAKAR: The suit out of which this appeal arises was brought on 8th September 1928, by the appellants (plaintiffs 3-5) and respondents 29 and 30 (plaintiffs 1 and 2) against respondents 1-28 (defendants 1-28), claiming redemption of certain properties on the allegation that the deed of sale of the said properties dated 25th March 1844, executed by one Gulab Singh (the representative in interest of the plaintiffs) in favour of Het Ram and Tula Ram (the representatives-in-interest of the defendants) and an alleged agreement to transfer the said properties bearing the same date and executed by Het Ram and Tula Ram in favour of Gulab Singh formed one transaction and constituted a mortgage by conditional sale of the properties comprised in the sale deed. In the plaint, plaintiffs mentioned 26th March 1844, as the date of the mortgage completed by the execution of the two documents and they filed with the plaint a certified copy of the said sale deed (which is marked Ex. I) bearing...

Hem Chandra Roy Chaudhury Vs. Suradhani Debya Chaudhurani and Others

Court: Privy Council

SIR GEORGE RANKIN: The appellant, Hem Chandra Roy Chaudhury, was defendant 1 in a suit brought by respondent 1 in the Court of the Subordinate Judge at Mymensingh to enforce a mortgage. The suit was filed on 6th March 1931, and the mortgage deed (Ex. I) was dated 18th August 1918. The property mortgaged thereby was a taluk (Gangaram Rai) numbered 237 in the books of the Mymensingh Collectorate and comprising ten mouzas; also another taluk (Sambhu Chandra Roy) numbered 239 in the same Collectorate and comprising seven mouzas. The mortgage deed had been executed in favour of the plaintiff by two persons as mortgagors- the appellant and his paternal grandmother, an old lady whose name was Sm. Nabin Kishore Chaudhurani. The appellant had inherited the mortgaged properties, together with other properties, from his father at some date before 1914 while he was yet a minor. The father's will, made in 1391, states that Nabin Kishore, the testator's adoptive mother, had managed and administered ...

Suleman Haji Ahmed Umer Vs. Haji Abdulla Haji Rahimtulla

Court: Privy Council

SIR PHILIP MACDONELL: This is an appeal from a decision of the High Court of Bombay in its appellate jurisdiction, given in favour of the plaintiff-respondent, and reversing a judgment of the Original Side of that Court which judgment had dismissed the plaintiff-respondent's action to recover various sums of money bailed by him to the defendant-appellant between the years 1923 and 1928. The only question for determination in this appeal is whether the respondent as plaintiff brought this action within time or whether his claim is barred under the Limitation Act 9 of 1908, and the answer to this question depends on what was the character of the bailment under which the plaintiff handed over and the defendant received these sums of money. If by that bailment the respondent must claim these sums of money as "money payable for money lent," (Art. 57, Limitation Act) or as "money lent under an agreement that it shall be payable on demand," (Art. 59, Limitation Act) then and in each case the ...

Jagadish Chandra Deo Dhabal Deb Vs. Debnath Mahto

Court: Privy Council

SIR GEORGE RANKIN: In this case four appeals from the High Court at Patna have been consolidated. They are brought by the proprietor of the permanently settled estate of Dhalbhum, a large estate situate on the eastern part of the district of Singhbhum in Bihar but extending for a little distance into Bengal. The orders complained of were made by the High Court on 29th April 1936. They arose out of four applications for execution made to the Revenue Court at Jamshedpur on 10th March 1934. By each of these applications the appellant sought execution of a decree for rent obtained by him against the respondents respectively as the person or persons holding certain tenancies in four different mouzas of his zemindari. These decrees had been obtained ex parte: in the plaints and in the decrees the tenancies were described as "tenures," and by his execution proceeding in each case the appellant, on the footing that the tenancies were tenures within the meaning of the Chota Nagpur Tenancy Act, ...

Seth Kishori Lal and Another Vs. Bhawani Shankar and Others

Court: Privy Council

SIR GEORGE RANKIN: This appeal is brought by the plaintiffs from a decree of the High Court at Allahabad, dated 24th November 1936. The defendants have not been represented at the hearing of the appeal, but Mr. Rewcastle and Mr. Hyam for the appellants have carefully laid before the Board all the material considerations. The suit was brought on 21st March 1932, in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Etah, upon a registered mortgage dated 1st September 1926, and claimed the usual relief under O. 34, Civil PC.-enforcement of the mortgage by sale of the mortgaged property. The mortgage deed was in favour of the plaintiffs. It was executed by three persons as mortgagors-Bhawani, Mahadeo, and Sriman Narain-but Bhawani purported to execute on behalf of himself and his minor son Kailash Narain; while Mahadeo purported to execute on behalf of himself and his four minor sons-Tirjugi, Giyandendra, Mathresh and Sat Narain. As will be seen from the pedigree hereunder, Bhawani and Mahadeo were br...

Mosque Known as Masjid Shahid Ganj and Others Vs. Shiromani Gurdwara P ...

Court: Privy Council

SIR GEORGE RANKIN: Before 1935 there had stood for many years to the south of what is now called the Naulakha Bazaar, in the city of Lahore, a structure having three domes and five arches, which had been built as a mosque (masjid) and which retained, notwithstanding considerable disrepair, sufficient of its original character to suggest, or even so proclaim, its originalpurpose. It had a projecting niche (mehrab) in the centre of the west wall such as is used in mosques as the place from which the imam leads the prayers. Its dedication is no longer in dispute, having been established as of the year 1134 A. H. or 1722 A. D. by the production and proof of a deed of dedication executed by one Falak Beg Khan. By this deed, Sheikh Din Mohammad and his descendants were appointed mutawalis. The deed speaks of a school, a well and an orchard as being among the appurtenances of the mosque and gives the total area of the dedicated property as three kanals and fifteen marlas; but it is not now ne...

Thakur Bhagwan Singh and Others Vs. Bishambar Nath (Minor) and Others

Court: Privy Council

Reported in: AIR1940PC114

LORD JUSTICE GODDARD: This is an appeal from a judgment of the High Court of Allahabad dismissing an appeal by the present appellants and allowing an appeal by the first three respondents from a judgment of the Subordinate Judge of Agra. The action was brought to recover Rs. 44,000, the principal sum secured by a mortgage dated 17th August 1924, with interest thereon at 5 per cent. This mortgage was in fact the last in a series by way of renewal of an original mortgage dated 22nd July 1892, whereby Durjan Sal, the father of appellant 1 and great-grandfather of appellants 2 and 3, had mortgaged some of his ancestral lands to one Bhoraj, the father of respondent 4, for Rs. 25,000. The consideration for the mortgage is stated in the deed to be the discharge of two promissory notes with interest amounting to Rs. 6221-8-0 and Rs. 18,778-8-0 cash, for payment of a debt due under a bond. On the same day the mortgagor executed a bond for Rs. 2000 payable in two years in favour of the mortgagee...