Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1932All199
Niamatullah, J.1. This is an application for revision directed against the decree passed by the Judge of the Court of Small Causes at Pilibhit dismissing the plaintiff-applicant's suit for recovery of Rs. 250 principal and Rs. 30 interest on what purports to be an acknowledgment of liability, but has been wrongly described by the Court below as a promissory note. As considerable importance has come to be attached to its contents in course of the arguments before us,'-it is desirable to quote it in extenso. It runs as follows:A sum of Rs. 250, half of which is Rs. 125, has been found due by me to Shaikh Abdur Rafiq...on settlement of account (fahmid hesab kitab) in respect of dealings between me and him (Abdur Rafiq) up to date. These presents are therefore executed to be of service in case cf need.2. The plaintiff's case as set out in the plaint is that dealings hetween the parties were taken account of on 3rd May 1929 when the sum of Rs. 250 was found due to the plaintiff from the def...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Halbert v. United States - 283 U.S. 753 (1931) U.S. Supreme Court Halbert v. United States, 283 U.S. 753 (1931) Halbert v. United States Nos. 141-154 Argued March 11, 12, 1931 Decided June 1, 1931 283 U.S. 753 CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Syllabus 1. Indians of the Chehalis, Chinook and Cowlitz Tribes, not allotted elsewhere, are among those who, under the Act of March 4, 1911, are entitled to take allotments on the Quinaielt Reservation in the State of Washington. P. 283 U. S. 760 . 2. Personal residence on the reservation is not essential to the right of allotment. P. 283 U. S. 762 . Page 283 U. S. 754 3. The rule is general that, in the absence of provision to the contrary, the right of individual Indians to share in tribal property, whether lands or funds, depends on tribal membership, and is terminated when the membership ends. P. 283 U. S. 762 . 4. Under the operation of this rule, an Indian woman loses her tribal membersh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1932Cal93
Mukerji, J.1. This is an appeal by defendant 1 from a preliminary decree in a partition suit. The following genealogy will show the relationship of the parties: 1st wife = Bazlul Karim = 2nd wife S.M. Masuda Khatun died 3rd Falgun 1830 Srimati Latifa Defendant 1. B.S.=18th February 1924. Bibi, dead. | _________________________________________________________________________ | | | 1st wife = Son = 2nd wife Daughter Daughter Mrs. Katherine | Badrul Alum S.M. Abeda Sm. Siddiquo Srimati Badre Alum. Def. 4 | died 1925. Khatun. Bibi Jehan. | Def. 3. (Died 1926) Def. 2. | = Husband Md. | Ibrahim, | Plff. 2. | | | | Daughter Son S.M. Badre Manir Golam Haidar alias Tepi. Plaintiff Defendant 5. No. 1.The two plaintiffs commenced the action on a plaint filed on 28th February 1927. The properties in respect of which partition was asked for were described in three schedules annexed to the plaint; schedule Ka, consisting of securities and cash, schedule Kha, moveable properties and schedule Ga, im...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1931All490
ORDER1. A simple mortgage had been executed in 1907 by one Sheo Nath in favour of Mahabir Singh. Sheo Nath died and was succeeded by his son Chandi. Before his death Sheo Nath had sold a part of the mortgaged property to Shri Bhagwat.2. In 1915 Mahabir Singh sued on his mortgage against Chandi and Shri Bhagwat and obtained a preliminary decree for sale on 22nd December 1920 against both.3. Shri Bhagwat died after the passing of the preliminary decree. Then Mahabir Singh applied for the preparation of the final decree but omitted to implead the legal representatives of Shri Bhagwat. The Court actually declared that the application had abated as far as the property held by Sri Bhagwat deceased was concerned. A final decree was passed against Chandi alone. The name of Shri Bhagwat was of course not shown as a judgment-debtor in the decree but the whole mortgaged property was included in it.4. When Mahabir Singh put his decree into execution the sons of Shri Bhagwat filed an objection in t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1932Bom356; (1932)34BOMLR655
Tyabji, J.1. This suit has a long history into which I need not enter. It comes before me now for hearing on exceptions and further directions on the Commissioner's report, pursuant to a decree of the appeal Court, slightly modifying a decree passed by Mr. Justice Madgavkar. I have heard very careful and detailed arguments on the report. The points that have been taken before me can conveniently be put under three heads. They refer to three clauses in the draft scheme placed before the Commissioner by the plaintiffs.2. The first arises out of Clause 5 of the draft scheme which originally ran as follows:-5. His Holiness the Mullaji Saheb of the Dawoodi Bohra Community and his successors in office shall be the sole Amin of the Mosque and shall by virtue of his office have the sole right to manage, control and regulate theconduct of the religious services and prayers to be performed or led thereat, and to appoint an Amil and Khadim therefor, in accordance with the tenets of the Dawoodi Bo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1932Cal579
Rankin, C.J.1. The property in question in this suit was originally owned by one Bolai Chand Sinha who had two sons Sarat and Purna. The plaintiffs in this suit are in effect the Brahmo Somaj Education Society, a Society incorporated under Act 21 of 1860. The defendants are the sons and administrators of the estate of Sarat and certain mortgagees from them. By a deed dated 27th May 1914 the representatives of the estate of Sarat leased to certain persons on behalf of the City College institution, a society registered under Act 21 of 1860, a certain portion of property which belonged to Bolai. It appears that the two branches of Bolai's family had come to a partition and that the portion of the property now in question which belongs to Sarat's branch is the southern portion of which the present description is 102/2 Amherst Street,2. The deed by its operative portion granted a perpetual lease at a certain monthly rent of the property belonging to Sarat's branch. There was a covenant that...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1932Bom15; (1931)33BOMLR1418; 136Ind.Cas.161
Baker, J.1. In the year 1790 A. D. the village of Takli in the Ahmednagar District was granted by the Holkar Darbar by a Sanad to Bhanudas, the great-grandfather of the plaintiffs and his brother Eknath. The property descended to the male issue of the grantees and ultimately to Manohar and Eknath uncles of the plaintiffs who are the sons of Eknath's sister. From the year 1875 the Inamdars had been mortgaging the inam to various persons and ultimately by a decree of the High Court the right of Eknath to redeem the property, Manohar being dead, was declared to be foreclosed.2. The present suit was brought by the plaintiffs, the nephews of Eknath, for a declaration that the inam being for religious and charitable purposes is inalienable and consequently the mortgagees were not entitled to deprive the Inamdars of it. Eknath was defendant No. 5 in the suit as he did not join as plaintiff. He has since died.3. The prayers of the plaintiffs were for a declaration to the effect that the income...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1931)33BOMLR1192
Patkar, Ag. C.J.1. These are four applications for quashing the order of commitment of the several accused under different sections of the Indian Penal Code passed on May 14,1931, by the Special Magistrate appointed to try the case. It is not necessary to mention all the facts leading to the prosecution of the accused in this case. The commitment can be quashed under Section 215 by this Court only on a point of law.2. The first point taken on behalf of the accused is that the case was started as a warrant case and the learned Magistrate led the accused to believe that he was trying the case under Chapter XXI of the Criminal Procedure Code and not inquiring under Chapter XVIII of the Code, and therefore the accused had no opportunity of cross-examining the prosecution witnesses and leading evidence on their behalf before the Magistrate. It is further urged that though the Magistrate had power to commit the accused under Section 347 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the Magistrate was boun...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1931Bom517
Patkar, Ag. C.J. 1. These are four applications for quashing the order of commitment of the several accused under different sections of the Indian Penal Code passed on 14th May 1931, by the Special Magistrate appointed to try the case. It is not necessary to mention all the facts leading to the prosecution of the accused in this case. The commitment can be quashed Under Section 215 by this Court only on a point of law. 2. The first point taken on behalf of the accused is that the case was started as a warrant case and the learned Magistrate led the accused to believe that he was trying the case under Ch. 21, Criminal P.C., and not inquiring under Ch. 18 of the Code, and therefore the accused had no opportunity of cross examining the prosecution witnesses and leading evidence on their behalf before the Magistrate. It is further urged that though the Magistrate had power to commit the accused Under Section 347, Criminal P.C., the Magistrate was bound to proceed according to the procedure...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Reported in : AIR1932Cal53
Suhrawardy, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit on a simple mortgage in which the plaintiff claimed Rs. 1,500 on a mortgage bond executed on 15th Falgun 1320 corresponding to about 1st March 1914 by defendant 1, and the predecessor of defendants 2 to 5. The amount borrowed was Rs. 200 payable in six instalments running over six years from .1914-1919 and it was stipulated that in default of payment of any one of these instalments the mortgagors would pay interest on the defaulted instalment at the rate of one pan of betelnut par rupee per month. The evidence on record shows that a pan of betelnut at the time when the contract was entered into was, worth from 2 annas to 4 annas. The interest accordingly chargeable on a defaulted instalment was under the bond from 150 to 300 per cent. The plaintiff however in the suit charged interest at 1 anna per rupee per month, that is 75 per cent per annum. There were various defences on the merits but we are concerned with one which relates to a q...
Tag this Judgment!