Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1918)20BOMLR278
..... non domino. the dominus was myaiug, who was not a grantor. in short, the kyins were purporting to sell and the shwe pes purporting to buy what both the nominal sellers and buyers knew to belong to somebody else.7. when the matters in dispute were before this board upon a former occasion, it was decided that evidence upon the topics ..... kyin and his wife. no possession passed; interost was paid by myaing and repayment of the loan to the extent of 3,500 rupees was also made. this left an unpaid balance of 5,000 rupees. on the 4th march, 1903, kyin and his wife obtained payment of this sum from u shwe pe and his wife, and conveyed the properties .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1932All632; 140Ind.Cas.509
..... at all, at any rate till the property has already come into the hands of the purchaser and the price remains unpaid. in that case it might be said that the purchaser owes money and therefore a debt to the seller. in the case of a pre-emption the property is to be obtained only on payment, and if no payment is .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1934All740; 153Ind.Cas.824
..... was not challenged before us during the hearing of this appeal. the learned subordinate judge has allowed interest at the rate of re. 1 per cent per mensem on the unpaid price of the sleepers which the plaintiff-respondent has supplied to the defendant and also on the retrenchment money which the plaintiff was not paid. the rate of interest appears ..... under the terms of the contract it is the place where a part of the contract is to be performed. and if owing to the action of the buyer the seller is unable to perform the contract at the place agreed upon he will have a right to institute his suit there.29. in the case before us, under the agreement .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1938All544
..... no privity of contract between the plaintiffs and the vendee. after the termination of this litigation, the widow executed a deed of assignment in favour of the plaintiffs of the unpaid part of the sale consideration which was left in the hands of the vendee. the plaintiffs thereupon brought the present suit for the recovery of the principal and interest. the ..... vendor. under section 55(b) of the act, the vendee is bound to pay or tender at the time and place of completing the sale the purchase money to the seller or such person as he directs. in the present case it is not disputed that the vendee was directed to pay part of the sale consideration to the plaintiffs. the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1933All905
..... not have paid to him the whole of the lease money. we are not prepared to accept this contention. the mere fact that some portion of the sale consideration remained unpaid did not affect the validity of the transfer in favour of lachhmi narain, and he was entitled to receive the whole of the lease money. lalta prasad could not have ..... of the falsi year, we think lalta prasad was entitled to pay the whole amount to him. if any different arrangement had been come to between the buyer and the seller, then it was a question of adjustment between them, but in our opinion, lalta prasad was not bound to credit any part of the rent for the year 1324 f .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 166Ind.Cas.805; (1936)71MLJ425
..... 's risk and that messrs. thomas cook & sons, ltd., were not to be under any liability whatsoever. ex. ii which contains that condition and a declaration was signed by the seller of the dog rev. dr. bruce who presumably signed it as agent for the purchaser, the maharajah of pithapuram. it must also be noted that the steamship company are by ..... . that being so, they had no liabilities from that moment, having fully complied with all the obligations they were obliged to carry out and are entitled to succeed for the unpaid balance of the freight and on the claim against them in respect of the loss of this dog. they had no responsibility in regard to the dog from the time .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : (1941)2MLJ910
..... by the policy, this would be revived. on the 20th june, 1940, the applicant sent a cheque for rs. 140 to the company to meet the amount of the premia unpaid. the company acknowledged payment on the 16th july, 1940, stating that the medical certificate had not been forthcoming, but upon its receipt, it would consider revival of the policy and ..... against the employee.5. whenever money is paid by one person to another it can be said that it is remitted for a specific purpose. the buyer pays to a seller of goods or a hirer for the hire of an article but because money is so paid that does not ipso facto make the recipient the trustee. if the goods .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 2Ind.Cas.617
1. we are of opinion that the plaintiff has no charge upon the property for her maintenance. the sale-deed creates no such charge. it is the seller and not the plaintiff who would have a charge upon the property for any unpaid purchase money. what the plaintiff relies upon is merely a covenant by the vendee with the vendor to pay the plaintiff a certain quantity of rice annually. such a covenant would not give rise to a charge vide webb v. macpherson 31 c.h 57. we, therefore, allow the appeal and dismiss the plaintiff's suit with costs throughout.
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 54Ind.Cas.458
..... this suit to enforce their vendor's lien to which they are entitled by section 55, clause 4 of the transfer of property act. it is thereby declared that 'the seller is entitled (a) to the rents and profits of the property till the ownership thereof passes to the buyer, (6) where the ownership of the property has passed to the ..... the whole of the purchase-money, to a charge upon the property in the hands of the buyer for the amount of the purchase-money or any part thereof remaining unpaid and for interest on such amount or part.'2. it has now been established by the fall bench in sivasubramania aiyar v. subramania aiyar 37 ind. cas. 429 : 39 m .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : AIR1930Mad665
..... design.9. thus, in cases where no consideration of the law of bankruptcy come3 in, there is nothing to prevent a debtor paying one creditor in full and leaving others unpaid, though the result might be that the rest of his assets will be insufficient to provide for the payment of the rest of his debts: see musahar sahu v. hakim ..... property by the debtor was made to defeat the claim of a particular creditor is of no moment if the consideration be adequate. even if the purchaser had asked the seller why he wanted to sell and the latter had told him that it was to defeat an execution, that would have been no ground for impeaching a transaction. but the .....
Tag this Judgment!