Bansi And Ors. vs Kanhaya And Ors.
Judges: Tudball, Sulaiman
17 July, 1920·3. In the year 1904 there was a dispute and a Magistrate, by an order, dated the 2nd of July 1904, passed apparently under Section 144, Criminal Procedure Code, restrained the plaintiffs, the Mahabrahmans, from taking any such gifts within a distance of 13 yards of the water's edge. The order held g...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Musammat Ram Piari And Ors. vs Budhsain And Ors.
Judges: G Mears, K Lal
17 July, 1920·1. These are two Letters Patent Appeals arising out of a suit for redemption. It appears that Hansa was the owner of some land situated in Shahgunj in the Agra City, whereon stood a kutcha house and chaupal. In 1S61 he mortgaged with possession the paid land with the kutcha house and chaupal standin...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Muhammad Hafiz And Anr. vs Muhammad Ibrahim
Judges: Piggott, G Prasad
16 July, 1920·JUDGMENT Piggott and Gokul Prasad, JJ. 1. This is a second appeal by the decree-holder in an execution matter and it raises a question of limitation which, so far as we are aware, is not definitely covered by any published ruling. The decree was passed against three persons jointly and severally; bu...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Sanehi Lal And Anr. vs L. Onkar Mal
Judges: Piggott, G Prasad
16 July, 1920·1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiffs under the following circumstances: 2. Some money was due to the plaintiffs by the defendant, in payment of which the defendant sent a hundi to the plaintiffs drawn by Tulshi Ram-Ram Baksh on Bansidhar-Manohar Lal in favour of the defendan...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
In Re: A. John And Company And Anr. vs Unknown
Judges: G Knox, Piggott, G Prasad
15 July, 1920·(1) Is the allowance on account of the annual value of business premises owned and occupied by an assessee given under Section 9(2)(i) of the Indian Income-Tax Act, 1918, liable to assessment or not? (2) If the answer to the foregoing is in the affirmative, is Section 8 or Section 11 applicable? 7. ...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
In Re: A. John And Company And Anr. vs Unknown
Judges: G Knox, Piggott, G Prasad
15 July, 1920·The Chief Revenue authority is further supported in its view by the fact that Clauses (iii) and (v) of Section 8, and Clauses (iv) and (viii) of Section 9(2), of the Act of 1918 deal with the same classes of expenditure, insurance premier and a charge of land revenue, thus implying that house proper...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Ganga Prasad And Anr. vs Ram Sarup And Ors.
Judges: Piggott, G Prasad
15 July, 1920·1. This was a suit on a mortgage of the 2nd of May 1909. The mortgagors were two brothers, Newazi and Dhanna. The suit is brought by the mortgagee against these two, along with Ganga Prasad and Basant, the minor sons of Dhanna. The property alienated was a share in an ancestral house, of which share...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Jagat Singh And Anr. vs Baldeo Prasad And Anr.
Judges: Tudball, Sulaiman
13 July, 1920·JUDGMENT 1. The sole point in this appeal which has been argued before us is the question of consideration. The vendor owned property, the market-value of which was Rs. 1,250. He had borrowed from the vendee appellant a sum of Rs. 800 many years ago and had hypothecated this property as security. At...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Baldeo Prasad And Anr. vs Jagat Singh And Anr.
Judges: Tudball, Sulaiman
13 July, 1920·JUDGMENT Tudball and Sulaiman, JJ. 1. The sole point in this appeal which has been argued before us is the question of consideration. The vendor owned property, the market value of which was Rs. 1,250. He had borrowed from the vendee appellant a Bum of Rs. 800 many years ago and had hypothecated thi...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Abdulla vs Shams-Ul-Haq And Ors.
Judges: Ryves, G Prasad
10 July, 1920·2. The plaintiff's case is that what was actually sold was the half share of Amir over which Azima was in possession as mortgagee, and that Rasai and after him his representatives, defendants Nos. 1 to 4, have continued in possession as mortgagees. That the plaintiffs asked them "to return the mortg...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Don’t wait for legal issues to escalate
By continuing past this page, you agree to our Terms of Service, Cookie Policy, Privacy Policy, Refund Policy and Content Policies. © 2023 - Uber9 Business Process Services Private Limited. All rights reserved.