Sheo Dayal Niranjan Lal vs Great Indian Peninsula Railway ...
Judges: Mukerji, King
15 July, 1926·2. The suit was dismissed by the lower Appellate Court on the sole ground that no notice as required by Section 77 of the Indian Railways Act, was given by the plaintiffs. 3. The facts involved are briefly these:--On the 26th of January 1920, the plaintiffs' agent, who was impleaded as the defendant...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Sheo Dayal Nirajan Lal vs Great Indian Peninsula Railway ...
Judges:
15 July, 1926·3. The facts involved are briefly these: 4. On the 26th of January 1920 the plaintiffs' agent, who was impleaded as the Defendant No. 2, and against whom no relief was claimed, despatched 58 bags of raw sugar, 32 bags of wheat and 11 bags of refined sugar to the plaintiffs in the district of Banda. ...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Lal Behari Misra And Anr. vs Equeen Mohammad Hajjam And Anr.
Judges:
13 July, 1926·1. This is an appeal by two plaintiffs arising out of a pre-emption suit. The ostensible sale consideration entered in the sale-deed was Rs 793 7-8. The Court of first instance found this consideration proved. The defendant-vendee had taken the plea that the Plaintiff No. 1 had acquiesced in the sal...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Abdul Aziz vs Mt. Mariyam Bibi And Anr.
Judges:
13 July, 1926·1. This is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of a suit for recovery of possession of part of the property sold and for pre-emption of the rest. The vendor was Mt. Maryam Bibi, the widow of Ali Raza. The property sold is admittedly what originally belonged to Ali Raza. The plaintiff claimed to be an "...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Madho Singh vs Pancham Singh And Ors.
Judges:
13 July, 1926·1. We have got two appeals before us, viz., No. 660 of 1924 and No. 957 of 1924 and also a cross-objection in the former appeal. The cross-objection is easily disposed of. For, there is a deficiency in Court-fee, and the learned Counsel, Dr. Katju, has declined to take time to make good the deficien...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Lachhmi Narain Sahu And Ors. vs Bindra And Ors.
Judges:
12 July, 1926·1. A preliminary objection has been raised in this case that no second appeal lies, because the suit is of the nature cognizable by a Court of Small Causes and the subject-matter of the suit does not exceed Rs. 500. It is admitted that the subject-matter of the suit does not exceed Rs. 500; and the ...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Gulab vs Dalip
Judges: Mukerji
12 July, 1926·2. The facts established are these. The respondent obtained a written lease from an occupancy tenant oh the 1st of May, 1921, it having been agreed that he would be put in possession on the 1st of July, 1921. The occupancy tenant, however, did not put the respondent in possession, but, instead, put ...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Pearey Lal vs Sagar Mal
Judges:
12 July, 1926·1. This application for revision is based on two main grounds: It is argued that a Sessions Judge cannot take up at the instance of a private person any revision of a Magistrate's order of discharge in a case instituted under Section 476, Criminal P.C. 2. That a Sessions Judge cannot interfere with ...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Gulab vs Dalip And Anr.
Judges:
12 July, 1926·2. The facts established are these: The respondent obtained a written lease from an occupancy tenant on the 1st of May 1921, it having been agreed that he would be put in possession on the 1st of July 1921. The occupancy tenant, however, did not put the respondent in possession, but, instead, put th...
High Court Of Judicature at Allahabad
Sheobaran Pande And Anr. vs Kishun Prasad Pande And Anr.
Judges:
12 July, 1926·4. On appeal the lower appellate Court directed the trial Court to determine whether Gajadhar Pande was at the time of his death separate from the parties. The finding of the trial Court on that point was that he was separate. The correctness of that finding was contested by the defendants before th...
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.