Skip to content


Sheo Kumar Misra and ors. Vs. Brij Kumar Lal and ors. and Mohar Lal and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectProperty
CourtAllahabad
Decided On
Judge
Reported in(1915)ILR37All444
AppellantSheo Kumar Misra and ors.
RespondentBrij Kumar Lal and ors. and Mohar Lal and anr.
Excerpt:
act no. xii of 1881 (north-western provinces rent act) - mortgage of occupancy holding--relinquishment--rights of mortgagee. - .....connected with this appeal are extremely simple. prior to the passing of the agra tenancy act an occupancy tenant purported to mortgage his occupancy tenancy. the term of the mortgage was fifty-nine years. in the year 1911, the occupancy tenant entered into an arrangement with the zamindar to relinquish his rights. the court below has found that the mortgage was for consideration and genuine. it has found, that the object of the relinquishment was to defeat the mortgagee's rights. the first court dismissed the suit on the ground that the civil court had no jurisdiction. mr. dalai, district judge, on appeal reversed the court of first instance and granted the plaintiff a declaration that the relinquishment was ineffectual against him and also granted an injunction restraining the.....
Judgment:

Henry Richard, C.J., Pramada Charan Banerji and Tudball, JJ.

1. The facts connected With this appeal are extremely simple. Prior to the passing of the Agra Tenancy Act an occupancy tenant purported to mortgage his occupancy tenancy. The term of the mortgage was fifty-nine years. In the year 1911, the occupancy tenant entered into an arrangement with the zamindar to relinquish his rights. The court below has found that the mortgage was for consideration and genuine. It has found, that the object of the relinquishment was to defeat the mortgagee's rights. The first court dismissed the suit on the ground that the Civil Court had no jurisdiction. Mr. Dalai, District Judge, on appeal reversed the court of first instance and granted the plaintiff a declaration that the relinquishment was ineffectual against him and also granted an injunction restraining the zamiudar from interfering with the plaintiff's possession. In our opinion the decision of the court below was correct. It is fully covered by the decision of this Court in the case of Jaigopal Narain Singh v. Uman Dat (1911) 8 A.L.J.R. 695 with which we agree. We dissmiss the appeal with costs. The objection is disallowed with costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //