Skip to content


Lalla Juggilal Vs. Hukum Chand Agarwal - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtAllahabad
Decided On
Judge
Reported in9Ind.Cas.25
AppellantLalla Juggilal
RespondentHukum Chand Agarwal
Cases ReferredShiam Lal v. Nathe Lal
Excerpt:
auction-purchaser - rent for the period between the dates of sale and its confirmation. - .....two dates. the court below dismissed the suit holding that the plaintiff is not entitled to the rent accruing due before the 22nd august 1908, the date of the confirmation of the sale. on behalf of the applicant, i have been referred to the case of adhur chander banerjee v. aghore nath aroo 2 c.w.n. 589. there are several authorities of this court against the plea urged on behalf of applicant. i need only refer to the case of amir kazim v. darhari mal 24 a. 475 : a.w.n. (1902) 145. in a later case decided by a bench of this court [shiam lal v. nathe lal 7 ind. cas. 65] the same question arose. in that case certain shops and premises were sold in execution of a decree on the 29th of june 1907 and purchased by juggi lal (who is plaintiff in the present case). the sale was not confirmed.....
Judgment:

Griffin, J.

1. This is an application for revision of the order of the learned Judge of the Court of Small Causes at Cawnpore dismissing the plaintiff's suit under the following circumstances. The plaintiff at an auction sale bought a house the rent of which is a matter now in dispute. The date of the auction sale is the 29th Jane 1907. The sale was not confirmed until the 22nd August 1908. The suit relates to the rent which accrued due between these two dates. The Court below dismissed the suit holding that the plaintiff is not entitled to the rent accruing due before the 22nd August 1908, the date of the confirmation of the sale. On behalf of the applicant, I have been referred to the case of Adhur Chander Banerjee v. Aghore Nath Aroo 2 C.W.N. 589. There are several authorities of this Court against the plea urged on behalf of applicant. I need only refer to the case of Amir Kazim v. Darhari Mal 24 A. 475 : A.W.N. (1902) 145. In a later case decided by a Bench of this Court [Shiam Lal v. Nathe Lal 7 Ind. Cas. 65] the same question arose. In that case certain shops and premises were sold in execution of a decree on the 29th of June 1907 and purchased by Juggi Lal (who is plaintiff in the present case). The sale was not confirmed until the 22nd of August 1908. The rents accruing due prior to the 22nd of August 1908 were attached in execution of a decree and were sold and purchased by the plaintiff in that suit. The defence set up in that suit was that the person who was entitled to the rents for the period between the 29th June 1907 and 22nd August 1908 was Lala Juggi Lal. This Court held that the plaintiff, that is the purchaser of the rents, was entitled to the rent accruing due between 29th June 1907 and 22nd August 1908 and not Lala Juggi Lal. The present case cannot be distinguished from the case to which I have referred and following the decision in that case, I must dismiss this application with costs.


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