Skip to content


Birj Kumar Lal and ors. Vs. Sheo Kumar Missir and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtAllahabad
Decided On
Judge
Reported in29Ind.Cas.215
AppellantBirj Kumar Lal and ors.
RespondentSheo Kumar Missir and ors.
Excerpt:
occupancy holding - mortgage before agra tenancy act (ii of 1901)--relinquishment after act, effect of. - .....mortgage was 59 years. in the year 1911 the occupancy tenant entered into an arrangement with the zemindar to relinquish his rights. the court below has found that the mortgage was for consideration and genuine. it has found that the object of relinquish-ment was to defeat the mortgagee's rights. the first court dismissed the suit on the ground that the civil court had no jurisdiction. mr. dalal, district judge, on appeal reversed the decree of the court of first instance and granted the plaintiff a declaration that the relinquishment wns ineffectual against him, and also granted an injunction restraining the zemindar from interfering with , the plaintiffs' possession. in our opinion the decision of the court below was correct. it is fully covered by the decision of this court in the.....
Judgment:

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 the occupancy tenancy. The term of the mortgage was 59 years. In the year 1911 the occupancy tenant entered into an arrangement with the zemindar to relinquish his rights. The Court below has found that the mortgage was for consideration and genuine. It has found that the object of relinquish-ment was to defeat the mortgagee's rights. The first Court dismissed the suit on the ground that the Civil Court had no jurisdiction. Mr. Dalal, District Judge, on appeal reversed the decree of the Court of first instance and granted the plaintiff a declaration that the relinquishment wns ineffectual against him, and also granted an injunction restraining the zemindar from interfering with , the plaintiffs' 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 Jai Gopal Narain Singh v. JJman Vat 10 Ind. Cas. 573 : 8 A.L.J. 695. with which we still agree. We dismiss the appeal with costs including in this Court fees on the higher scale. The objection is disallowed with costs.


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