Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: the usurious loans act 1918 Year: 1949 Page 1 of about 2 results (0.023 seconds)

Nov 01 1949 (PC)

Sv. L. Sv. Sevugan Chettiar Vs. Chinnasami Reddiar and anr.

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-01-1949

Reported in : AIR1950Mad654

..... the payments made from time to time.2. the plaintiff, who is the appellant, contends that the lower court had no power to give the defendants the benefit of the usurious loans act in the way in which it has done. firstly he contended that the rate of 12 per cent, is too low and at least 15 per cent, should have been ..... a promissory note dated 24th july 1930 executed by defendant 1 and others in his favour for rs. 4600 is whether the defendants are entitled to any relief under the usurious loans act. the suit promissory note carried interest at 24 per cent. per annum. it is common ground that this promissory note represents the final transaction in a series of transactions between ..... . in our opinion, though the lower court has held that the defendants were not agriculturists within the meaning of the madras agriculturists relief act, they are agriculturists within the meaning of the usurious loans act because the term 'agriculturist' in this act must be understood in the ordinary sense of a person following the calling of an agriculturist. the question then is whether the calculation ..... [4] of 1938 and also pleaded that in any event they would be entitled to the benefits of the ptovisions of the usurious loans act because the interest claimed was excessive. the learned subordinate judge rejected the former plea but accepted the latter and granted a decree for rs. 2000 with interest at the rate .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 24 1949 (PC)

Murli Singh Vs. Tika Ram

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Nov-24-1949

Reported in : AIR1950All401

..... consider in this connection the principles which the legislature has laid down for determining if a transaction is unfair under the. usurious loans act (act x [10] 1918). section 3(d) of that act lays down that:'in considering whether a transaction was substantially unfair, the court shall take into account all circumstances materially affecting ..... it may be noted that the words 'transaction' and ''fair' occur in section 3(2)(d), usurious loans act also. clause (d) of that act lays down certain practical tests for the guidance of the court. in act iii [3] of 1947 no specific tests have been laid down, but the view that i take ..... of the house is rs. 3 p. m.2. the landlord applied to the court under the u. p. control of rent and eviction act (act iii [3] of 1947) to enhance the rent which the applicant had been paying to him from and about the year 1944. the suit which ..... so far as the same were known, or must be taken to have been known to the debtor.' i may refer in this connection also to section 16(1), contract act which lays down:'a contract is said to be induced ..... the relation of the parties at the time of the loan or tending to show that the transaction, was unfair, including the necessities or supposed necessities of the debtor at the time of the loan .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 13 1949 (PC)

Govinda Mohapatra Vs. T. Venkatakrishnayya and ors.

Court : Orissa

Decided on : May-13-1949

Reported in : AIR1950Ori6

..... that the purchase was subject to payment of rs. 15,000, the court in exercise of its discretion to relieve the debtor of the mischief of usurious loans cannot go behind it. it would be oppressive, however, to allow interest to run on the principal money of rs. 12,000 since the ..... prescribed circumstances but not always. in such a hypothetical case it is only the proportionate amount which is exempted from the category of loan as defined in the act in such a contingency if the mortgagee wants to enforce the entire debt against a part purchaser of a mortgage property, his ..... the sale proclamation will not make the sale 'subject to mortgage' within the mischief of exception 3 clause (i) of section 2, orissa money lenders act (orissa act iii [3] of 1939); and that (iii) conceding that the defendant 8's purchase was at a sale of the mortgage properties 'subject to ..... his liability must be scaled down to the ultimate benefit of the original debtor in respect of his undertaking to indemnify. respective operations of the acts will call forth widely different considerations and no analogy can be drawn between the two. the statutes cannot be called part materia, the matters ..... decision countenances decrees for different amounts against different judgment-debtors liable under one mortgage according as one is entitled to the benefits under the relief act and the other is not. their lordships directed modification of the form of the decree resulting in splitting the decretal amount into two parts, .....

Tag this Judgment!


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