REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

PRITHI SINGH Appellant

V/S

GANESH PD.SINGH Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

CONNOR V. EARL OF BELLAMONT [REFERRED TO]
STAPLETON V. CONWAY [REFERRED TO]
SETRUCHARLU V. MAHARAJA OF JEYPORE [REFERRED TO]
IN RE HAWTHORNE,GRAHAM V. MASSEY [REFERRED TO]
EWING V. ORR SWING [REFERRED TO]
MAHADEO GOVIND V. RAM CHANDRA [REFERRED TO]
CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA LTD. V. NUSSERWANJI H.BHARUCHA [REFERRED TO]
N.ACHAYYA V. N.YELLEMMA [REFERRED TO]
NIHAL CHAND V. JAI RAMDAS [REFERRED TO]
GOCULDAS VS. CHAGANLAL [REFERRED TO]
HAJI SHEIKH WAHID-UDDIN VS. BMAKHAN LAL [REFERRED TO]
NILKANTH BALWANT NATU VS. VIDYA NARASINH BHARATHI SWAMI [REFERRED TO]
DURGA DAS ALIAS DURGA PARSAD VS. JAI NARAIN [REFERRED TO]
SHEO CHARAN LAL VS. UMRAO BEGAM [REFERRED TO]
DHARAM SINGH VS. BISHAN SARUP [REFERRED TO]
YADAO GHIRNIKAR VS. KRISHNAJI DORLE [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This, a plaintiff's application in revision under Section 115, Civil P. C., against a decree of the learned Civil Judge, Banaras, affirming a decree of the Additional Munsif, Banaras, in proceedings under Section 12, U. P. Agriculturists' Relief Act.

(2.) The mortgage in question was a usufructuary mortgage dated 23-5-1902, executed by the plaintiff's father, Payag Singh, in favour of the defendant's ancestor in respect of twelve bighas of land, a part of which lay in the Banaras district and the balance within the Banaras State territory. The mortgagee lived within the said district and the mortgage deed also was executed there.

(3.) In defence, the mortgagee had raised a number of pleas, one of which was that the suit, in so far as it related to lands within the Banaras State, was not maintainable. In this revision we are concerned only with this plea, although a number of subsidiary points were also raised with which I shall have to deal to restrict the duration of the suit.

Click here to view full judgment.

PRITHI SINGH Vs. GANESH PD SINGH

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address