SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1976 Supreme(SC) 396

A.N.RAY, JASWANT SINGH, M.H.BEG
SETH LOON KARAN SETHIYA – Appellant
Versus
IVAN E. JOHN – Respondent


Judgment

JASWANT SINGH, J.

( 1 ) THESE two appeals by certificates granted under Article 133 of the Constitution which are directed against the common judgment and decree dated 22/12/1972 of the High Court at Allahabad in two connected Civil First Appeals Nos. 465 of 1954 and 65 of 1955 preferred against the judgment and preliminary decree of the Second Additional Civil and Sessions Judge, Agra, dated 5/04/1954, in suit No. 76 of 1949 shall be disposed of by this judgment.

( 2 ) THE facts material for the purpose of these appeals are : The appellant in Appeal No. 416 of 1973 and respondent No. 1 in Appeal No. 572 of 1974, Seth Loonkaran Sethiya, (hereinafter referred to for convenience as the plaintiff) is a financier living and carrying on business in Agra, respondents Nos. 1 to 3 in the first appeal and appellants Nos. 1 to 3 in the second appeal viz. Ivan E. John, Maurice L. John and Doris Marzano, grandsons and grand-daughter of one A. John, are partners of the registered firm called john and Co. , There are three spinning mills and one flour mill at Jeoni Mandi, Agra, which are compendiously described as john Mills. Originally, the members of the John family were the exclusive







































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top