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

1917 Supreme(SC) 17

AMEER ALI, SIR JOHN EDGE, LORD SHAW OF DUNFERMLINE, VISCOUNT HALDANE
SAHU RAM CHANDRA – Appellant
Versus
BHUP SINGH – Respondent


Advocates:
Solicitors for appellants: T. C. Summerhays & Son.

Judgement

Appeal from a judgment and decree of the High Court (May 26, 1913) affirming the decree of the Subordinate Judge of Mainpuri.

The first six respondents were members of a joint Hindu family, governed by the Mitakshara, Bhup Singh being the father and the other five his sons and grandsons.

On January 6, 1883, Bhup Singh borrowed Rs.200 from one Bhagirath under a hypothecation bond which stated that the money was borrowed to meet the necessity of Bhup Singh. The bond provided for interest at Rs.18 per month, subject to half-yearly rests, and hypothecated a one-biswa share in a zamindari, the property of the joint family, but described as belonging to the borrower.

In 1884 Bhup Singh mortgaged the same property together with other joint family property to the father of the appellants. In 1893 the appellants, their father being dead, sued to enforce the mortgage of 1884, and a decree was made in their favour conditional upon their discharging the prior mortgage in favour of Bhagirath. They accordingly paid the amount due upon the bond into Court under 8. 83 of Act IV. of 1882 ; the Court paid the money over to Bhagirath, and the bond was made over to the appellants. The appell































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