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

1938 Supreme(SC) 2

Mohammad Hatibul Haq and others – Appellant
Versus
Seth Tikam Chand – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Dold, Douglas Grant , W. Wallach, W. Wallach, L.P.E. Pugh, J.M. Parikh

Lord Roche:-

This is an appeal from a decree, dated 6th July 1932, of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad setting aside the decree, dated 29th May 1928, of the Subordinate Judge of Agra. The dealings between the original parties to the suit or their predecessors in business extended over very many years and litigation or disputes culminating in litigation have been in progress for nearly 20 years. Of the matters litigated between the parties only two points remained for decision upon the hearing of this appeal. Those points are :

First : Whether a deed bearing date 25th January 1918, executed by the original plaintiff in favour of the original defendant remained effective notwithstanding a compromise between the parties made in 1921 or was cancelled by such compromise.

Second : Whether the original plaintiff was or was not entitled to the benefit of certain Government promissory notes of the face value of Rs. 13,000 which had been deposited by him with the said defendant as security and was or was not entitled to recover the said promissory notes or the amount realized by their sale.

The Subordinate Judge found on both these points in favour of the plaintiff. The High Court rever








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