Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (1.45 seconds)
Documents citing Agha Husain And Ors. vs Qasim Ali on 30 June, 1925

S.P. Sahul Hamid vs P.M. Abdul Majid And Ors. on 18 October, 1963

6. In this view of the matter, it is unnecessary to consider whether the amendment of the decree long after the purchase would, in any way, affect his rights. I have been referred to a decision of Agha Hussain v. Qasim Ali, ILR 48 All 94 : (AIR 1926 All 35), which held that the amendment of the decree would not affect the rights to third parties. It is unnecessary to express any opinion upon that point.
Madras High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Chiraunji Lal vs Ishwar Das on 19 January, 1930

2. The next point which is to be noted is that in the final decree dated 7th September 1912 this exemption clause finds no place. Subsequently there was a sale on this decree, and the defendant Chiraunji Lal, the appellant before us, bought the village at an auction-sale on 20th April 1920 and the sale was confirmed and formal possession was delivered to Chiraunji Lal on 4th August 1921, and mutation was affected in his name. No objection under Order 21. Rule 90 was made by Ishwar Das, and accordingly a suit would be barred. It is difficult to see on what ground the present claim of Ishwar Dass could be maintained. As the final decree contained no exemption of the grove even a subsequent correction of that decree would not affect the validity of the sale: see Agha Husain v. Qasim Ali A.I.R. 1926 All.
Allahabad High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1