Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.33 seconds)
Documents citing Nand Ram Chhotey Lal vs Kishori Raman Singh And Anr. on 26 December, 1961

Smt. Brij Rajkumari And Anr. vs Raja Mohammad Mustafa Ali Khan on 10 May, 1967

In view, however, of the decision of the Supreme Court in State of Rajasthan v. Mukan Chand, AIR 1964 SC 1633, the Bench was of opinion that the decision of this Court in Nand Ram's case, AIR 1962 All 521, needed reconsideration. It accordingly referred the case to a larger Bench. Thereafter, the case was fixed before a Bench of three Judges, namely, Oak, Gyanendra Kumar and Seth JJ. When the case was heard by them, the learned Advocate-General contended that if Sub-clause (vi) of Clause (f) of Section 2 of the U.P. Zamindars' Debt Reduction Act was foimd to be invalid, the effect of it would be to invalidate the entire Clause (f) which contained the definition of the term 'debt'. The learned Judges thought that the questions raised in the case were of sufficient importance to merit decision by a Full Bench of five Judges, and they passed an order to that effect.
Allahabad High Court Cites 38 - Cited by 1 - S N Dwivedi - Full Document

State Of Rajasthan vs Mukanchand And Others on 26 February, 1964

Mr. Kapur further relied on Nand Ram Chhotey Lal vs. Kishore Raman Singh (2). The judgment of the High Court undoubtedly supports him, but, with respect, we are unable to agree with the ratio of the case. The High Court was concerned with. the U.P. Zamindars Debt Reduction Act (U.P. Act XV of 1953), which is substantially similar to the impugned Act The ratio of the High Court is: "It appears to us that the legislature had to make a distinction between debts due from the ex- zamindars to private individuals and the debts due to scheduled banks or to Government or semi-Government authorities. The obvious reason appears to be that the private money-lenders were considered to be a bane to rural economy and perpetrating agricultural indebtedness. It was to save the cultivators from such unscrupulous moneylenders that such laws had to be enacted, the last in series being the Zamindars Debt Reduction Act." We consider there is no force in these observations. No such reason is apparent from the terms of the Act. Non-scheduled banks (1) [1961] 2 S.C.R. 962.
Supreme Court of India Cites 18 - Cited by 15 - S M Sikri - Full Document

Mohd. Azmat Azim Khan vs Raja Shatrunjai And Ors. on 27 November, 1962

The question in Firm Nand Ram Chbotey Lal v. Kishori Ram Singh, 1956 All LJ 704, to which one of us was a party, was simply whether an appeal lies or a revision from an order passed under Section 4 of the Zamindars' Debt Reduction Act amending a decree passed by a Special Judge under Section 14 of the Encumbered Estates Act, and it was answered in the negative. The question whether a decree passed under Section 14 of the Encumbered Estates Act can be amended under the Zamindars' Debt Reduction Act was not directly before the Learned Judges and, therefore, the observation made by Bhargava J, that a decree passed by a Special Judge can be amended under the Zamindars' Debt Reduction Act was an obiter dictum. No contention was advanced before the learned Judges that such a decree is not capable of amendment under the Zamindars' Debt Reduction Act.
Allahabad High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1