TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1943 (2) TMI 17
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urther provided that Najafallikhan was to pay ₹ 96 a year even if no income was realised by him. But in case of any catastrophe or an act of God or King he failed to realise any income, he was to pay such sum as he thought fit. Nothing more was to be paid to the plaintiff's ancestors even if the income realised was more. In pursuance of this agreement the plaintiff's father obtained decrees against defendant No. 1's father for arrears due at the rate agreed upon. In 1923 defendant No. 1 sold the village Kujad to Sardar Samsuddin, the father of defendants Nos. 3 to 7 and the husband of defendant No. 8. In 1924 he sold the other village SahijpurBogha to Sheth Maneklal Mansukhlal, who sold it to defendant No. 2 in 1930. In th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Defendant No. 1 was held liable for the period from 1917 to 1923 and defendants Nos. 2 to 8 together for the amount payable in subsequent years. Accordingly defendant No. 1 was ordered to pay ₹ 51-7-2 to the plaintiff, and defendants Nos. 3 to 8 ₹ 51-7-2 and defendant No. 2 ₹ 58-12-9. It was declared that in future the plaintiff was entitled to recover ₹ 7-5-2 2/5 on January 17 every year from defendant No. 2 and defendants Nos. 3 to 8 or their heirs or assignees. 3. Three appeals were preferred against the decree of the trial Court, one by the plaintiff, one by defendant No. 2 and one by defendants Nos. 3 to 8, and they were disposed of by one judgment. The learned District Judge held that, so far as the transferee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the widow of the grantor, In Mt. Sahodra v. Badri Prasad AIR1929All737 it was held that where a fund was indicated for payment of a certain allowance, the latter must be deemed to be a charge on the former. In Tancred v. Delagoa Bay and East Africa Railway Co. (1889) 23 Q.B.D. 239 it was held : A document given by way of charge is not one which absolutely transfers the property with a condition for conveyance, but is a document which only gives a right to payment out of a particular fund or a particular property, without transferring that fund or property. 5. In Mangat Ram v. Piyara Lal A.I.R. [1929] Lah. 274 a stipulation that the amount due under a certain promissory note should come out of the timber of a certain jungle was held to c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e extended to a charge which is not created by a decree. Those decisions are now superseded by the express provision made in the amended Section 100 of the Transfer of Property Act. But, as pointed out by Sir Dinshah Mulla at pp. 545 and 550 of his Transfer of Property Act (second edition), the amendment does not alter the law, but only shows more clearly what the rights and liabilities of a charge-holder are, and even before the amendment, a charge, whether created by an agreement, or by a decree or by operation of law, was not enforceable against a transferee for consideration without notice. As held by a full bench in Musamma Indrani v. Babu Mahraj Narain I.L.R. (1936) Luck. 101 there is no difference in principle between a charge create....