Allahabad Court May 1907 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Beti Jeo Vs. Sham Bihari Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-17-1907
Reported in: (1907)ILR29All574
George Knox, Acting, C.J. and Richards, J.1. The only question which arises in this appeal is whether the legal representative of a deceased judgment-debtor is entitled to continue an application made by her predecessor in title under Section 108 of the Code of Civil Procedure to set aside an ex parte decree. It is urged on behalf of the respondent that under the ruling of Janki Prasad v. Sukhrani (1899) I.L.R., 21 All., 274, the legal representative has no such right. In that case it was held that where a defendant had died after an ex parte decree had been made, his personal representative could not apply under Section 108 because the right given under Section 108 is a right personal to the defendant and does not pass to his representative. This decision was considered by the Calcutta High Court in the case of Ganoda Prasad Roy v. Shib Narain Mukerjee (1901) I.L.R., 29 Calc., 33. The Court would naturally loan toward giving as wide a construction as possible to Section 108 so as to g...
Emperor Vs. HusaIn Bakhsh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-15-1907
Reported in: (1907)ILR29All569
Dillon, J.1. This is an application for revision of an order passed by the District Magistrate of Shahjahanpur convicting the nine petitioners under Section 153 of the Indian Penal Code, and sentencing them to two months rigorous imprisonment each. The District Magistrate also passed an order under Section 106 of the Code of Criminal Procedure directing that all the accused at the expiration of their respective sentences should execute a bond to keep the peace for one year in their own recognizance for Rs. 200 with two sureties of Rs. 100 each. The facts which gave rise to this conviction are these: On or about the 5th of April last, which was the chehlum, that is, the 40th day of the Mohurram, the qasais and sikligars of Shahjahanpur started with tazias for the local karbala. A police order had been issued that day that all the tazia processions should arrive at Ajan Chauki by 7 P.M. so as to arrive at the karbala at 10 P.M. AS a matter of fact the qasais and sikligara did not start f...
Kundan Bibi Vs. Kunni Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-15-1907
Reported in: (1907)ILR29All571
Aikman, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiff respondent against her neighbours, the defendants, in which she asked for an injunction ordering the defendants to demolish certain constructions which they had made, and which according to the plaintiff's case, had blocked up a window and two sky-lights in her house. Other reliefs were claimed, but in this appeal we are only concerned with the first relief asked for, namely, in regard to the closing of the window and the two sky-lights. The learned District Judge after an inspection of the locality found that the construction made by the defendants entirely blocked up the window and blocked up all but a minute portion of one of the sky-lights. He accordingly found the plaintiff entitled to an order for the removal of so much of the construction as blocked up the window and the sky-light. In appeal to the lower Court it was contended that the plaintiff had not acquired any right of easement in respect of the opening...
Mohsan Shah and ors. Vs. Mahbub Ilahi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-14-1907
Reported in: (1907)ILR29All589
George Knox, Kt., Acting, C.J. and Richards, J.1. The property in dispute in this appeal was the properly of one Musammat Hawa Begam, deceased. In the year 1896, according to the plaint, Musammat Hawa Begam asked that her property might be placed under the superintendence of the Court of Wards. This prayer of hers was granted, and the property was taken charge of by the Court of Wards. We must however, point out that the Court of Wards assumed the superintendence of this property under Clause (g) of Section 194 of Act Ho. XIX of 1873 and not under Section 9 of the Local Act No. III of 1899. At the time when the Court of Wards took over the superintendence of this property, the Court had full power, under Section 203 of Act No. XIX of 1873, to mortgage or sell the whole or any part of such property. The sale complained of was made in 1902, and Section 35 of Act No. III of 1899 applies to that sale. This section gives the Court of Wards full power to mortgage or sell the whole or any par...
Bakhtwar Mal Vs. Abdul Latif
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-14-1907
Reported in: (1907)ILR29All567
Banerji, J.1. The suit out of which this appeal has arisen was brought by the appellant against a Sub-Inspector of Police for recovery of possession of three account books. It has been dismissed on the ground that the notice required by Section 424 of the Code of Civil Procedure was not served on the defendant before institution of the suit. The allegations of the plaintiff are these. The defendant in his capacity as a Sub-Inspector of Police searched the plaintiff's house and carried away several articles including jewellery and these account books; that at the trial of the case he was asked to produce the account books, but he refused to produce them, alleging that he had not taken them. The present suit was therefore brought for recovery of the account books. It is clear on the plaintiff's own allegation that when the defendant searched the plaintiff's house he did so in the capacity of a public servant. In seizing the account books (assuming that he seized them) he also acted in th...
Ram Sukh Vs. Ram Sahai
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-14-1907
Reported in: (1907)ILR29All591
Aikman, J.1. One Chunni Lal had a simple money decree against the appellant Ram Sukh. In execution of that decree a house belonging to the appellant Ram Sukh was sold, and was purchased by the respondent Ram Sahai, who paid the money into Court. Section 316 of the Code of Civil Procedure provides that the title to the property sold, in a case like this, shall vest in the purchaser from the date of the certificate which is granted to the purchaser under that section, and it contains this important proviso, namely, 'that the decree under which the sale took place was still subsisting at that time.' I infer from this proviso that even though a sale has become absolute on being confirmed under Section 314, the Court may hold its hand and refuse to grant a certificate if before the certificate is granted the decree under which the property was sold is no longer subsisting. In the present case the decree under which the property was sold was reversed on the 19th of March 1904. That was befor...
In Re: Petition of Damma
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-04-1907
Reported in: (1907)ILR29All563
Banerji, J.1. This is an application for the revision of an order passed by Babu Surajbhan Prasad, Magistrate of the first class of Fatehpur. The learned Assistant Government Advocate raises a preliminary objection that the application is not maintainable under the Code of Criminal Procedure. The facts were these: Proceedings were instituted against the applicant Damma under Section 110 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Magistrate after holding an inquiry discharged Damma under Section 119 of the Code. At the same time he directed the record of the case to be laid before the District Magistrate with the request that Damma, who wag the head-man of the village, might be removed from that office, and that the District Magistrate might, if necessary, direct the police to watch the movements of Damma. Mr. Malcomson who appears for the applicant informs me that it is this order relating to the dismissal of Damma from the office of head-man and to his conduct being watched by the police ...
Emperor Vs. Tula
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-04-1907
Reported in: (1907)ILR29All587
Dillon, J.1. In this case one Tula lodged a complaint of robbery against Rameshwar and another in the Court of a first class Magistrate of Garhwal. As Tula had already reported the matter to the police, the Magistrate decided to await the police report before taking action on the complaint. The police report was to the effect that the complaint was false. Beyond examining the complainant at the time of recording his complaint the Magistrate took no further evidence in the case. On receiving the police report, the Magistrate dismissed the complaint under Section 203 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Tula was then called upon to show cause why he should not be prosecuted under Section 211, Indian Penal Code. In showing cause, Tula said that beside other witnesses he relied upon those who had already been examined by the police. The Magistrate then passed an order, directing Tula to be prosecuted under Section 211, Indian Penal Code, and sent the case to the District Magistrate for dispo...
Thakur Prasad and ors. Vs. Sheo Ram Tiwari
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-01-1907
Reported in: (1907)ILR29All562
Griffin, J.1. On Sunday, the 18th of June 1905, the Munsif made an inspection of the spot. The parties came to a compromise which was embodied in. a rubkar. The Munsif on the same day gave a decree on the compromise. The defendant appealed to the District Judge, who, while upholding the defendant's contention that the decree was void having been passed on a dies non dismissed it on other grounds. The defendant appeals to this Court on the ground that the decree, being passed on a Sunday, was null and void. It is admitted that there is no authority of this Court directly bearing upon the question raised in this appeal. I am referred to the ruling in Ram Das Chakarbati v. The Official Liquidator, Cotton Ginning Company, Limited, Cawnpore (1887) I.L.R., 9 All., 360. I am asked to infer from this ruling that a decree passed on a Sunday should be held null and void. No such inference, in my opinion is warranted. For the respondents it is contended that the Court of first instance in disposi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›