Allahabad Court July 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.
Joti Prasad and ors. Vs. Ramchandra Das
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-12-1907
Reported in: (1907)ILR29All675
Richards, J.1. This was a suit brought by the plaintiff for a declaration as to an alleged right of way over the defendant's land. The Court of first instance dismissed the suit. After the suit had been dismissed the defendant died. The plaintiffs thereupon filed an appeal, putting the name of Musammat Pavitra Mati as guardian of Mahant Ram Chandar Das, alias Paras Ram, the successor in title of the deceased defendant. On the 13th of February 1906 the plaintiffs applied that the Musammat, who was the step-mother of the minor, might be appointed his guardian ad litem, and on the 17th of February 1906 an order that notice should go to show cause against such appointment was made. It appears from the order of the 16th June that these notices were never issued, and fresh notices were ordered to issue for the 17th of July following, which was also fixed as the date of trial. From the order sheet of the 17th of July a recital appears that the Musammat had not appeared and also an order that ...
Murlidhar Vs. Sadho Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-11-1907
Reported in: (1907)ILR29All672
George Knox, Acting, C.J., Banerji and Richards, JJ.1. The parties to this appeal are respectively Murlidhar, who was plaintiff in the Court below, and Sadho Lal, the present appellant, who was defendant. On the 6th of January 1904 the District Judge of Agra, acting under the provisions of Act No. VIII of 1890, appointed Sadho Lal guardian of the person and property of Murlidhar, who was then a minor of about 15 years of age. Sadho Lal continued to act as guardian up to the 11th of January 1906. He then applied to resign his office as guardian. The District Judge passed an order which was the subject of argument in the Court below, and which in the present appeal the appellant) claimed to be an order of absolute discharge. As we are able to decide this appeal upon the other pleas taken in the memorandum of appeal, we do not intend to do more than point out that all that the learned Judge of Agra in his order says is as follows: 'He is discharged under Section 40 of Act No. VIII of 1890...
Ham Partap and ors. Vs. Jamna Prasad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-11-1907
Reported in: (1907)ILR29All667
Banerji and Aikman, JJ.1. The plaintiffs, who are the five sons of one Rajit Pande, brought the suit which has given rise to this appeal to have a sale-deed executed by Rajit Pande in favour of the appellants set aside, on the ground that the property told is joint ancestral property in which the plaintiffs have a share and that their father Rajit Pande was not competent to sell it. They also alleged other grounds in their plaint, such as insanity and want of consideration, but these were abandoned at the hearing in, the Court of first instance It is admitted that the property in question was inherited by Rajit Pande from his maternal grandfather Acharaj Upadhya. The widow of Acharaj inherited the property from her husband and after her Rajit Pande inherited it. It was contended on behalf of the defendants appellants that as the property was inherited by Rajit from his maternal grandfather, the plaintiffs acquired no interest in it and that they are not entitled to question the sale ma...
Sheo Prasad and anr. Vs. Aya Ram and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-09-1907
Reported in: (1907)ILR29All663
George Knox, Acting, C.J. and Dillon, J.1. This first appeal arises out of a suit brought by the appellants who were plaintiffs in the Court below. According to them, they in Sambat 1914, corresponding to the year 1857, made a religious endowment consisting of certain buildings situate at Sarsya Ghat in the city of Cawnpore.2. The religious endowment was for the promotion of the Nanak Shahi religion. They installed one Baba Gobind Das to carry out all the necessary rites connected with the endowments, and in succession to him they also appointed one Baba Sadho Ram. Upon Baba Sadho Ram's death they appointed as a temporary measure Baba Kirpal Das to carry on the duties connected with the Sangat until such time as they could make a further appointment.3. The first four defendants, who represent themselves as Nanak Shahi Fakirs and as disciples of Baba Sadho Ram and also of Baba Kirpal Das, aforesaid, denied the plaintiffs' title to make any appointment to the religious endowment. They at...
Damodar Das Vs. Sheoram Das and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-09-1907
Reported in: (1907)ILR29All730
Richard and Griffin, JJ.1. This was a suit for an adjustment of accounts between the plaintiff and the defendants. The defendants are commission agents, carrying on business in Calcutta, and they have acted as agents for the plaintiff in a considerable number of transactions. On the 2nd of March 1902, accounts were settled between the parties, and a sum of Rs. 684-5-6 was found due to the plaintiff. The case was originally tried before the Subordinate Judge of Bareilly, and the result of his decree was an appeal by the plaintiff and also an appeal by the defendants. The lower appellate Court disposed of both appeals in one judgment and found in favour of the defendants for a sum of Ra. 1,401-4-0 principal, and Rs. 232-5-6 interest from the institution of the suit to the date of the decree at 6 per cent, per annum. He made a similar order in the plaintiff's appeal which was No. 411. The plaintiff has brought this second appeal without instituting a second appeal against the decree in ap...
Ahmad Ullah Khan and ors. Vs. Ali Sher Khan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-06-1907
Reported in: (1907)ILR29All660
Dillon and Griffin, JJ.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for profits which was brought by the plaintiffs respondents, who are co-sharers, against the defendant appellant, who is the lambardar, for the years 1309 and 1310 F. They claimed Rs. 260 on account of such profits. The suit was tried by the Assistant Collector of the Kairana sub-division in the district of Muzaffarnagar, who gave the plaintiffs a decree for Rs. 135. They appealed to the District Judge, and ultimately the appeal came on for hearing before the Additional Judge of Saharanpur, By an order, dated the 24th of January 1905, under Section 560 of the Code of Civil Procedure, he remanded the case to the Court which had tried it for findings upon certain issues and for the taking of additional evidence. The case then apparently found its way (how, it does not appear) to the Court of the Assistant Collector of the 'headquarters pargana. 'We may assume that it was by an order passed by the Collector. At the very earliest o...
Brij Bilas Vs. Salig Ram
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-05-1907
Reported in: (1907)ILR29All659
George Knox, Acting, C.J. and Richards, J.1. This is an appeal from an order of remand. The suit was a suit for pre-emption and on the 8th of June 1900 the Court of first instance dismissed the suit. The plaintiff appealed, and on the 10th of September 1906 the suit was remanded. On the 9th of November 1906 the Court of first instance on remand decreed the suit. The present appeal is not taken against the decree that was made on the 9th of November 1906. It is an appeal filed against the order of remand, and the appeal was not filed until after the decree of the 9th November 1906 was actually made. The appeal was filed on the 1st December 1906. The appellant appeared on the hearing of the suit on remand. A preliminary objection is now raised by Mr. Kedar Nath on behalf of the respondent that the present appeal cannot be sustained under the circumstances mentioned. He has cited the case of Madhu Sudan Sen v. Kamini Kanta Sen (1905) 9 C.W.N. 895. In this case under circumstances which ca...
Parbati Vs. Budh Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-04-1907
Reported in: (1907)ILR29All652
George Knox, Acting, C.J. and Dillon, J.1. The suit out of which this appeal has arisen was brought by the plaintiff respondent for possession of certain plots of land by demolition of a house and removal of the materials. The plaintiff came into Court alleging that she is, in consequence of a partition, proprietor of a separate share in Lohari, and that the defendants are her tenants; that the ancestor of the defendants had been allowed to settle in the village and to occupy plot No. 3 in the khasra in the settlement of 1862 as a dwelling house and to hold possession of plot No. 99 in the same khasra for the purposes of a shop and the tying up of their cattle as tenants; that about 10 or 11 years ago the plaintiff appointed defendant No. 1 as her karinda and put him in charge of Lohari circle, and that in his capacity of karinda the defendant had full control over plaintiff's share in the inhabited part of the village as well as in the waste lands; that about 8 or 9 years ago the defe...
Kunndan Lal and anr. Vs. Gajadhar Lal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-01-1907
Reported in: (1907)ILR29All728
Knox, Acting, C.J. and Dillon, J.1. The point which we have to consider in this appeal is whether the decree, dated the 16th of November 1900 is a nullity as against the plaintiffs as they were not represented in the suit in which the said decree was made by a legally appointed guardian. The plaintiffs up to the time when the suit was brought which resulted in the decree of the 16th November 1900 were, and one of them still is a minor. In the former suit they were arrayed as defendants under the guardianship of Musammat Jamna Kunwar, their mother and certificated guardian, but no application was made to the Court to have Musammat Jamna Kunwar appointed as guardian ad litem nor was any formal order at any stage in the suit to that effect passed. It is contended by the learned advocate for the appellants that in any case, looking to the language of Section 457 of the Civil Procedure Code, Musammat Jamna Kunwar could not have been appointed guardian ad litem, she being a married woman wit...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›