Allahabad Court February 1909 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.
Hub Lal Vs. Wazir Muhammad and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-12-1909
Reported in: (1909)ILR31All313
Karamat Husain, J.1. A suit for arrears of rent of a sum below Rs. 100 was instituted in the court of an Assistant Collator of the 2nd class and was decreed. Hub Lal patwari was a witness for the plaintiff. There was an appeal under Section 176 of the Agra Tenancy Act to the Collector who dismissed the suit and granted sanction for the prosecution of Hub Lal under Sections 193, 465, 471 and 466, Indian Penal Code, on the 9th of September 1907. Hub Lal applied in revision to the District Judge of Cawnpore, who on the 6th of March 1908, revoked the sanction. Wazir Muhammad and Amir Muhammad now apply for revision of the order passed by the learned District Judge. Their learned vakil argues that the learned District Judge had no jurisdiction to revoke the sanction granted by the Collector of Fatehpur inasmuch as the court of the District Judge of Cawnpore is not a court to which the court of the Collector of Fatehpur is subordinate for the purposes of Section 195 of the Criminal Procedure...
Musammat Sohan Bibi Vs. Musammat Hiran Bibi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-12-1909
Reported in: 1Ind.Cas.180
1. The facts of the suit which gave rise to this appeal are these--one Babu Harish Chander died leaving him surviving a widow Must. Manki Bahu and three daughters Hiran Bibi, Makundi Bibi and Punno Bibi. It is alleged that after his death Manki Bahu under the authority given to her by her husband adopted Babu Parsottam Das The plaintiff, Sohan Bibi, is a daughter of Parsottam Das and the defendant Bindesri Bahu is his widow. Parsottam Das left another daughter Mohan Bibi who is one of the defendants to the suit. Manki Bahu died in 1893. In 1895 Punno Bibi one of the daughters of Babu Harish Chander brought a suit against Bindesri Bahu and against her own sisters for a declaration of her right to a third share in certain Government securities of which Bindesri Bahu had taken possession and also in certain moveable property. The parties to that suit, namely, Punno Bibi, Bindesri Bahu, Makundi Bibi and Hiran Bibi entered into a compromise on the 2nd of April 1896 and in accordance with th...
Lalta Prashad Vs. Suraj Kunwar and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-12-1909
Reported in: 1Ind.Cas.239
1. Lalta Prashad was one of two decree-holders, in whose favour a decree was passed for the recovery of money from certain judgment-debtors, two of whom were, at the time, when the decree was passed, minors, viz., Kundan Lal and Balbahadar Prashad. The decree was passed jointly against them under the guardianship of their mother, a married woman, whose husband was alive, and against others who were majors at the time. The decree bears date, the 17th November 1900. It was carried into appeal up to this Court and the decree was affirmed on the 19th April 1903. Thereafter execution was taken out against the minors on the 24th August 1904. When these execution proceedings were being taken out, the minors were still represented by the lady, who had represented them throughout the suit. It then occurred to the minors or some one on their behalf that the decree, so far as they were concerned, was a decree that could be challenged inasmuch as, when it was obtained, the person who purported to ...
Wazir Muhammad Vs. Hub Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-12-1909
Reported in: 2Ind.Cas.182
Karamat Husain, J.1. A suit for arrears of rent of a sum below Rs. 100 was instituted in the Court of an Assistant Collector of the 2nd class and was decreed. Hub Lal, patwari was a witness for the plaintiff. There was an appeal under Section 176 of the Agra Tenancy Act to the Collector who dismissed the suit and granted sanction for the prosecution of Hub Lal under Sections 193, 465, 471 and 466, Indian Penal Code, on the 9th of September 1907. Hub Lal applied in revision to the District Judge of Cawnpore, who, on the 6th of March 1908, revoked the sanction. Wazir Muhammad and Amir Muhammad now apply for revision of the order passed by the learned District Judge. Their learned vakil argues that the learned District Judge had no jurisdiction to revoke the sanction granted by the Collector of Fatehpur, inasmuch as the Court of the District Judge of Cawnpore is not a Court to which the Court of the Collector of Fatehpur is subordinate for the purposes of Section 195 of the Criminal Proce...
Mahadeo and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-12-1909
Reported in: 2Ind.Cas.219a
Richards, J.1. Applicants were ordered under the provisions of Section 109 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to give a bond and sureties for good conduct and in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year. Section 109 enables a Magistrate to make an order of this kind against, (a) a person who is taking precautions to con-coal his presence when the Magistrate believes that such precautions are being taken with a view to committing an offence, and (6) when there is a person within the limits of a Magistrate's jurisdiction, who has no ostensible means of subsistence or who cannot give a satisfactory account of himself. I think the evidence quite fails to show that the applicants were taking precautions to conceal their presence with a view to committing any offence. They apparently belong to a gang who go about frequenting melas and markets. They carry on or pretend to carry on a game played with rings. Whether this is or is not a legal game appears to be somewhat d...
Ramdial and ors. Vs. Narpat Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-12-1909
Reported in: 9Ind.Cas.931
1. This appeal arises out of a suit for sale brought upon a mortgage, dated the 26th of September, 1898, executed by the defendants Nos. 1-3, in favour of the plaintiff. The mortgage-bond provides for payment of the amount secured by it by instalments covering a period of 12 years. The plaintiff alleges that default has been made in the payment of one of the instalments and he claims the amounts of all the instalments remaining unpaid. He also prays for the sale of the hypothecated property which consists of a grove admittedly the occupancy-holding of the mortgagors and a dwelling house and enclosure in which they reside as such occupancy-tenants. The Court of first instance granted to the plaintiff a decree for only one of the instalments in respect of which default had been made, but it dismissed the remainder of the claim including the claim for sale of the mortgaged property. The lower Appellate Court has modified the decree of the Court of first instance and made a decree for the ...
Shiamlal Vs. Chunni Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-11-1909
Reported in: 1Ind.Cas.220a
Karamat Husain, J.An application was made to the learned Munsif to sanction the prosecution of Shiam Lal, applicant. The learned Munsif refused to grant sanction for the prosecution of Shiam Lal under Section 193, I.P.C. Then an application in revision was made to the learned District Judge, who declined to grant sanction under Section 195 of the Criminal Procedure Code, but purporting to act under Section 476 of that Code, he himself ordered the prosecution of Shiam Lal under Section 193. Shiam Lal has made this application in revision and his learned Counsel contends that the learned District Judge had no jurisdiction to direct the prosecution of Shiam Lal under Section 476 as that section could apply only if the offence had been committed in that Court or brought under its notice in the course of a judicial proceeding. The offence was neither committed before the learned District Judge nor was brought under his notice in the course of a judicial proceeding. In support of this conten...
Thakur Parshad Vs. Jamna Kunwar and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-11-1909
Reported in: (1909)ILR31All308; 2Ind.Cas.474
1. The only question in this appeal is whether Suraj Prasad, the last owner of the property in suit, conferred upon his mother Jamna Kunwar by his will, dated the 9th of April, 1902, an absolute estate in one-half of the property left by him. The will provides that in the event of his marrying again and having issue, such issue shall be the owner (milik) of his property like himself. It then goes on to say If I happen to have no issue, the names of my wife and mother shall be entered in equal shares and they shall be owners and in possession (malik aur kabiz).' It is urged that the mother of the deceased, Musammat Jumna Kunwar, acquired a life-estate only and not an absolute estate under the terms of this will. The word malik has been interpreted in the recent ruling of the Privy Council in Surajmuni v. Rabi Nath Ojha 30 A. 84 (P.C.) : 5 A.L.J. 67 : 18 M.L.J. 7 : 12 C.W.N. 231 : 10 Bom. L.R. 59 : 7 C.L.J. 131 : 3 M.L.T. 144. In that case their Lordships observe that 'in order to cut do...
Devi Prasad Vs. A.H. Lewis
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-10-1909
Reported in: (1909)ILR31All304
Richards, J.1. This appeal arises out of an application for the attachment of the salary of the respondent, who is a clerk in the employment of Pandit Pirthi Nath, a vakil practising in Cawnpore. There is nothing to show that any salary was actually due at the time of the application for attachment and having regard to the date of the application none would be due in the ordinary course of events. Both the courts below have treated the application as being an application for the attachment of the future salary of the respondent. The application itself was an application to attach a sum of Rs. 150 every month. Section 266 of the old Code of Civil Procedure (which was in force at the time) specifies the classes of property etc. liable to attachment and sale in execution of a decree. They are as follows: 'Land, houses or other buildings, goods, money, bank-notes, cheques, bills of exchange, hundis, promissory-notes, Government securities, bonds or other securities for money, debts, shares...
Musammat Najmunnissa Bibi Vs. Lala Jamna Das
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-10-1909
Reported in: 1Ind.Cas.78
1. A preliminary objection has been taken to the hearing of this appeal on behalf of the respondent on the ground that no appeal lies. The facts are these. The respondent Jamna Das holds a decree against the estate of one Farzand Ali passed by the Subordinate Judge of Mirzapur. The appellant Musammat Najmunnissa has obtained decree for her dower against the same estate from the court of the District Judge of Mirzapur. In execution of her decree she has caused certain property to be attached as the property of Farzand Ali. Jamna Das in execution of his decree has caused the same property to be attached. There are thus two attachments on the same property; namely, one under the orders of the District Judge and the other under the orders of the Subordinate Judge. Najmunnissa was a party to the suit brought by Jamna Das and is judgment-debtor in the decree passed in that suit. She objects to the sale of the attached property by the Subordinate Judge on the ground that as it has been attach...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »