Allahabad Court April 1910 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.
Baldeo Singh and ors. Vs. Bulaqi Dass
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-11-1910
Reported in: 6Ind.Cas.203
1. This appeal arises out of a suit to enforce a mortgage. It appears that in the year 1898 certain of the defendants, who are all members of a joint Hindu family, had been arrested for non-payment of Government revenue. They had been under arrest for some days. They managed to persuade the Tahsildar to allow them to go to the plaintiff who is a money-lender. In all probability the chaprasi or chaprasis of the Tahsildar accompanied them to the money lender's house. A small sum of Its. 99 was advanced, the rate of interest being 37 1/2 per cent, compound interest with rests at six months. In consideration of this small advance, the debtor1 hypothecated substantial zitmindari property. The zamindari itself except the sir was already mortgaged with possession to other persons. The sir, however, must have been security for many times the amount of the advance. In the year 1904, the principal and interest due to the plaintiff in respect of the advance of 1898 had amounted to no less than Rs...
Moulvi Abdul Majid Vs. Moulvi Abdul Ghani
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-11-1910
Reported in: 6Ind.Cas.249
1. The only ground urged before us against the decree of the Court below is that the subject-matter of the suit being above Rs. 5,000, an appeal from the decree of the Assistant Collector, first class, lay to the, High Court and not the District Judge, having regard to the provisions of Section 177 of the Agra Tenancy Act. In our opinion the appeal only lay to the High Court. The objection is a technical one and was not taken in the Court below. The respondent has called our attention to the provisions of Section 11 of the Suits Valuation Act and certain rulings bearing on the same section. In our opinion Section 11 of the Suits Valuation Act does not apply, there being no under valuation or overvaluation of the appeal before the Court below. The words of the proviso to Section 177 of the Agra Tenancy Act are quite clear and we hold that the Court below had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. We allow this appeal, set aside the decree of the Court below and direct that the memoran...
Patakdhari Rai Vs. Mankaran Rai and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-09-1910
Reported in: 6Ind.Cas.205
1. The facts of the case out of which this appeal has arisen are these. The plaintiffs-respondents brought a suit against several defendants, one of whom was the appellant Palakdhari Rai. He did not appear at the hearing of the suit but some of the other defendants did so and a decree was passed against all the defendants by the Court of first instance. Prom this decree an appeal was preferred by all the defendants, except Palakdhari who was made a respondent. The lower appellate Court affirmed the decree of the Court of first instance and dismissed the appeal. Thereupon Palakdhari applied under Section 108 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1882, to the Court of first instance to have the decree of that Court, which had been affirmed by the appellate Court, set aside on the ground that he had no notice of the suit. The Court of first instance granted his application, re-opened the case and in the result dismissed, the suit. Upon appeal to the lower appellate Court, it was held that the M...
Hemraj Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-09-1910
Reported in: 6Ind.Cas.250
George Knox, J.1. Hemraj has been convicted in the alternative of an offence falling either under Section 215 or under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. There can be no conviction for an offence under Section 215 of the Indian Penal Code until it is proved that a person has been deprived of movable property by an offence punishable under the Code. The property in this case is a buffalo. I have examined the evidence and can find no evidence that Jahangira was deprived of the buffalo by any offence. All that is known for certain is that the buffalo has disappeared. It is quite possible that it may have strayed away, at any rate, it cannot be presumed that an offence has been committed in respect of it. The conduct of the accused though suspicious does not amount to knowledge that a theft had been committed and that the accused knew who had committed it. The conviction under Section 215, Indian Penal Code, is illegal and must be set aside. The Court finds no such offence proved agains...
Kesri Rohan and ors. Vs. Ganga Sahai and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-09-1910
Reported in: 6Ind.Cas.364
Banerji, J.1. The suits, out of which this appeal and the connected Appeal No. 58 of 1907 arise, relate to certain property left by one Bahadur Singh. The plaintiffs in each case claim to be the next heirs of Bahadur Sipgh. The relationship between the parties appears from the following pedigre:Mihin Lal__________________________________________________________________________| | | |Ganga Prasad Gya Prasad Rajaram Nekram| | | (branch extinct).| Bahadur Singh || ________________________________________|______________________| | | | || Pokha Singh Kesri. Gulab Singh Rohan.| | || Kallu. Ram Narain.|______________________________________________________|___________________| |Jainlal Kalka Prasad.|Munshi Lai.2. It is admitted that the four sons of Mihin Lal were separate and that after the death of Bahadur Singh his widow Musammat Lachhman Kunwar succeeded to his property. When Lachhman Kunwar died, Raja Ram, Jian Lal and Kalka Prasad were alive as also was Musammat Gulab Kunwar the step-mo...
Nathumal Vs. the District Judge of Benares
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-09-1910
Reported in: 6Ind.Cas.870
1. Nathu Mal, appellant here, applied under Section 16 of Act III of 1907 for an order of adjudication of insolvency. The learned District Judge made the order applied for notwithstanding very strenuous objections on the part of the creditors. The learned Judge says in his judgment of the 11th of March, 1909, 'I, therefore, hold that there were no sufficient grounds for refusing an order of adjudication.' The next sentence proceeds as follows: 'At the same time I must place here on record that it is clearly proved that the applicant is guilty of very bad faith.' He then proceeds to set forth the facts which show that the applicant was fraudulently concealing documents, which would throw light on the state of assets and was also fraudulently understating the amount of his assets. We wish to clearly express our opinion that the learned Judge holding the opinion ho did was clearly wrong in granting the petition of Nathu Mal and declaring him insolvent. Section 15 of Act III of 1907 provid...
Pandit Channu Dat Vyas Vs. Babu Nandan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-08-1910
Reported in: 6Ind.Cas.223
1. In the suit out of which this appeal has arisen the plaintiff-respondent Babu Nandan seeks a declaration that he has a right to perform at Benares a religious pageant (Ramlila) styled Chitherkopt Narsinghla, Bawan Dwadashi and Holi, which are performed every year from Kuar Badi 9th to Kuar Sudi 15th, and to receive the offerings given on the occasion and to realise subscriptions; and for an injunction to restrain the defendant from interfering in any way with the plaintiff's right to perform these ceremonies and from receiving subscriptions and offerings, or from taking any income which might accrue from the said pageants.2. The defendant in his written statement, amongst other pleas, denied the right of the plaintiff to perform the Lila alleging that it was performed on behalf of and by the aid of all the Hindu community. He denied that the pageants in question were exclusively performed by the plaintiff, and he further pleaded that the claim was not cognizable by a Civil Court. He...
Rohilkhand and Kumaon Railway Vs. Babu Jagdamba Sahai
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-08-1910
Reported in: 6Ind.Cas.333
1. This appeal arises out of a suit in which . the plaintiff claimed Rs. 1,00Q, the value of the contents of a box, which he had delivered to the defendant Railway Company for carriage from Katgodam to Kasganj City Station. It appears that at the time of booking the box, the plaintiff made a representation to an officer of the Company that the box contained articles of the value of about Rs. 1,000 and he wished that special care should be taken to prevent the box or its contents from being injured by rain. He was asked the nature of the contents and he showed a list of the contents. The defendants Railway Company contend that they are relieved from all the liability by virtue of the provision's of Section 75 of the Indian Railways Act; IX of 1890, and Clause 26 of the bye-laws of the defendant Company. Section 75 of the Railways Actis as follows:1. When any articles mentioned in the second schedule are contained in any parcel or package delivered to a Railway administration for carriag...
Maharaja Vizinagram Vs. Chhango Kurmi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-08-1910
Reported in: 6Ind.Cas.834
1. The suit out of which this appeal arises was brought by the plaintiff-appellant, who is the zemindar, for redemption of two mortgages of a tenancy at fixed rates, executed by one Ramdin on the 28th of July, 1878, one in favour of the defendant's father and the other in favour of the defendant's grandfather. Ram Din died, leaving a son Lachman, who also died in 1901. On Lachman's death the defendant's name was entered in the Revenue papers as the tenant holding at fixed rates. The plaintiff brought a suit against the defendant to eject him from the holding on the allegation that he was only a tenant-at-will. In that suit the Assistant Collector held on the 8th of February, 1906, that the defendant was a tenant at fixed rates and that he was mot liable to ejectment. After this decision by the Revenue Court, the suit out of which this appeal has arisen was brought by the plaintiff. The learned Judge of this Court has held that such a suit is not maintainable in view of the decision of ...
Persottam Patak and ors. Vs. Sheo Shanker Kolapuri and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-06-1910
Reported in: 6Ind.Cas.163
1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiffs as the sons and grandsons of one Matadin for a declaration that certain property was owned and possessed by the plaintiffs and the defendants had acquired no proprietary interest in the property under a sale-deed dated the 12th of August 1895, and in the alternative for possession of the property. The plaintiffs alleged that the sale-deed was made by Matadin, that Matadin was incapable from mental incapacity of making the same, that fraud was practised on him (Matadin), that there was no consideration for the deed and that the items of antecedent debts mentioned in the deed were fictitious and had no foundation in fact. They farther submitted that even on the assumption that there was no fraud and that there was consideration for the deed, as there was no previous debt payable by Matadin and as Matadin did not execute the sale-deed as the managing member of the family or for the benefit of the family, it was not binding on t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »