Allahabad Court October 1912 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.
Muhammad Abdul Aziz Vs. Rafi-un-nissa Bibi and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-22-1912
Reported in: 17Ind.Cas.833
1. This and the connected appeals arise out of suits for profits against the lambardar. The plaintiff, Musammat Rafi-un-nissa, in the first appeal which arises out of Suit No. 2 of 1909, sues for certain arrears of profits as vendee of the share of her husband, Abdul Jail. The other first Appeal No. 334 arises out of Suit No. 3 of 1909. In that suit, the plaintiff claimed merely as assignee of the profits, the profits being originally due to Abdul Alim. The connected second appeals also arise out of suits for profits under similar circumstances. All the appeals can be conveniently disposed of by a single judgment.2. The first point taken by the learned Advocate on behalf of the appellant is grounded on the following circumstances. It appears that a suit was brought in the year 1905 to which the present defendant was a party for the partition of certain property including the property in respect of which the profits are claimed in the present suits. It would appear that that suit, which...
Giga Vs. Muhammad Amin
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-04-1912
Reported in: 17Ind.Cas.799
Rafique, J.1. This is an application in revision by one Giga, praying that the order of the learned Cantonment Magistrate, dated the 23rd of July 1912, be set aside. It appears that Giga had employed Muhammad Amin, the opposite party, to work at the shop of the former. Muhammad Amin took a loan from the applicant for which he gave an agreement. Before the loan had been paid off, Muhammad Amin left the service of Giga. The latter filed a complaint under Act XIII of 1859, in the Court of the Cantonment Magistrate, for the recovery of the loan or for an order directing Muhammad Amin to return to work. The learned Magistrate referred the matter to arbitration. The majority of the arbitrators filed an award decreeing Rs. 51-4-0, to Giga, the applicant. That sum, I understand, has been paid. It is contended for the applicant that the learned Magistrate had no jurisdiction to delegate his powers under Act XIII. of 1859, to arbitrators. I find that the objection taken by the applicant need not...
Sardha Prasad and anr. Vs. Pitamber Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-02-1912
Reported in: 17Ind.Cas.409
Rafique, J.1. This is an application in revision contesting an order of the learned Joint Magistrate of Allahabad, which purports to have been passed under Section 145, Criminal Procedure Code. The relevant facts of the case are as follows: One Shah Haji Jan and some others are the owners of a Mandi in the town of Allahabad known as Khalifa Ki Mandi. The applicant, Pitamber Lal, was the lessee of that Mandi, and his lease, which is said to have been given in 1902, was to expire on the 21st of June 1912. Prior to the expiry of his lease, another lease was given to Sardha Prasad and Bhola Ram as long ago as 1938, which was to take effect on the expiry of the lease of Pitamber Lal, i, e., after the 21st of June 1912. On the 26th of June 1912, the Police submitted a report that there was a likelihood of the breach of the peace between the two lessees over the collection of the Mandi dues. The Magistrate acted on that report and issued notices to the applicant and the opposite parties on th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›