Allahabad Court November 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.
Jabbar Singh Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-30-1912
Reported in: 17Ind.Cas.541
ORDERTudball, J.1. The applicant, Jabbar Singh, has been convicted of a breach of the Municipal Rules made by the Municipality of Cawnpore and has been sentenced to fifty rupees fine, the maximum punishment allowed. The rule is one, which purports to have been made under Section 128 Clauses (h), (i), for the regulation of the Collector Gunj market, in the Cawnpore Municipality. Rule 2 of these rules recites: 'No retail transaction shall be permitted in the market except in the street known as the 'Pharyas street' and on a strip of laud lying on both sides of and extending back eight feet from the pacca road traversing the market and leading from the Kotwali to the Bawan Dukan. Retail sales are only permitted subject to the payment of rent at the rate of eight annas per square yard par month for the area occupied and subject also to the condition that neither grain nor vegetables shall be sold.2. For the purpose of these rules any transaction in which less than a cart load of produce is...
Basharat HusaIn and anr. Vs. Abdullah Khan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-29-1912
Reported in: (1913)ILR35All48
Macnaghten, J.1. The respondents in these consolidated appeals are the representatives of the late plaintiff Saiyid Basharat Husain, now deceased, who was the owner of valuable zamindari property, subject to a mortgage, dated the 25th of August 1880, and three further charges tacked to it. The mortgage of 1880 and these further charges are now vested in the appellant,2. The controversy in this case arose out of these mortgage transactions. The original mortgagee was Husain Ali Khan, who made the advances to Basharat Husain, and took the securities in the name of his wife.3. Basharat Husain brought a suit for redemption. His right to redeem was not disputed. The only question was as to the terms and conditions on which the decree for redemption should be made.4. On the part of the appellant it was maintained that the rights of the parties must be governed by the provisions of the mortgage deed of 1880, which was duly executed and duly registered. On the other hand, the mortgagor contend...
Emperor Vs. Phulel
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-29-1912
Reported in: (1913)ILR35All102
Tudball, J.1. The applicant Phulel went to the District Magistrate and made a statement before him that a certain police officer had beaten him, demanded a bribe from him and locked him in the police hawalat. He added that he did not wish to make a complaint, as it would not be possible to prove the complaint, but he wished the District Magistrate to make an inquiry so as to prevent the police officer behaving tyrannically towards him. In spite of the fact that he stated that he did not wish to make a complaint, the Magistrate made him take the oath and make a statement. Inquiry disclosed that the charge was groundless. Phulel was put on his trial under Sections 211 and 182, Indian Penal Code. The Magistrate came to the conclusion that Section 211 did not apply as the man distinctly refrained from instituting a complaint, but held that he was guilty of offences under Sections 182 and 193, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced him to separate sentences for each of those offences. On appeal t...
Banarsi Das Vs. Partab Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-29-1912
Reported in: (1913)ILR35All103; 18Ind.Cas.351
Tudball, J.1. The facts of this case are briefly as follows: The present applicant Banarsi Das applied to a magistrate of the first class asking him to bind over the opposite party to keep the peace. The Magistrate after recording all the evidence passed an order that the opposite party should furnish security for a certain period. The opposite party Partab Singh made an application to the District Magistrate which purported to be one under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The grounds of this application were, however, directed against the order of the Magistrate binding him over to keep the peace. The application was treated as an appeal by the officiating District Magistrate, was registered as such and he went into the evidence on the record, and his order ended as follows: 'I accept the appeal and cancel the order of the lower court; all the bonds are cancelled.' It is quite clear that the officiating District Magistrate who passed the order on the application treated ...
Ram Lal Vs. Amar Chand
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-28-1912
Reported in: 17Ind.Cas.653
Henry Griffin, J.1. A second appeal in a revenue suit to the learned District Judge of Jaunpore was dismissed by him on a preliminary ground that the appeal had been filed beyond time and no sufficient cause had been shown for extending the time for the filing of the appeal. Two grounds have been taken in the application for revision to this Court. One ground is that on the merits, the applicant was entitled to the benefit of Section 5 of the Limitation Act. From the facts set out in the judgment of the Court, I am satisfied that the decision of the Court below on that point was correct. The applicant had himself to thank for the delay in the filing of the appeal after the expiry of one month from the date of the decree. The second ground raises a question as to which no ruling has been quoted before me. Mr. Hamilton for the applicant contends that the Tenancy Act does not prescribe any period of limitation for appeals preferred to District Judges under the provisions of Section 167 of...
Banwari Lal and ors. Vs. Musammat Rama and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-28-1912
Reported in: 17Ind.Cas.915
Griffin, J.1. This appeal arises out of an application for execution of a decree for mesne profits. The decree-holders claimed interest on mesne profits. The Court below held that the decree-holders were not entitled to interest inasmuch as the original decree was silent as to interest on mesne profits. In the plaint interest had been asked for on mesne profits. The learned Subordinate Judge was of opinion that as the decree was silent on the question of interest, the relief as to interest should be deemed to have been refused. The decree-holders appeal.2. It appears from the definition of the term mesne profits' that it includes interest on such profits. The original decree must, therefore, have included interest on mesne profits and the decree-holders were entitled in execution of their decree to interest thereon. I allow the appeal, set aside the order of the Court below in so far as it dismisses the decree-holders' claim for interest on mesne profits and direct that the application...
Saiyid Ali Vs. Ali Jan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-27-1912
Reported in: (1913)ILR35All98
Henry Richards, Kt., C.J. and Banerji, J.1. The facts connected with this appeal are shortly as follows: In the year 1856 one Musammat Bikani Bibi made a deed of waqf of certain property for the purpose of meeting the expenses of a certain mosque and imambara. The deed provided that she had appointed one Syed Himayat Ali, son-in-law of her husband's eldest brother, to be the nazir and mutawalli and that after him the fittest and ablest in the family, who should be a follower of the Shia sect, and a good and religious man, should be appointed, generation after generation, as nazir and mutawalli of the waqf. In the course of time the office of mutawalli was held by the plaintiffs father. During his incumbency a suit was instituted before the District Judge of Jaunpur alleging that he had been guilty of breaches of trust and seeking to remove him from being mutawalli. That suit was instituted under the provisions of Section 539 of the Code of Civil Procedure of 1882, which was then in for...
Emperor Vs. Udit NaraIn Dube and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-27-1912
Reported in: (1913)ILR35All109
Tudball, J.1. This application has arisen out of the following facts:2. The District Registrar of Mirzapur had before him an application in reference to a certain document for an order of compulsory registration of that document. The Sub-Registrar had refused to register it on the ground of denial. After making some inquiry the District Registrar refused to register it on the ground that he believed the document to be a forgery. He passed the order on the 27th of July, 1912. Immediately below the order he recorded the following order:The deed in question is impounded. An inquiry will be held by me under Section 476, Criminal Procedure Code, on my return from leave. The writer of the deed, the attesting witnesses, Khub Lal and Udit Narain, will be called on to show cause why they should not be prosecuted for forgery.3. So far no action appears to have been taken by the District Registrar. Presumably the present application, though it does not say so, asks this Court on the criminal side...
Saiyad Ali Vs. Ali Jan and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-27-1912
Reported in: 18Ind.Cas.573
1. The facts connected with this appeal are shortly as follows: In the year 1856, one Musammat Bikani Bibi made a deed of waqf of certain property for the purpose of meeting the expenses of a certain mosque and imambara. The deed provided that she had appointed one Syed Himayat Ali, son in-law of her husband's eldest brother, to be the nazir and mutwalli and that after him the fittest and ablest in the family, who should be a follower of the Shia sect, and a good and religious man, should be appointed, generation after generation, as nazir and mutwalli of the waqf. In the course of time, the office of mutwalli was held by the plaintiff's father. During his incumbency a suit was instituted before the District Judge of Jaunpur alleging that he had been guilty of breaches of trust and seeking to remove him from being mutwalli. That suit was instituted under the provisions of Section 539 of the Code of Civil Procedure of 1882, which was then in force. The result of the suit was that the le...
Udit NaraIn Dube and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-27-1912
Reported in: 18Ind.Cas.896
Tudball, J.1. This application has arisen out of the following facts: The District Registrar of Mirzapur had before him an application in reference to a certain document for an order of compulsory registration of that document. The Sub-Registrar had refused to register it on the ground of denial. After making some inquiry, the District Registrar refused to register it on the ground that he believed the document to be a forgery. He passed the order on the 27th of July 1912. Immediately below the order he recorded the following order:The deed in question is impounded. An inquiry will be held by me under Section 476, Criminal Procedure Code, on my return from leave. The writer of the deed, the attesting witnesses, Khub Lal and Udit Narain, will be called on to show cause why they should not be prosecuted for forgery.2. So far no action appears to have been taken by the District Registrar. Presumably, the present application, though it does not say so, asks this Court on the Criminal side ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »