Allahabad Court May 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.
Kuber Nath and ors. Vs. Mahali Ram and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-31-1912
Reported in: (1912)ILR34All587
Karamat Hussain and Tudball, JJ.1. The managers of five ginning firms came to an agreement, where by they fixed the rates to be charged for ginning and baling cotton, thus forming a combination, and agreed that for a certain definite period the profits of ginning would be 7 annas 6 pies and of baling 1 anna 6 pies per maund. They further agreed that the profits were to be divided, and that those for baling were to be divided equally, while those for ginning were to be divided in proportion to the ginning capacity of the various factories. A dispute as to the ginning capacity of the factories arose and the suit was instituted by the plaintiffs for their share of the profits according to the ginning capacity of their mills. The court of first instance decreed the claim. On appeal, the decree was slightly modified by the lower appellate court as to the amount to which the plaintiffs were entitled. In second appeal to this Court the only point pressed before us is that the agreement relied...
Baij Nath Vs. Raja Ram
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-31-1912
Reported in: 16Ind.Cas.512
George Knox, J.1. Raja Ram, a young man who, it is said, has just attained his majority, filed a complaint in the Court of a Magistrate of the first class at Agra, The complaint was laid against two persons, one of them being Makhan Lal, who is said to be a munim of the firm of which the complainant says he is the proprietor. The complaint is certainly, as it stands, a rambling document with a good deal of irrelevant matter. It is, however, a complaint and the complainant is entitled to have it properly considered by the Magistrate in whose Court he made it. The duty of a Magistrate receiving such a complaint is set out in Section 200 of the Criminal Procedure Code. It is the Magistrate's duty at once to examine the complainant on oath and to reduce the substance of that examination to writing. In the present instance, there was a most perfunctory carrying out of these important provisions of the Code. I doubt, myself, whether the Magistrate did examine the complainant. If he did, and ...
ibrahim Vs. Ramnarain
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-31-1912
Reported in: 16Ind.Cas.483
Chamier, J.1. This was a suit for the recovery of Rs. 300 on the basis of a registered deed of mortgage. The plaintiff sued as the assignee of the original mortgagee. The defendants were the descendants of the mortgagor. It appears that the plaintiff produced evidence that the writer of the deed and all the marginal witnesses were dead; that the deed was in the handwriting of the person who purported to have written it out, and that the signatures of the witnesses were in their handwriting. On a consideration of all the evidence, the Munsif decided that it was safe to make the presumption permitted by Section 90 of the Evidence Act, the deed being one 35 years old. He found that the document was genuine, and he held that it was for the defendants to rebut he admission made by the executant of the deed at the time of registration that he had received the consideration.2. Both the Courts below have held that the deed was supported by consideration.3. In second appeal, two points are take...
Kuber Nath and ors. Vs. Mahali Ram and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-31-1912
Reported in: 16Ind.Cas.631
1. The managers of the five ginning firms came to an agreement, whereby they fixed the rates to be charged for ginning and baling cotton, thus forming a combination, and agreed that for a certain definite period, the profits of ginning would be 7 annas 6 pies and of baling one anna 6 pies per maund. They further agreed that the profits were to be divided, and that those for baling were to be divided equally, while those for ginning were to be divided in proportion to the ginning capacity of the various factories A dispute as to the ginning capacity ...
Bishumbhar Dayal Vs. Parshadi Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-30-1912
Reported in: 16Ind.Cas.629
Chamier, J.1. This was a suit by the respondents upon a mortgage made in their favour by the appellant on the 7th of December 1395. On the date of the mortgage, the appellant, with his brothers, Durga Prasad and Shiam Sarup and their children, constituted a joint Hindu family, and the appellant describes the property mortgaged as Mushtarkai-Durga Prasad waghaira. The respondents originally impleaded in this suit the appellant's brother, Shiam Sarup, but at their instance, his name was struck off the record, and the case proceeded against the appellant alone. The appellant put forward various defences, but the only one which I need notice now, was that the mortgage was invalid inasmuch art the property was the property of the joint family. The Munsif held that this defence was not open to the appellant and decreed the claim in full against the appellant and directed that in case of non-payment, the defendant's share in the property should be sold. An appeal to the District Judge was dis...
Thakur Chauharja Singh Vs. Sarabjit
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-30-1912
Reported in: 15Ind.Cas.303
Chamier, J.1. In this case, the Subordinate Judge held that the plaintiff had no right to sue as a thekadar. That decision was reversed by Mr. Justice Karamat Husain, who remanded the case to the lower Appellate Court for the determination of the remaining issues. The Subordinate Judge has now dismissed the suit on another ground, namely, that the suit is not maintainable in the Civil Court. The plaintiff again appeals to this Court. The Sub-ordinate Judge finds support for his view of the case in the decision of Knox and Karamat Husain, JJ., in Narain Singh v. Gobind Ram 8 A.L.J. 431 : 33 A. 523 : 9 Ind. Cas. 1022. In that case the plaintiff went first to the Revenue Court saying that he was an occupancy-tenant and the defendant was his sub-tenant. The Revenue Court dismissed his application for the ejectment of the defendant. The plaintiff then came into the Civil Court alleging that the defendant had been his sub-tenant, but had become a trespasser, because he had pleaded in the Rev...
Parsotam Rao Tantia and anr. Vs. Radha Bai and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-29-1912
Reported in: 15Ind.Cas.566
1. A preliminary objection has been taken to the hearing of this appeal on the ground that no decree has been passed in the suit and, therefore, no appeal lies. What happened in the Court below was this. A plea of res judicata was urged on behalf of the defendants. Arguments were heard in regard to that plea and the Court came to the conclusion that the matter was not res judicata between the parties. A number of other issues were framed and the Court, after determining the preliminary point referred to above, proceeded to try the other issues. It is from the decision upon the issue as to res judicata that this appeal has been preferred. We are of opinion that the determination of such an issue is not a decree within the definition of that term as given in the Code of Civil Procedure. No preliminary decree has been passed in the suit. What the definition means is that a Court may pass a preliminary decree in certain circumstances, which is appealable, and a final decree subsequently. I...
Musaddi Lal and anr. Vs. Jwala Prasad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-28-1912
Reported in: 16Ind.Cas.496
Chamier, J.1. This was a suit for possession of a grove and Rs. 50, the alleged value of the fruit of the grove taken by the defendants during the three years immediately preceding the suit. The suit has been dismissed on the ground that it is barred by a decision in a previous suit. The previous suit was brought by Hardial and his son, Banke Rai, to recover damages on account of the fruit of the grove alleged to have been wrongly taken by the defendants. The suit was dismissed because the plaintiffs failed to prove their title to the grove or that it ever was in their possession. The present suit was brought by Banke Rai and other descendants of Hardial, who were either not born or were very young children at the date of the previous suit. There can be no doubt, I think, that such of the plaintiffs as were alive at the date of the previous suit, were sufficiently represented by Hardial. Those who were born since the date of the previous suit, are clearly bound by that decision so far ...
Madan Lal Vs. Kishan Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-27-1912
Reported in: (1912)ILR34All572
Henry Richards, C.J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit to realize the amount of a mortgage, dated the 11th August, 1884. It was pleaded by way of defence, amongst other things, that the plaintiff and his minor son, Bisheshar Dayal, were a joint Hindu family, and that the suit could not be maintained because the mortgage was of family property and the son was not made a party. Plaintiff urged against this plea that he was manager and represented the family. Plaintiff also asked that the plaint might be amended by stating therein that he sued as manager. The Court below refused to amend the plaint and dismissed the suit on the ground that the son was necessary a party to the suit.2. The appeal has been referred to this Bench because of the conflict of judicial decisions on the question.3. Apart from authority, I can see no reason why the son should be a necessary party to the suit. It must be assumed for the purpose of this appeal that the plaintiff is the manager of the family. If, bef...
Narayan Dei Vs. Durga Dei and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-27-1912
Reported in: 16Ind.Cas.489
George Knox, J.1. In order to understand this appeal, it will be better in the beginning to set out that one Bhola Nath had a wife, named Musammat Sunder Dei. Of these two, were born four ladies, Musammat Narain Dei, Musammat Durga Dei, Musammat Uttam and Musammat Piari. Bhola Nath died leaving his widow and these four ladies him surviving. Musammat Sunder Dei is now dead, and the dispute relates to property which is said to be the property of Musammat Sunder Dei. It will be well to note also that the lady, Musammat Durga Dei, married one Baldeo, In this appeal, the parties are Musammat Narain Dei, who was the plaintiff in the Court of first instance, Musammat Durga Dei and her busband Baldeo. The property with which this appeal is concerned, is a house situate in Mohalla Mandi Said Khan in the city of Agra. This house was pat up to sale by the Civil Court at Agra. It was purchased--so the sale certificate sets out--by Baldeo. The Sale certificate shows that it was sold subject to a li...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »