Allahabad Court April 1914 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.
Autar Kurmi Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-29-1914
Reported in: AIR1914All107; 24Ind.Cas.160
ORDERP.C. Banerji, J.1. This is an application for the revision of an order which a Magistrate of the 1st class purported to make under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The ground of the application is that the Magistrate did not comply with the requirements of Clause (1) of Section 145, and had, consequently, no jurisdiction to proceed under that section. It appears that a telegram had been sent to the Magistrate of the District by Raghbir Singh, complaining of action which he apprehended would be taken by the applicant and which might lead to a breach of the peace. A Police inquiry was ordered and proceedings were commenced under Section 107 of the Code. The applicant filed a written statement and thereupon the Magistrate, before whom the case under Section 107 was, made an order in the following terms : On looking at this case it appears that it is a case under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and not under Section 107. Therefore, it is ordered that the 23...
Mathura Prasad Vs. Durga Wati and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-28-1914
Reported in: (1914)ILR36All380
Muhammad Rafiq and Piggott, JJ.1. This is an appeal from an order rejecting the application of the appellant for grant of a succession certificate under Act VII of 1889. The appellant in his application to the lower court stated that the deceased Gaya Prasad, in respect of whose estate the certificate was wanted, was his brother and lived with him as a member of a joint undivided Hindu family. There were certain other allegations made in the application which need not be referred to. The application was opposed and the learned Judge rejected it. No evidence was given by either state in the court below m support of the allegations made in the application. The learned Judge in rejecting the application said that he thought that the two brothers were separate and that one of the legatees under the will of the deceased was a more likely person to apply for and to be granted a succession certificate. We do not think that there was any evidence before the learned Judge to enable him to come ...
Bal Krishna Das Vs. Hira Lal Bagla and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-28-1914
Reported in: AIR1914All393; (1914)ILR36All406
Tudball and Chamier, JJ.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of a suit for possession of property. The plaintiff's case was that one Ram Jas died leaving an estate and a widow, Musammat Hira Dei. The latter died and was succeeded by his daughter Musammat Lakhi Bibi, who died on the 23rd of April, 1906. Musammat Lakhi Bibi transferred certain portions of the estate. The plaintiff claims as a bandhu a one third share of the estate, admitting that defendant No. 2 is entitled to two thirds. He impleaded defendants 1 and 2 as being in possession of some of the property, defendants 3 and 4 as transferees of a certain house in Calcutta from Musammat Lakhi Bibi, and defendant 5 as a mortgagee of another portion of the estate from the same lady. These transfers he alleges to be null and void as against his interest. There were various defences, among them being the plea that the suit was bad for multifariousness. During the pendency of the suit the plaintiff and defendants 1 and 2 came t...
Panday Jagannath Vs. Musammat Junian
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-28-1914
Reported in: 24Ind.Cas.63
Chamier, J.1. This appeal arises out of an application made by the appellant under Order XXXIV, Rule 6, for a decree for Rs. 119-12-0. The mortgage was made in 1884. The suit thereon was brought in 1909 and resulted in a preliminary decree for sale under Order XXXIV, Rule 4, passed by this Court in May 1910. The amount declared due on account of principal, interest and costs was Rs. 696-4. This included a sum of Rs. 61 on account of costs in this Court and a sum of Rs. 58-12 on account of costs in the lower Appellate Court. Costs of the first Court were not allowed.2. In due course an order absolute was. Made and the property was sold for Us. 560, leaving a balance of Rs. 136-4. The appellant then applied for a decree under Rule 6 for Rs. 119-12, i. e., the amount allowed for the costs of two Courts. His case is that although the balance of the amount found due on account of principal and interest is not legally recoverable from the respondent, the a-mount found duo for costs is so rec...
Kundun Lal Vs. Kallu and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-28-1914
Reported in: 24Ind.Cas.79
P.C. Banerji, J.1. The suit out of which this appeal has arisen was brought by the plaintiff to eject the principal defendants from a piece of land and a building erected thereon. A perpetual lease of the laud was granted to three persons, Kallu, Nathu and Nura, on the 21st of April 1888 on a rent of Rs. 12 a year. The plaintiff has acquired the interest of defendant No. 76 who was one of the lessors. His case was that the defendant No. 4, who is the successor-in-title of Nathu, had sold his interests in the premises to Saudagar Mal, defendant : that by reason of this sale the lease was forfeited by the defendants and that it was also forfeited because there was a failure to pay the rent for two years, as provided in the lease. At the hearing of the suit the defendants paid into Court for payment to the plaintiff the amount of arrears of rent claimed as well as interest thereon and costs of the suit. The Court, therefore, refused to make a decree for ejectment, purporting to act under ...
Balkrishna Das Vs. Kunwar Hira Lal Bagla and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-28-1914
Reported in: 24Ind.Cas.95
1. This is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of a suit for possession of property. The plaintiff's case was that one Ram Jas died leaving an estate and a widow, Musammat Hira Dei. The latter died and was succeeded by her daughter, Musammat Lakhi Bibi who died on April 23, 1906. Musammat Lakhi Bibi transferred certain portions of the estate. The plaintiff' claims, as a bandhu, a one-third share of the estate admitting that defendant No. 2 is entitled to two-thirds. He impleaded defendants Nos. 1 and 2 as being in possession of some of the property, defendants Nos. 3 and 4 as transferees of a certain house in Calcutta from Musammat Lakhi Bibi and defendant No. 5 as a mortgagee of another portion of the estate from the same lady. These transfers he alleged to be null and void as against his interest. There were various defences, among them being the plea that the suit was had for multifariousness. During the pendency of the suit the plaintiff and defendants Nos. 1 and 2 came to terms. Unde...
Mathura Prasad Vs. Durgawati and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-28-1914
Reported in: AIR1914All68(1); 24Ind.Cas.182
Piggott, J.1. This is an appeal from an order rejecting the application of the appellant for grant of a succession certificate under Act VII of 1889. The appellant in his application to the lower Court stated that the deceased Gaya Prasad in respect of whose estate the certificate was wanted was his brother and lived with him as a member of a joint undivided Hindu family. There were certain other allegations made in the application which need not be referred to.. The application was opposed and the learned Judge rejected it. No evidence was given by either side in the Court below in support of the allegations made in the application or in the Objections. The learned Judge in rejecting the application said that ho thought that the two brothers were separate and that one of the legatees under the Will of the deceased was a more likely person to apply for and to be granted a succession certificate. We do not think that there was any evidence before the learned Judge to enable him to come ...
Ambica Saran Singh and ors. Vs. Debi Saran Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-27-1914
Reported in: AIR1914All436; 24Ind.Cas.91
P.C. Banerji, J.1. The suit out of which this appeal has arisen was brought by the plaintiffs for possession of two plots of land, one lying to the north of their courtyard and the other to the south of it, and for the removal of constructions made on those plots of land by the defendants. We are not concerned with the southern plot of land in this appeal. The controversy in this appeal relates only to the plot lying to the north of the plaintiffs' courtyard. The plaintiffs put forward their claim in regard to this plot on two grounds : first, that the plot of land in dispute was part of their courtyard of which they were in possession and secondly, that their land being on a higher level the water from their land flows over the land in question and the construction of a dalan on it by the defendants obstructs the flow of the water.2. The Court of first instance, holding that the land did not belong to the plaintiffs and that they had not been in possession within 12 years, dismissed t...
Saeed-ud-dIn Khan and ors. Vs. Hira Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-25-1914
Reported in: AIR1914All109; 24Ind.Cas.25
P.C. Banerji, J.1. This appeal aries out of a suit for redemption of a mortgage, dated the 5th of September 1850. The suit was instituted on the last day of the expiry of limitation, namely, on the 5th of September 1910. The mortgage was made by one Ghulam Mustafa. He had a son Ghulam Nabi, who in the year 1872 brought a suit for redemption of the mortgage and obtained a decree against the original mortgagee or his heirs. One Meghraj held a money-decree against Ghulam Nabi and in execution of that decree caused the mortgaged property to be sold by auction in 1875 and it was purchased by Azim Ullah, Ghulam Mohi-ud-din and Muhammad Hosain Khan in 1876. These persons' paid off the mortgage and obtained possession. The representatives of these persons, save Musammat Khatun Bibi, the widow of Muhammad Husain, are defendants to this suit. The plaintiff, Hira Lal, is a purchaser from one Ratan Lai, who again was a purchaser from two persons who are the sons of one Umrao Begam, alleged to have...
Emperor Vs. Gansa
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-24-1914
Reported in: (1914)ILR36All378
Chamier, J.1. This is a reference by the District Magistrate of Moradabad in which he recommends that the sentence of five years' rigorous imprisonment, with ninety days in solitary confinement, passed on Ganga Ahir should be enhanced. The case was tried by the Assistant Sessions Judge, to whom it was transferred by the Sessions Judge. The District Magistrate in the first instance in accordance with the procedure followed in cases tried by Subordinate Magistrates, sent the record to the Sessions Judge asking that the case might be forwarded to the High Court with a recommendation that the sentence should be enhanced. The Sessions Judge declined to send the case to the High Court The District Magistrate has accordingly submitted the case direct to this Court. The question whether this can be done has arisen on several occasions. It arose in a case which was in my hands as Government Advocate several years ago. This Court while declining to hold that the District Magistrate was not entit...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »