Allahabad Court May 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.
Emperor Vs. Kundan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-22-1914
Reported in: (1914)ILR36All496
Piggott, J.1. In this case a complaint was laid before a magistrate of the third class in which six persons were accused of having committed criminal trespass under Section 447 of the Indian Penal Code. The complainant's case was that he had first been put in possession of certain land by the civil court in execution of a decree passed against two of the persons accused, and that thereupon the six accused persons, acting in concert, -had forcibly re-entered into possession of the land in question and had placed certain stacks and manure heaps upon it with a view to assert their possession against the complainant in the teeth of the civil court decree. The magistrate issued process against three persons only, and in a somewhat curious judgment eventually found two of thorn not guilty. He convicted one man, Kundan, apparently on the ground that the stacks and manure heaps placed on the disputed land were admitted by Kundan to belong to himself or to members of his family, ho that on this...
Gulzar Ahmad Vs. Sheva Shankar Sahai
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-22-1914
Reported in: AIR1914All253; 24Ind.Cas.415
1. This appeal arises out of a suit for the price of work done in connection with the repairs of a tent. The only defendant to the suit is the respondent, Shiva Shankar Sahai. He pleaded that he did not give the order for the repair of the tent on his own behalf, but as the agent for the Bonaili Raj. Both Courts have dismissed the plaintiff's suit, holding that the defendant was merely agent and not personally liable. The appellont relies upon the provisions of Section 230 of the Contract Act. That section is as follows :In the absence of any contract to that effect, an agent cannot personally enforce contracts entered into by him on behalf of his principal, nor is he personally bound by them. Such a contract shall be presumed to exist in the following cases :'(1) where the contract is made by an agent for the sale or purchase of goods for a merchant resident abroad :'(2) where the agent does not disclose the name of his principal :'(3) Where the principal, though disclosed, cannot be ...
Umrao HusaIn and ors. Vs. Allah Jilai and anr. and
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-21-1914
Reported in: (1914)ILR36All492
Chamier and Muhammad Rafiq, JJ.1. One Faiz Ali had an interest in patti Jamal-ud-din, mauza Sambhal Khera, He died leaving a widow and four daughters who, in 1875, sold the entire interest in the patti with the exception of 26 bighas to which the present suit relates. It appears that in 1888 the vendors were recorded as exproprietary tenants of these 26 bighas. The plaintiffs and the fourth defendant are representatives of the vendors of 1875, and they have brought this suit for a declaration that they are the proprietors of the 26 bighas. In 1903 the plaintiffs applied to the revenue authorities for correction of the village papers. The defendants' predecessors objected, and the order of the court was as follows: 'The applicants are in possession of the land and can remain so. If they want to have any change made in their capacity they should move a Civil Court for it. I therefore dismiss the application.' In January, 1910, the defendants applied to the Revenue Court under Section 36 ...
Musammat Allah Jilai and anr. Vs. Umrao HussaIn and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-21-1914
Reported in: 24Ind.Cas.535
1. One Faiz All had an interest in patti Jamal-ud-Din, Mauza Sambhal Khera. Ho died leaving a widow and four daughters who, in 1875, sold the entire interest in the patti with the exception of 26 bighas to which the present suit relates. It appears that in 1888 the vendors were recorded as ex-proprietary tenants of these 26 bighas. The plaintiffs and the fourth defendant are representatives of the vendors of 1875 and they have brought this suit for ,a declaration that they are the proprietors of the 26 bighas. In 1903 the plaintiffs applied to the Revenue Authorities for correction of the village papers. The defendants predecessors objected and the order of the Court was as follows : 'The applicants are in possession of the land andean remain so. If they want to have any change made in their capacity they should move a Civil Court for it. I, therefore, dismiss the application.' In January 1912 the defendant applied to the Revenue Court under Section 36 of the Land Revenue Act of 1901 f...
Pir Khan Vs. Faiyaz HusaIn and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-19-1914
Reported in: AIR1914All289; (1914)ILR36All488
Richards, C.J. and Tudball, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for pre-emption of a zamindari share and a house. The plaintiff appellant is a co-sharer in the mahal. Ho is a Mussalman of the Sunni sect. The vendor is also a Mussalman but of the Shia sect. The vendees are Hindus and strangers to the village. The plaintiff bases his right on a custom prevailing in the village among the members of the co-parcenary body. In the alternative he claims a right baaed on Muhammadan law and alleges that he performed the two necessary preliminary demands.2. The court below has dismissed the suit. It held that the plaintiff had failed to prove satisfactorily the existence of the alleged custom.3. In regard to the alternative claim it held that the plaintiff was not entitled to claim the application of the Sunni rule of pre-emption to this case, the vendor being a Shia, and under the Shia rule of pre-emption, no right of pre-emption could be claimed in the circumstances of the present case, as t...
Emperor Vs. Mehar Chand and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-19-1914
Reported in: AIR1914All580; (1914)ILR36All485; 24Ind.Cas.607
Piggott, J.1. This is a reference by the Additional Sessions Judge of Meerut, arising out of the following facts. Mehar Chand and Kanak Singh were tried before a Subordinate Magistrate on a charge under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code and were sentenced each to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a Period of one month and to pay a fine of Rs. 5 each. A period of one week's imprisonment was prescribed in default of payment of fine. Compensation was ordered to be paid to the complainant Chajju out of the fine, if realized. Mehar Chand and Kanak Singh appealed to the District Magistrate. He affirmed the conviction, but varied the sentence passed. He reduced the period of imprisonment to one of three days, which period the appellants before him had actually undergone; but he directed the appellants each to pay a fine of Rs. 100 or in default to undergo imprisonment for one month. The Additional Sessions Judge, when the case was brought before him in revision, found, no reason for interf...
Pir Khan Vs. Fayaz HusaIn and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-19-1914
Reported in: 25Ind.Cas.445
1. This appeal arises out of a suit; for pre-emption of a zemindari share and a house. The plaintiff-appellant; is a co-sharer in the mahal. He is also a Mussalman of the Sunni sect. The, vendor-is also a Mussalman but of, the Shia sect. The vendees are Hindus and strangers to the village. The plaintiff bases his right. on a custom prevailing in the village among the members, of the co-parcenary body. In the alternative he claims a right based on. Muhammadan Law and alleges that he performed the two necessary preliminary demands. The Court below has dismissed the suit. It held that the plaintiff had failed to prove satisfactorily the existence of the alleged custom. In regard to the alternative claim, it held that the plaintiff was not entitled to claim the application, of the Sunni rule of pre-emption to this case, the' vendor being a Shia, and under the Shia rule of pre-emption, no right of preemption could be claimed in the circumstances of the present case as there were admittedly ...
Parsottam Das and ors. Vs. Kesho Saran and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-19-1914
Reported in: AIR1914All280; 24Ind.Cas.206
Piggott, J.1. This is a second appeal by the decree-holder in an execution case. The somewhat complicated facts out of which this appeal arises have been fully laid before me, but I do not think it necessary to enter into them in detail. The essential point in issue is a simple one. The judgment-debtors-objectors, Kesho Saran and Raghunath Saran, are bound by a decree under which they are liable only to the extent of any property which may have come to them by inheritance from one Musammat Puran Dei as the stridhan of that lady. Execution of the decree was sought by arrest of the person of the judgment-debtor, Kesho Saran. When confronted with the terms of the decree the decree-holders pleaded that certain property, the stridhan of Musammat Puran Dei, had come into the possession of Kesho Saran by inheritance from her and has been sold away by him, that he has not accounted for the proceeds and is, therefore, personally liable under the decree and subject to arrest in execution thereof...
Bhajan Lall Vs. Cheda Lall
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-19-1914
Reported in: 24Ind.Cas.215
Piggott, J.1. This is a decree-holder's appeal. The decree was passed on July 1st, 1909. The application for execution was made on January 24th, 1913, the application being on the face of it barred by time. It is contended that limitation is saved by a payment out of Court of a sum of Rs. 25 said to have been made by the judgment-debtor on November 23rd, 1911. The Courts below have held that they are precluded by the terms of Order XXI, Rule 2, Clause (3) of the Code of Civil Procedure, from recognizing this payment. On behalf of the appellant reliance is placed on various older rulings of this Court of which it is sufficient to refer to the case of Roshan Singh v. Mata Din 26 A. 36 : A.W.N. (1903), 179. This argument overlooks the alteration effected by the passing of Act V of 1908. Comparing Order XXI, Rule 2 of this Act, with Section 258 of the Code of Civil Procedure of 1882, it is clear that certain words have been removed and Ors. added. The former section was to the effect that ...
Bansraj Singh and anr. Vs. Rajbans Barthi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-19-1914
Reported in: AIR1914All76(2); 24Ind.Cas.451
1. This appeal arises out of a suit on foot of a mortgage. The Court below has dismissed the plaintiffs' suit on the ground that the document was not duly registered according to the provisions of the Registration Act. None of the immoveable property which purports to be mortgaged was situate within the sub-district where the document was in fact registered. It will be seen that when the document was presented for registration, it was returned by the Sub-Registrar upon the very ground that none of the property was situate within the sub-district and that he had no jurisdiction to register it. The parties then added to the mortgage security a couple of sal trees alleged to be growing on the property within the sub-district. It has been found by the Court below that these trees never existed, and that the mortgagor had no property in the place where they were supposed to grow.2. The question we have to decide is whether under these circumstances the Court below was right in holding that ...