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. Ram Sarup and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-14-1914
Reported in: (1914)ILR36All474
Piggott, J.1. This is an application in revision against an order of the District Magistrate of Meerut, dismissing the appeals of Ram Sarup, Mutasaddi Lal and Ram Rijpal who have been convicted of an offence under Section 447, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to a fine. The case was tried by a magistrate of the third class. His judgment, contains a complete statement of the-facts of the case and the evidence given by various witnesses, but makes no inference throughout to the definition of 'criminal trespass' as given in the Indian Penal Code. There is therefore no finding recorded as to whether the conviction in this case is for having entered on property in possession, of the complainant Umrao Mirza with intent to commit an offence, or with intent to intimidate, insult or annoy the said Umrao Mirza. The case for the prosecution is thus stated by the magistrate at the very commencement of his judgment: That in the village of Aslatpur plot No. 12 owned and possessed by the complainant ...
Sheobabu Vs. Udit NaraIn and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-14-1914
Reported in: AIR1914All275; 24Ind.Cas.490
Piggott, J.1. This is a second appeal by a plaintiff whose suit has been dismissed by both the Courts below, on the ground that ho is debarred from maintaining it by reason of the fact that he is bound by an agreement with the defendants to allow the matter in dispute to be settled by arbitration. It is an admitted fact that an agreement to refer this matter to arbitration was entered into between the parties on the 18th of June 1909, and that nothing had been done by way of enforcing that agreement when the plaintiff filed the present suit on the 11th of August 1911. The suit was brought independently of the agreement : that is to say, the plaintiff did not ask the Court to take action in the direction of constituting an arbitration tribunal in accordance with the agreement. He gave the agreement the go by altogether, and brought his suit upon his alleged title. When the defendants objected on the ground of the agreement, one or two objections were taken by the plaintiff with respect ...
Salim-un-nissa Vs. Saadat HusaIn and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-13-1914
Reported in: (1914)ILR36All466
Muhammad Rafiq and Piggott, JJ.1. The point raised in this appeal relates to the guardianship of a minor Shia girl, about 3 1/2 years old, whose mother died on the 25th of August, 1913. The maternal grandmother of the minor applied to the court below to be appointed guardian of her parson and property. The application was opposed by the father and paternal grandfather of the minor. The father did not apply to act as guardian of the minor, but supported the application of his own father. The learned District Judge appointed the maternal grandmother as guardian of the person of the minor. The question as to the guardianship of the minor's property was given up by the applicant. The father and the paternal grandfather of the minor have come up in appeal to this Court and contend that the order of the court below is bad under the law. It is said that under the Shia law, to which the parties are subject, on the death of the mother or her disqualification for any reason, the nest person enti...
Fazal HusaIn Vs. Muhammad Sharif and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-13-1914
Reported in: (1914)ILR36All471
Richards, C.J. and Tudball, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for pre-emption. The plaintiff adduced in evidence, in support of the existence of this custom, an extract from the wajib-ul-arz of 1861. He also produced a judgment of 1866 which shows that the right of pre-emption was at least asserted and that the pre-emptor got possession, though possibly on a compromise decree. Both the courts below have dismissed the plaintiff's claim. The question for us to decide is whether or not the evidence which the plaintiff adduced was sufficient, in the absence of all evidence to the contrary, to establish the custom under which he claimed. In the full Bench case of Returaji Dubain v. Palwan Bhagat (1911) I. L. R. 33 All. 196 it was decided that the entry in the wajib-ul-arz of a right of preemption was to be taken prima facie as a record of a custom rather than of a contract, and that the mere fact that at the beginning of the wajib-ul-arz, or at the end, a word such as 'ikrarnama' appear...
Bal Kishun Vs. Sipahi Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-13-1914
Reported in: 25Ind.Cas.336
Knox, J.1. The case was one in which the offence charged was an offence under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code. It was transferred from one Court to another until it had come under the cognizance of no less than four different Courts, and even now it does not appear clear under what order the case passed from one to another of these several Courts. There appears to be a custom in Pilibhit under which all cases entrusted to a Bench of Magistrates are put before the Senior Honorary Magistrate in order that he may make a proper distribution of the work, and the authority for this practice is based upon Section 17 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Section 17 empowers District Magistrate to make rules or give special orders connected with the Code as to the distribution of work among such Magistrates and Benches. Now distribution of work is one thing, calling up a case from the Court to which it is transferred for trial is quite different and I cannot find that the Code anywhere empowe...
Fazal HussaIn Vs. Muhammad Sharif and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-13-1914
Reported in: AIR1914All78; 24Ind.Cas.464
1. This appeal arises out of a suit for pre-emption. The plaintiff adduced in evidence in support of the existence, of the custom an extract from the Wajib-ul-arz of 1861. He also produced a judgment of 1866 which shows that the right of pre-emption was at least asserted and that the pre-emptor got possession though possibly on a compromise decree. Both the Courts below have dismissed the plaintiff's claim.2. The question for us to decide is whether or not the evidence which the plaintiff adduced was sufficient in the absence of all evidence to the contrary to establish the custom under which he claimed. In the Full Bench case of Musammat Rituraji Dubain v. Pahalwan Bhagat 7 Ind. Cas. 680 : 7 A.L.J. 1040 (F.B.) : 33 A. 196. it was decided that the entry in the Wajib-ul-arz of a right of pre-emption was to be taken as a prima facie record of a custom rather than of a contract and that the mere fact that at the beginning of the Wajib-ul-arz or at the end a word such as 'ikrarnama' appear...
Mohan Singh Vs. Musammat Anar Kuar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-13-1914
Reported in: AIR1914All97; 24Ind.Cas.518
1. This is an application in revision arising out of an order passed by the District Judge of Bareilly in a proceeding under the Guardians and Wards Act. The question was as to the appointment of a guardian to the person and property of a minor named Roshan Lal. An application for appointment as guardian had been made by Musammat Anar Kuar and was being opposed by Mohan Singh. The learned District Judge ordered that a certificate of guardianship of the person and property of the minor be granted to Musammat Anar Kuar. That order was not appealed against and became final between the parties. It so happened that in the course of the inquiry the learned District Judge formed an opinion that Mohan Singh had in his possession a sum of Rs. 2,000 which rightly belonged to the minor. At the close of the judgment by which he disposed of the questions raised by the parties, the District Judge noted that he directed Mohan Singh to deposit the? sum of Rs. 2,000 within a month to the credit of the ...
Sayadat HusaIn and anr. Vs. Musammat Salimunnissa
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-13-1914
Reported in: AIR1914All486(1); 24Ind.Cas.632
1. The point raised in this appeal relates to the guardianship of a minor Shia girl : She is about 3 1/2 years old and her mother died on August 25th, 1913.2. The maternal grandmother of the minor applied to the Court below to be appointed guardian of her person and property. The application was opposed by the father and paternal grandfather of the minor. The father did not apply to act as guardian of the minor, but supported the application of his own father. The learned District Judge appointed the maternal, grandmother as guardian of her person of the minor The question as to the guardianship of' the minor's property was given up by the applicant. The father and the paternal, grandfather of the minor have come up in appeal to this Court and contend that the order of the Court below is bad under the law. It is said that under the Shia Law to which the parties are subject, on the death of the mother or her disqualification for any reason the next person entitled to the guardianship of...
Hazari Singh and ors. Vs. Terbeni Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-12-1914
Reported in: AIR1914All554; 28Ind.Cas.577
1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiffs respondents for recovery of possession on the basis of a leas dated 14th October 1912. The claim was resisted on the ground, among others, that the lease, the basis of the claim, was inadmissible in evidence as it was unregistered. The Court of first instance accepted this plea in defence and dismissed the claim.2. On appeal the learned District Judge disagreeing with the first Court, held that the leas in question being an agricultural lease for a term not exceeding five years and reserving a term not exceeding five years and reserving a rent less than Rs. 50 was exempted by a notification of the Local Government from registration and was admissible in evidence. The decree of the first Court was set aside and the case was remanded under Order XLI, Rule 23, Civil Procedure Code, for trial on the merits. The defendants have come up in appeal to this Court and object to the order of the lower Appellate Court on two grounds. Th...
Shiam Sunder Lal and ors. Vs. Buddhu Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-12-1914
Reported in: 24Ind.Cas.252
1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiff to enforce a mortgage of the 21st of May 1893 executed by one Ram Narayan. He is dead. The first three defendants are his sons and grandsons. The mortgage was in favour of Brij Kishore and Rup Kishore and the other defendants are the aforesaid Brij Kishore and the legal representatives of Rup Kishore. The plaintiff alleged that Brij Kishore and Rup Kishore were only benamidars for him and that he was the real owner of the bond.2. This has been found in the plaintiff's favour and it must be taken that he is entitled to maintain the suit. The property mortgaged was acquired in 1873 in the name of Ram Narain. The plaintiff alleged that the property belonged exclusively to Ram Narain and that he was entitled to enforce his mortgage as against it. The defendant's contention was that the property was ancestral property and that Ram Narain was not competent to mortgage it, that there was no family necessity for the loan, that the pr...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »