Allahabad Court February 1915 Judgments
Emperor Vs. Ismail Khan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-26-1915
Reported in: (1915)ILR37All289
Henry Richards, C.J. and Pramada Charan Banerji, J.1. Ismail Khan has been convicted under Section 60A of the Excise Act and under Section 61 read with Section 70 of the Post Office Act. On conviction on the first charge he was fined Rs. 200 and on the second one Rs. 100, The learned Sessions Judge, to whom Ismail Khan appealed, has affirmed the convictions, but referred the matter to this Court for the purpose of having the sentences considered with a view to enhancement. Notice was duly served upon Ismail Khan, and he has been represented by Mr. Hoskins as counsel. Mr. Hoskins on his behalf urges, first, that both convictions were illegal, and that in any event the punishment was sufficient. In our opinion the court below was justified in finding that the accused had been guilty of an offence under Section 60A of the Excise Act and that he was rightly convicted. So far as the conviction under Section 61 read with Section 70 of the Post Office Act is concerned we think that the convic...
Tag this Judgment!ismail Khan Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-26-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All273; 28Ind.Cas.655
1. Ismail Khan has been convicted under Section 60 A of the Excise Act and under Section 61 read with Section 70 of the Post CMiiee Act; on conviction, on the first charge he was fined Rs. 200 and on the second one Rs. 100. The learned Sessions Judge to whom Ismail Khan appealed has affirmed the convictions but referred the matter to this Court for the purpose of having the sentences considered with a view to enhancement. Notice was duly served upon Ismail Khan and he has been represented by Mr. Hoskins as Counsel. Mr. Hoskins on his behalf urges, first, that both convictions were illegal, and that in any event the punishment was sufficient. In our opinion the Court below was justified in finding that the accused had been guilty of an offence under Section 60A of the Excise Act and that he was rightly convicted. So far as the conviction under Section 61 read with Section 70 of the Post Office Act is concerned, we think that the conviction was not justified by law. Section 70 of the Pos...
Tag this Judgment!Badri Das and ors. Vs. Sheo Nath Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-26-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All62(1); 28Ind.Cas.816
Chamier, J.1. The applicants obtained a decree against the respondent, Sheo Nath, in the Court of Small Causes, in execution of which they brought certain property to sale on July 16th, 1914. An order was made that the proceeds of the sale should be paid to the decree-holders, less' the costs of the sale. One month before this the judgment-debtor had applied to be declared insolvent, and an interim Receiver had been appointed under Section 13 of the Provincial Insolvency Act. On July 18th, that is, two days after the sale, the interim Receiver made a report to the Court on which an order was passed that the proceeds of the sale were not to be paid to the decree-holders, and a few days later the Court ordered that the money should be given back to the purchasers of the property and that the sale should be set aside. This is the order against which the present application is directed. The case is covered by the decision of this Court in Sri Chand v. Murari Lal 16 Ind. Cas. 183 : 10 A.L.J...
Tag this Judgment!Musammat Fakhran Vs. Rajab Ali Khan and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-26-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All160(1); 28Ind.Cas.948
Chamier, J.1. I doubt whether this application for revision is maintainable at all; but assuming that it is maintainable I think it should be dismissed on the merits. Certain property was sold in execution of a decree. The applicant had attached the property before the sale took place and after the sale she made an application under Order XXI, Rule 89, to have the sale set aside. The Courts below have held that she is not a person who is entitled to ask the Court to set aside the sale. It is admitted that she does not own the property, The only question is whether she has any interest in it by virtue of any title acquired before the sale within the meaning of Order XXI, Rule 89. A person who has attached property may for some purposes be regarded as having an interest in it; for example, it has been held that an attaching creditor is entitled to redeem mortgaged property. But what is required to entitle the present applicant to ask the Court to set aside a sale under Rule 89 is an inte...
Tag this Judgment!Goswami Sri Gopal Lalji Maharaj Vs. Goswami Sri Girdhar Lalji and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-25-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All44; 28Ind.Cas.715
1. The suit out of which this appeal arises relates to certain disputes between Ballavacharya Goshains. A case relating to the customs of this sect lately came before their Lordships of the Privy Council in the case of Mohan Lalji v. Gordhan Lalji Maharaj 19 Ind. Cas. 337 : 35 A. 283 : 17 C.W.N. 741 : 11 A.L.J. 648 : 17 C.L.J. 612 : 15 Bom. L.R. 606 : (1913) M.W.N. 536 : 14 M.L.T. 27 : 40 I.A. 97. The principal defendant in the present suit was the respondent in that case their Lordships in referring to the history of the sect made the following observations:The Ballvacharya cult, in reality an offshoot of Vaishnavism, was founded in the sixteenth century of the Christian era by one Ballavacharya, who is usually designated among his followers and disciples as Maha Pirbhuji. He and his descendants, who constitute the Ballavacharya Goshain Kul, are held in great veneration by the members of the sect and regarded as the incarnation of the famous and favourite Hindu deity, Krishna, whom in...
Tag this Judgment!Muhammad Hasan Askari Vs. Niaz HusaIn and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-25-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All233; 29Ind.Cas.213
George Knox, J.1. The Munsif of Allahabad passed a decree in the following terms: 'it is ordered and decreed that the plaintiff's claim, for pre-emption, be dismissed with costs as against all the defendants with the exception of defendants Nos. 5 and 6, that the plaintiff's claim for pre-emption, in respect of the shares of defendants Nos. 5 and 6, if any in the property in dispute, be decreed; and that if the plaintiff deposits for payment to defendants Nos. 5 and 6, within one year from this date, the proportionate amount of the consideration money, equal to the price of the shares of defendants Nos. 5 and G, with reference to the entire consideration money, Rs. 780, specifipcl in the sale-deed, then on his so depositing the aforesaid money, he (the plaintiff) shall be entitled to get possession over the shares of defendants Nos. 5 and 6, if any, in the property in dispute.'2. That decree was neither taken into appeal nor has it in any way been altered since it passed.3. The decree-...
Tag this Judgment!Dodraj and ors. Vs. Musammat Natho
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-23-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All177(2); 28Ind.Cas.597
George Knox, J.1. The lower Appellate Court has found upon evidence that Musammat Natho was the dharona wife of Chet Ram and his heir. This Hading is attacked in appeal. The contention is that the lower Appellate Court has erred in law in setting aside a finding returned by a lower Court when no objections had been taken in respect of it.2. The lower Appellate Court bad sent back to the Court of first instance this issue: Is the plaintiff the widow of Chet Ram? If it is found that her statement is true, there should also be a finding whether the dharona form is a valid form of marriage?3. The Court of first instance found that Musammat Natho was not the widow of Chet Ram. It does not appear why it went on to consider the second of the issues returned to it, but it did, and it found that dharona was a prevalent form of marriage among Hindus.4. A definite time was given for taking objections to these findings--no objection was taken within the time given.5. The position before the lower ...
Tag this Judgment!Shafaat-ullah Vs. Izzat-ullah and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-23-1915
Reported in: 28Ind.Cas.677
Chamier, J.1. The facts of this case are as follows, so far as they have been determined. Many years ago certain property was mortgaged by Mummmat Fateh-un-nissa to the predecessor of defendants Nos. 9 to 11. The mortgage was of a usufructuary character and the mortgagee was placed in possession. Some years after the mortgage, Fateh-nn-mssa died leaving four sons. Her first son is represented in this suit by defendants Nos. 6, 7 and 8. Her second son is re-presented by defendants Nos. 3, 4 and 13. The third son is represented by defendants Nos. 1 and 2 and the fourth son is represented by the plaintiff, Shafaat-ullah, and defendants Nos. 5, 12, 14 and 15. Each branch of the family became entitled to one-fourth of Fateh-un-nissa' estate, but under an arbitration award each branch got definite properties not necessarily corresponding exactly to its one-fourth share. It was provided in the mortgage-deed that the mortgagor might redeem any portion of the property upon payment of a proporti...
Tag this Judgment!JamiluddIn and ors. Vs. Hafiz Abdul Majid
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-22-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All218; 28Ind.Cas.674
Rafique, J.1. The parties to this appeal are neighbours and they live in Mohalla, Bakhtiari in the city of Allahabad. The defendants-appellants made certain additions to their house, which according to the plaintiff-respondent invaded the privacy of his house. He instituted a suit in the Court of the Munsif of Allahabad for the closing of the doors in the verandah marked A and B respectively on the plan and for the demolition of parapets marked C and D and for a perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from doing any similar acts in future. The claim was resisted on various grounds. It was alleged in defence that no custom of purdah prevailed in the Mohalla of Bukhtiari, that the house of the plaintiff was overlooked by other houses, that the plaintiff had no right of privacy, and that he had acquiesced in the new constructions complained of. The learned Munsif after inspection of the spot and recording the evidence came to the conclusion that the additions made by the defendant...
Tag this Judgment!Raghunath Das Vs. Kishen Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-22-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All208(2); 28Ind.Cas.854
1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The allegations in the plaint were that Lain Shib Lal had by Will, dated the 18th of September 1911, and also by another deed executed during his life-time, created a trust of certain property, that Raghu Nath Das in collusion with Nathu Mal and two other trustees had taken possession of the trust property and misappropriated the same and converted it to their own use. The defence of Raghu Nath was that be was the adopted son of Shib Lal, that the family was a joint family, that the property was ancestral and that Shib Lal had no power to creat the trust (Raghu Nath himself brought the suit out of which the connected Appeal No. 265 of 1913 arises). Nathu Mal put in no written statement. The Court below has found that Raghu Nath and Shib Lal were separate at the time of Shib Lal's death. It also found that the trust was validly created and that a breach of trust was committed by some of the trus...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »