Allahabad Court April 1915 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.
Padarath Tewari Vs. Baz Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-26-1915
Reported in: 29Ind.Cas.264
P.C. Banerji, J.1. The plaintiff, who is one of the co-sharers in the village, brought the suit out of which this appeal has arisen for demolition of certain constructions made by the defendants on parti land. The defendants Contended that they had been in possession of this land for a long time, that they had their cattle troughs, sugar-pressing mill and a shed for storing sugarcane juice and keeping cattle on the land and that they had rebuilt the shed which they had there. The Court of first instance found in favour of the defendants and dismissed the suit, and this decree has been affirmed by the lower Appellate Court. In my judgment on the findings of both the Courts below, the decision of the lower Appellate Court is right. It has been found that the house of the defendants, who are tenants in the village, is at a short distance from the site in dispute, that they have been in possession of this site for upwards of 12 years and have had their cattle troughs, cattle shed and sugar...
Amir Singh Vs. Chhattar Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All311; 29Ind.Cas.274
Chamier, J.1. This appeal arises ont of an application made on November 12th, 1913, for execution of a decree dated May the 10th, 1909. The decree was for a considerable sum of money to be paid in certain instalments. The first instalment amounting to Rs. 124 was to be paid at the end of Aghan Sambaf, 1966 corresponding with December the 26th, 1909. The second instalment amounting to Rs. 62 was to be paid at the end of Jeth Sambat 1967. Subsequent instalments of Rs. 62 each were to be paid at the end of Agfiai and at the end of Jeth till the whole decree wns satisfied. In case of default the whole amount became payable at once. The decree-holders in their application of November 12th, 1913 stated that they had received the first four instalments, but that there had been a default in payment of the instalment due at the end of Aghan Sambat 1968, and they, therefore, claimed the whole amount remaining1 due under the decree. Payment of the first 4 instalments was not certified to the Cour...
Dori Lal Vs. Sewak Ram and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All261; 29Ind.Cas.988
Piggott, J.1. This suit was brought upon a promissory note executed in favour of one Ram Narain. The plaintiff claims to be the true owner of the instrument from the time of its execution, and alleges Ram Narain to have been a benamidar for himself. He has also impleaded as defendants the heirs of the ostensible payee. After the suit had been decreed by the first Court, it was dismissed by the learned Subordinate Judge of Pilibhit, on the ground that only the ostensible payee can maintain a suit upon a promissory note. The Subordinate Judge has supported himself by authority of a Madras case, in respect of which it is contended here that the learned Judges who decided that case were referring specifically to a negotiable instrument as defined in Section 13 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (XXVI of 1881). I find, however, that there is clear authority of the same Court on the same point in Ramanuja Ayyangar v. Sadagopa Ayyangar 28 M. 205 : 25 M.L.J. 249 and in Subramanya Tevan v. Aruna...
Bishunath Shukul Vs. Ganesh Datt Shukul
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All310(1); 29Ind.Cas.1002
1. This and the connected Appeal No. 620 of 1914 arise out of two suits brought one by Ganesh Datt Shukul and the other by Jadunandan Shukul for establishment of the right of each of them to carry water into their fields by means of a channel which runs through the defendant's field No. 32/1. The field of Ganesh is No. 31 and that of Jadunandan is No. 32/2. It was alleged that the plaintiffs had a right to irrigate their fields with water flowing through the channel and that the defendant had blocked this passage by building a wall. The defence was that the fields of the two plaintiffs were irrigated with water flowing through the fields Nos. 40 and 41, and 29 and 38. This has been found against the defendant and the Court below has held that as a matter of fact the fields of the two plaintiffs were irrigated with water flowing through the channel which existed in the defendant's field No. 32/1. This is a finding of fact and must be accepted in second appeal. The learned Judge, instead...
Makhdoom Bakhsh Shah and ors. Vs. Hashim Ali
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-22-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All244; 29Ind.Cas.210
Piggott, J.1. This is one of those second appeals in which the only real difficulty is to ascertain with certainty what facts the lower Appellate Court intended to find, or must be taken to have found. The suit was one for recovery of possession over a certain plot of land and a tree situated thereon. If I rightly understand the pleadings there never was any question of title, strictly so called, in issue between the parties. The land in question is situated in the abadi, or inhabited site, of an agricultural village, and the proprietors of the1 soil are no doubt the zamindars of the village. The plaintiff alleged that he had been for many years in actual possession and occupation of the land in suit, having erected a thatched hut thereon and possessing the rest of the land, not actually covered by the suit, as a courtyard appertaining to the fame. He further alleged that, during his absence from the village, the defendants, without any sort of right or title, had demolished the hut wh...
Emperor Vs. Rahamat and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-21-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All443; (1915)ILR37All419
Chamier and Piggott, JJ.1. This is a Government appeal against an order of acquittal and is brought under the following circumstances. There were four accused persons, Rahmat, Moti, son of Pir Bakhsh, Jhandu and Moti, son of Khilari, all of the Banjara caste, and the case against them, was that they had beaten with lathis their caste fellow, Pir Bakhsh, inflicting serious injuries which as a matter of fact resulted in the death of the said Pir Bakhsh. The Magistrate who inquired into the case, for reasons given by him, framed a charge under Section 325, Indian Penal Code, but committed the accused persons for trial before the Court of Session, The case unfortunately came before a Sessions Judge of very limited experience. He rejected an application made on behalf of the prosecution for amendment of the charge into one under Section 304, Indian Penal Code, or Section 302, Indian Penal Code, and then permitted the case to be compounded upon an arrangement come to between the accused pers...
Badri Vs. Niadar and Umrao Kunwar and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-21-1915
Reported in: (1915)ILR37All422
Chamier and Piggott, JJ.1. This was a suit by a plaintiff claiming to be the next reversioner under the Hindu Law to the estate of one Dewa. The said Dewa died leaving a widow, Umrao Kuar. This lady has executed a will bequeathing the property in her hands as widow of Dewa to one Tika Ram, son of Niadar, brother of the said Dewa. In the will there is a recital to the effect that the bequest is made in accordance with oral directions given by Dewa. The plaintiff sought a declaration that the will in question is void and ineffectual as against his interest, and that Tika Ram, who was impleaded as defendant No. 2, will acquire no rights under the said will. The court of first instance dismissed the suit upon a preliminary point, holding that there had been no alienation by Umrao Kuar of the property in her hands, and that under the circumstances the mere execution of a will would not afford a sufficient reason for granting a declaratory decree It supported itself by a quotation from Mulla...
NaraIn Das Vs. Muhammad Inamullah Khan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-21-1915
Reported in: (1915)ILR37All423
Chamier and Piggott, JJ.1. This appeal arises out of an order passed in the course of proceedings taken to execute a decree dated November the 23rd, 1911. It appears that in August, 1901, the appellant mortgaged to the respondent his right to receive what are described as taluqdari malikana dues from a number of villages. A decree nisi for sale of the property was passed in favour of the respondent on November the 23rd, 1911. There was an appeal to this Court, which was dismissed in April, 1913, and an order absolute for sale of the property was passed on February the 10th, 1914. In March of the same year the respondent applied for sale of the property. Notice was issued to the appellant who put forward objections. Those objections were ultimately dismissed and an order was made that the property should be sold. On July the 10th, 1914, the respondent applied to the court to issue an injunction to the appellant restraining him from receiving the malikana dues. At first sight it seems to...
Emperor Vs. Rahmat and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-21-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All378; 30Ind.Cas.138
1. This is a Government appeal against an order of acquittal and is brought under the following circumstances. There were four accused persons, Rahmat, Moti, son of Pir Bakhsh, Jhandu and Moti, son of Khilari, all of the Banjara caste, and the case against them was that they had beaten with lathis their caste-fellow Pir Bakhsh, inflicting serious injuries, which, as a matter of fact, resulted in the death of the said Pir Bakhsh. The Magistrate who inquired into the case, for reasons given by him, framed a charge under Section 325, Indian Penal Code, but committed the accused persons for trial before the Court of Session. The case unfortunately came before a Sessions Judge of very limited experience. He rejected an application made OTI behalf of the prosecution for amendment of the charge into one under Section 304, Indian Penal Code, or Section 302, Indian Penal Code, and then permitted the case to be compounded upon an arrangement come to between the accused persons and, the widow of ...
Umrao Kunwar and anr. Vs. Badri
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-21-1915
Reported in: 29Ind.Cas.302
1. This was a suit by a plaintiff claiming to be the next reversioner under the Hindu Law to the estate of one Dewa. The said Dewa died leaving a widow, Umrao Kunwar. This lady has executed a Will bequeathing the property in her hands as widow of Dewa to one Tika Ram, son of Naidar, brother of the said Dewa. In the Will there is a recital to the effect that the bequest is made in accordance with oral directions given by Dewa. The plaintiff sought a declaration that the Will in question is void and ineffectual as against his interest and that Tika Ram, who was impleaded as defendant No. 2, will acquire no rights under the said Will. The Court of first instance dismissed the suit upon a preliminary point, holding that there had been no alienation by Umrao Kunwar of the property in her hands and that under the circumstances the mere execution of a Will would not afford a sufficient reason for granting a declaratory decree. It supported itself by a quotation from Mulla's Principles of Hind...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »