Allahabad Court May 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.
Munna Lal Vs. Ram Gulam Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-19-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All160(2); 29Ind.Cas.549
1. The facts connected with this appeal so far as they are material to our decision are as follows. The plaintiff is a recorded co-sharer and in possession of certain property in the mahal. He has been recorded for three years. It is conceded that if he is a 'co-sharer', he is entitled to bring the present suit for pre-emption as against a stranger. The defendant-vendee, however, contends that the plaintiff is not a co-sharer, because his vendor had no title to sell to him; on the contrary that the real owner of the share (which the plaintiff's vendor purported to sell) sold the share to him. The lower Appellate Court has held that the plaintiff being d recorded co-sharer in possession of the property and no step having been taken to set aside the sale, or to oust him from possession, he must be regarded as a co-sharer. In our opinion this view is quite correct.2. It is next argued that the Court of first instance having found that the property, in respect of which [the plaintiff is re...
Raja Audendra Partap Singh Sahai Vs. Daman Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-19-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All137; 29Ind.Cas.543
Piggott, J.1. This is an application in revision arising out of a riparian dispute. The river Ghagra flows between the District of Fyzabad in the Province of Oudh and the District of Basti in the Gorakhpur Division in the Province of Agra. It appears that at a certain point between these two districts the river divides into two disinct channels, northern and southern, leaving an island of alluvial soil between the two. A dispute having broken out between the proprietors of villages situated respectively on the Basti side and on the Fyzabad side of the river with regard to possession of a portion of this alluvial land, a Magistrate of the first class exercising jurisdiction in the District of Basti took cognizance of the dispute under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and after issuing notice to the parties and conducting a formal inquiry has passed certain orders. The point taken in the application before me, and the only point with which I have to deal, is that the Magist...
Mohammad YasIn Vs. Cheda Lal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-19-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All217; 29Ind.Cas.540
Piggott, J.1. The applicant in this case is one Mohammad Yasin, who on the 21st of February 1914 applied for execution of a certain decree in the Court of Small Causes at Meerut, alleging himself to be a transferee of the decree. He produced a sale-deed purporting to be executed by the decree-holder. On inquiry the Court held the genuineness of that, deed to be open to great suspicion and rejected Mohammad Yasin's application. The original decree-holder having died during the pendency of these proceedings, there was some little delay, perhaps not unnatural under the circumstances, before his sons applied to the Judge of the Court of Small Causes for sanction to prosecute Mohammad Yasin in respect of offences punishable under Sections 193, 467 and 471, Indian Penal Code, alleged to have been committed by him in the course of this transaction. The application came before the successor of the learned Judge who had tried the matter on the civil side, and sanction was refused by an order da...
Ambika Pershad Vs. Salamat Khan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-18-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All302; 29Ind.Cas.438
George Knox, J.1. Ambika Pershad, the appellant, has obtained a decree against Salamat Khan, the respondent. This was based upon a compromise arrived at between the parties, according to which the appellant was entitled to redeem the property, if he paid Rs. 2-8. Regarding the payment of Rs. 2-8 the decree saya in one place that it is to be paid on Phagun Sudi purnamashi. In another place it is said that Rs. 2-8 was to be paid at the time of obtaining possession. The date Phagun Sudi purnamashi had passed when the decree-holder came into Court with an application to execute the decree. He, however, brought Rs. 2-8 with him and prayed that they might be made over to the judgment-debtors. The Court accepted Rs. 2-8, but does not seem to have passed any definite orders about it. The Court of first instance, however, recognising that Rs. 2-8 had been paid before proceedings in execution commenced, granted the application. The judgment-debtors objected that the time for payment had passed a...
Hargu Lal and ors. Vs. Med Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-18-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All307; 29Ind.Cas.509
1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiffs-appellants for their share of profits for the year 1318 and 1319. It appears that during these years the plaintiffs were recorded as co-sharers, but before the institution of this suit a suit had been brought in the Civil Court which decided that the plaintiff had no title and that they were not co-sharers although they were recorded as such. In accordance with the decision of the Civil Court an application was made for the correction of the entry in the Revenue papers and for the removal of the names of the plaintiffs from the list of co-sharers. It was during the pendency of this application that the present suit was brought. Both the Courts below have dismissed the suit and in our opinion rightly. The learned Counsel for the appellants relies upon Section 201 of the Agra Tenancy Act and contends that as at the date of the suit the plaintiffs were recorded as co-sharers, there was a presumption in their favour under the se...
N.K. Roy Vs. East Indian Railway Company
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-17-1915
Reported in: (1915)ILR37All463
Tudball and Chamier, JJ.1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiff respondent under the following circumstances : The plaintiff travelled on the 3rd of July, 1912, as a passenger from Howrah to Khurja by the up Umballa express train on the East Indian Railway. He had three parcels of luggage : two bundles and a steel trunk. These were weighed and delivered by him to the Railway administration and placed in the luggage van. Only two bundles were delivered at the end of his journey. The steel trunk was lost. He therefore sued the Railway for Rs. 461-8-0 the value of the box and its contents plus Rs. 40 damages, total Rs. 501. At the time the luggage was booked he did not declare the nature of the contents. According to his plaint the trunk contained besides ordinary clothing some silk articles the value of which comes to over Rs. 300 and also some silver articles of the value of about Rs. 60. These are all articles which are mentioned in the second schedule of the Railw...
East Indian Railway Vs. M.K. Roy
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-17-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All328; 30Ind.Cas.400
1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiff-respondent under the following circumstances: The plaintiff travelled on the 3rd of July 1912 as a passenger from Howrah to Khurja by the up Umballa express train on the East Indian Railway. He had three parcels of luggage: two bundles and a steel trunk. These were weighed and delivered by him to the Railway administration and placed in the luggage van. Only two bundles were delivered at the end of his journey. The steel trunk was lost. He, therefore, sued the Railway for Rs. 461-8, the value of the box and its contents, plus Rs. 40 damages, total Rs. 501. At the time the luggage was booked he did not' declare the nature of the contents. According to his plaint the trunk contained besides ordinary clothing some silk articles the value of which comes to over Rs. 300 and also some silver articles of the value of about Rs. 60. These are all articles which are mentioned in the second Schedule of the Railways Act. The Railway Comp...
Khelawan Koeri Vs. Sheikh Abdul Rahim
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-17-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All325; 29Ind.Cas.452
George Knox, J.1. In the Court of first instance the plaintiff, who is here respondent, instituted a suit for pre-emption, stating that he was entitled to preempt both under the Muhammadan Law and the village custom. The Court of first instance held that the plaintiff was entitled to pre-empt and gave him a decree accordingly. The date on which he granted the decree was the 20th of August 1913. From that decree the defendant filed an appeal on the 3rd of November 1913. That appeal was within time as the vacation intervened. Upon the Court proceeding to hear the appeal, a preliminary objection was taken on the part of the plaintiff, to the effect that the defendant had accepted the decree and could no longer appeal from it. The acceptance was said to be on this wise, namely, that on the 5th of September 1913 which was within the month of the period granted to the plaintiff to deposit the pre-emption money, the defendant applied to withdraw the money which had been deposited. Along with ...
Janak Singh Vs. Walidad Khan and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-14-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All339; 30Ind.Cas.410
1. On November 17th, 1905, the respondents purchased a share in a zemindari village from the appellant. The sale-deed contained a recital that the vendor had placed the purchasers in possession of the property and an undertaking that the vendor would cause mutation of names to be effected in favour of the purchasers. It also contained a provision to the effect that if the purchasers were disturbed or dispossessed by any person proving himself to be entitled to the property, they would he entitled to recover from the vendor the price paid by them for the property. Mutation of names appears to have been effected in favour of the purchasers on February 7th, 1986. But it is clear that they did not obtain possession in fact of the share. In 1907 Mahbub Khan and others brought a suit against the vendor and the purchasers to have the sale-deed pet aside and for a declaration of their title to the property. Their claim was decreed in July 1907. The present respondents appealed to the District ...
Bharath Chaube and ors. Vs. Gaya Chaube and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-14-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All303; 29Ind.Cas.418
1. This is a defendant's appeal in a suit for possession which arose out of certain previous litigation. There was a zemindari share of a 4 anna 8 pies belonging to one Harnam Singh. There were two incumbrances on this share, one was a mortgage of Rs. 931 in favour of the plaintiffs-respondents now before us. The other was a charge of Rs. 1,200 due on account of a premium lease in favour of the present defendants-appellants. Harnam Singh sold this share, and a suit for pre-emption was brought in which both parties to the appeal now before us appeared as joint plaintiffs. The result was that their right of pre-emption was decreed and it was held that a sum of Rs. 3,300 represented the sale price, apart from incumbrances. The Court, therefore, passed a decree for preemption of the entire share, jointly in favour of all the plaintiffs then before it, on payment of Rs. 1,169. In view of the fact that the incumbrances on the property were unequal in amount and different in nature, the preem...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »