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.
Kashi Nath and anr. Vs. Kanhaiya Lal Sharma
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-10-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All305; (1915)ILR37All452; 29Ind.Cas.990
Chamier and Piggott, JJ.1. This is an appeal against an order of the Second Additional Judge of Aligarh, passed under the Provincial Insolvency Act. In June, 1909, the appellants filed a suit against Keshab Deo and others and they caused certain immoveable property of Keshab Deo to be attached under Order 38 of the Code of Civil Procedure before judgement. The appellants obtained a decree in that suit on June 12th, 1913. In the meantime Keshab Deo had transferred portions of the property by four sale-deeds, dated November 15th and 16th, and December 6th and 9th, 1909, and part of the property which had been attached had been sold in 1909 in execution of a decree passed by the Bombay High Court. Keshab Deo had, in 1911 been declared insolvent and the respondent, Pandit Kanhaiya Lal Sharma, had been appointed receiver of his property. The receiver has claimed the property in question as property which is available for the creditors of the insolvent, and the learned Judge has decided that...
Utma Kuar Vs. Bhagwanta Kuar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-10-1915
Reported in: 29Ind.Cas.416
1. This is an appeal by a guardian lawfully appointed under the Guardians and Wards Act, VIII of 1890. The facts are peculiar. Musammat Utma Kuar applied to the District Judge of Azanigarh to be appointed guardian of the person and property of her minor daughter, Chandra Kuar. She stated in her application that the minor had been removed from her care and custody by her married daughter, Musammat Bhagwanta Kuar, sister of the said minor; but she did not ask the Court to take action under Section 12 of Act VII of 1890. Notice was issued to Musammat Bhagwanta Kuar, and certain matters having been inquired into by the Court, an order was passed on the 26th of August 1914 appointing Musammat Utma Kuar guardian of the person of her minor daughter, and a formal certificate of guardianship was issued to her dated 31st August 1914. On 15th September 1914 Musazmmat Utma Kuar presented an application to the Court, alleging that she was still unable to obtain possession of the person of the minor...
Bankey Bihari Lal Vs. Charni
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-10-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All324; 29Ind.Cas.473
Chamier, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the respondent against the appellant for his share of the profits of a mahal for the years 1318, 1319 and 1320 Fasli, The respondent in his plaint described the appellant as a co-sharer and the suit as one brought under Section 165 of the Tenancy Act, which provides for a suit by a co-sharer against another co-sharer for a settlement of accounts and for his share of the profits of a mahal. The appellant pleaded that he was the lambardar of the mahal and that the suit should have been brought against him not under Section 165, but under Section 164 of the Tenancy Act. The Assistant Collector fixed issues on the questions whether the appellant was a lambardar of the mahal and whether, if he was a lambardar, the suit could be maintained under Section 165 of the Act. He found that the appellant was a lambardar and that the suit could not be maintained against him under Section 165 of the Tenancy Act. He gave the respondent an opport...
Salle Vs. Mohan Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-08-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All316; 29Ind.Cas.447
Piggott, J.1. The plaintiff in this case, Salle, and the defendant, Mohan Lal, were joint holders of a simple money-decree for Rs. 70-12-0 against one Khet Singh. A zemindari share belonging to Khet Singh was attached in execution of the decree and put up for sale. It appears that at one stage both the decree-holders had obtained permission of the Court to bid; but this permission lapsed in consequence of the postponement of the sale. Later on Mohan Lal alone applied for permission to oid and, having received it, he became the certified purchaser of the share in question, at an auction-sale held on the 21st of July 1902, for a sum of Rs. 60. He seems to have certified to the executing Court the receipt of Rs. 60 in part satisfaction of the decree. Formal possession was delivered to Mohan Lal on the 28th of July 1903. In the present suit, filed on the 23rd of July 1913, Salle claimed possession of the share in question in accordance with an oral agreement set up by him, to the effect th...
Chanda Bibi Vs. Vasonji Morarji
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-07-1915
Reported in: (1915)ILR37All369
Atkinson, J.1. This is an appeal from a decree of the High Court of the North-Western Provinces, Allahabad, dated the 6th February, 1912, whereby a decree of the Subordinate Judge, of Benares, dated the 28th July, 1910, was set aside. The respondent did not appear on the hearing before this Board to support the, Judgment appealed from.2. The suit out of which the appeal has arisen was brought by the respondent against Thakur Vasonji Morarji, a well-to-do merchant of Bombay to recover possession of a certain house in the city of Benares, and also mesne rates.3. The land upon which this house is built was part of the immoveable property inherited by the respondent's father, one Kunj Behari Lal, the last surviving male member of a joint Hindu family, who died on the 6th November, 1890. He left his widow, Musammat Kama Bibi, and the respondent, his daughter by that lady him surviving. He Lad no other issue. One Musammat Phundo Bibi, the widow of Goshain Radha Govind, the paternal uncle of ...
Kheshtra Pal Sharama Vs. Pancham Singh Varma
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-07-1915
Reported in: (1915)ILR37All446
Chamier and Piggott, JJ.1. This is an application for revision of an order of the District Judge of Agra, confirming an order of the Subordinate Judge of Muttra, directing that the plaint be returned to the plaintiff for presentation to the proper court. The suit was one by the applicant for damages on account of alleged infringement by the defendant of the applicant's trade mark. The applicant has for a considerable time been selling a medicine under the name of Sudha Sindhu which, we understand, means 'Ocean of Nectar' in the course of his business at Muttra. He sells chiefly on V. P.P. orders received in response to advertisements which he puts in the papers. The respondent, who is a resident of Gaya, sells a medicine which he calls Asli Sudha Sindhu in the same way. The applicant's case is that his trade mark which has been duly registered has been infringed by the respondent. The alleged infringement is an advertisement of the respondent's medicine in papers published in Muttra an...
Sarju Prasad Vs. Mahadeo Pande and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-07-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All219; (1915)ILR37All450; 29Ind.Cas.996
Chamier and Piggott, JJ.1. This is an application for revision of an order of the Additional Subordinate Judge of Gorakhpur rejecting an appeal by the appellant on the ground that the suit out of which it arose was a Small Cause Court suit, and therefore no appeal lay. The facts are that the suit was instituted in the court of a Munsif who had been invested under Section 25 of the Bengal, N.W.P. and Assam Civil Courts Act, No. XII of 1887, with the jurisdiction of a Judge of a Court of Small Causes up to a certain pecuniary limit. The suit was registered on the Small Cause -Court side. Sometime after the written statement had been filed the Munsif went on leave and was succeeded by an officer who had not been invested with the jurisdiction of a Judge of a Court of Small Causes. The latter officer passed an order transferring to the regular side all Small Cause Court suits which he found pending in the court and tried them out as regular suits. One of those suits was the suit out of whi...
Sheo Kumar Misra and ors. Vs. Brij Kumar Lal and ors. and Mohar Lal an ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-07-1915
Reported in: (1915)ILR37All444
Henry Richard, C.J., Pramada Charan Banerji and Tudball, JJ.1. The facts connected With this appeal are extremely simple. Prior to the passing of the Agra Tenancy Act an occupancy tenant purported to mortgage his occupancy tenancy. The term of the mortgage was fifty-nine years. In the year 1911, the occupancy tenant entered into an arrangement with the zamindar to relinquish his rights. The court below has found that the mortgage was for consideration and genuine. It has found, that the object of the relinquishment was to defeat the mortgagee's rights. The first court dismissed the suit on the ground that the Civil Court had no jurisdiction. Mr. Dalai, District Judge, on appeal reversed the court of first instance and granted the plaintiff a declaration that the relinquishment was ineffectual against him and also granted an injunction restraining the zamiudar from interfering with the plaintiff's possession. In our opinion the decision of the court below was correct. It is fully covere...
Birj Kumar Lal and ors. Vs. Sheo Kumar Missir and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-07-1915
Reported in: 29Ind.Cas.215
1. The facts connected with this appeal are extremely simple. Prior to the passing of the Agra Tenancy Act an occupancy tenant purported to mortgage the occupancy tenancy. The term of the mortgage was 59 years. In the year 1911 the occupancy tenant entered into an arrangement with the zemindar to relinquish his rights. The Court below has found that the mortgage was for consideration and genuine. It has found that the object of relinquish-ment was to defeat the mortgagee's rights. The first Court dismissed the suit on the ground that the Civil Court had no jurisdiction. Mr. Dalal, District Judge, on appeal reversed the decree of the Court of first instance and granted the plaintiff a declaration that the relinquishment wns ineffectual against him, and also granted an injunction restraining the zemindar from interfering with , the plaintiffs' possession. In our opinion the decision of the Court below was correct. It is fully covered by the decision of this Court in the case of Jai Gopal...
Kheshtrapal Sharma Vs. Pancham Singh Varma
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-07-1915
Reported in: 29Ind.Cas.987
1. This is an application for revision of an order of the District Judge of Agra, confirming an order of the Subordinate Judge of Muttra directing that the plaint be returned to the plaintiff for presentation to the proper Court. The suit was one by the applicant for damages on account of alleged infringement by the defendant of the applicant's trade-mark. The applicant has for a considerable time been selling a medicine under the name of Sudha Sindhu which, we understand, means 'Ocean of nectar' in the course of his business at Muttra. He sells chiefly on V.P.P. orders received in response to advertisements which he puts in the papers. The respondent, who is a resident of Gaya, sells a medicine which he calls Asli Sudha Sindhu in the same way. The applicant's case is that his trade-mark which has been duly registered lias been infringed by the respondents. The alleged infringement is an advertisement of the respondent's medicine hi papers published in Muttra and in circulars and hand-...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »