Allahabad Court June 1915 Judgments
Abadi Bibi Vs. Kauleshar Prasad Misra,
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-30-1915
Reported in: (1915)ILR37All631
Henry Richards, C.J. and Piggott, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiff for possession of a bungalow and compound. The plaintiff's title is as follows : The property, they say, belonged to one Ali Ahmad, who died in March, 1910, leaving certain heirs who are the defendants of the fourth party. They made a deed in her (plaintiff's) favour on the 4th of July, 1913. The defendant's title on the other hand is as follows : Ali Ahmad, they alleged, executed a sale-deed in the year 1889, in favour of one Musammat Idan. Musammat Idan died in 1912, leaving as her heir the defendant of the third party Ramzan, and Ramzan by a sale-deed, dated the 30th of June, 1913, sold the property to the appellant, Pandit Kauleshar Prasad Misra. Both the courts below have decreed the plaintiff's claim. Both courts have found that the sale-deed of 1889 was a fictitious sale-deed under which no possession passed, or was intended to pass, that Musammat Idan was the mistress of Ali Ahmad, ...
Tag this Judgment!Kauleshar Prasad Misra Vs. Abadi Bibi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-30-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All347; 30Ind.Cas.512
1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiff for possession of a bungalow and compound. The plaintiff's title is as follows: The property they say belonged to one Ali Ahmad, who died in March 1910, leaving certain heirs who are the defendants of the fourth party. They made a deed in her (plaintiff's) favour on the 4th of July 1913, The defendants' title on the other hand is as follows: Ali Ahmad, they allege, executed a sale-deed in the year 1889, in favour of one Musammat Idan. Musammat Idan died in 1912, leaving as her heir the defendant of the third party, Ramzan, and Ramzan by a sale-deed, dated the 30th June 1913, sold the property to the appellant, Pandit Kauleshar Prasad Misra. Both the Courts below have decreed the plaintiff's claim. Both Courts have found that the sale-deed of 1889 was a fictitious sale-deed under which no possession passed or was intended to pass that Musammat Idan was the mistress of Ali Ahmad, that Ali Ahmad continued to be the owner and in ...
Tag this Judgment!Bisheshar Das and ors. Vs. Ambika Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-29-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All275; (1915)ILR37All575
Henry Richards, C.J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit in which the plaintiffs sought a declaration that they were entitled to Rs. 627-9-6 out of a sum which had been deposited in court. The facts are as follows : Ambika Prasad brought a suit against Mahbub and others. Before Judgment he attached property which belonged to Mahbub, under the provisions of order XXXVIII of the Code of Civil Procedure. The property being of a perishable nature it was sold and the proceeds were lodged in court on the 29th of March, 1911. It is out of this sum that the plaintiffs seek to be paid the amount of a decree. The plaintiffs obtained their decree on the 12th of September, 1911. They made an application for execution by 'attachment' of the money in court on the 10th of January, 1912. The court made an order on the 21st of February, 1912, in which it is stated that the property having been attached the money should be paid to the decree-holders upon application. An application for payment was made o...
Tag this Judgment!Emperor Vs. Bateshar and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-29-1915
Reported in: (1915)ILR37All628
Henry Richards, C.J. and Piggott, J.1. This is an application in revision. The facts are briefly as follows : A complaint was made to the police, in which the complainant complained that he and certain other persons had been beaten by the present applicants, and that one of them had suffered injuries amounting to grievous hurt. The police do not appear to have been very anxious to initiate proceedings. The result was that the complainant came before Mr. Williamson, a Magistrate of the first class, with what amounted to a 'complaint,' though no doubt it was to a certain extent also a complaint against the police for not moving in the matter. This was on the 8th of February. The Magistrate made an order in the following terms : 'Papers of the police investigation to be produced before me on the 16th of February. The complainants, if they wish to prosecute their case independently of the police, should produce evidence on that date and also summon the accused.' This order was not regular....
Tag this Judgment!Bateshar and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-29-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All417; 30Ind.Cas.653
1. This is an application in revision. The facts are briefly as follows: A complaint was made to the Police in which the complainant complained that he and certain other persons had been beaten by the present applicants, and that one of them had suffered injuries amounting to grievous hurt. The Police do not appear to have be n very anxious to initiate proceedings. The result was that the complainant came before Mr. Williamson, a Magistrate of the first Class, with what amounted to a 'complaint' though no doubt it was to a certain extent also a complaint against the Police for not moving in the matter. This was on the 8th of February. The Magistrate made an order in the following terms: 'Papers of the Police investigation to be produced before me on February the 16th. The complainants, if they wish to prosecute their case independently of the Police, should produce evidence on that date and also summon the accused.' This order was not regular. There was no objection, of course, to the ...
Tag this Judgment!Jwala Prasad Rai and anr. Vs. Ram Sarup Rai and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-29-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All295(1); 29Ind.Cas.923
Chamier, J.1. Musammat Jhiria, represented in this suit by her heir Deoki, who was at first plaintiff No. 1 but subsequently became defendant No. 13, mortgaged five plots of land to Sukhdeo Rai in July 1877. Shortly before this suit was brought Deoki transferred to Jwala Prasad and Siri Kishun, the present appellants, 9 or 10 plots which are said to include the five plots covered by the mortgage. The appellants on the strength of the sale-deed sued the representatives of the original mortgagee for redemption of the five plots mortgaged. The Munsif decreed the claim, but his decision was reversed by the Subordinate Judge who held that as the deed of sale in favour of the present appellants included plots which were part of an occupancy holding and, therefore, not legally transferable, the deed of sale was void and conferred no title upon the appellants. There is no definite finding and Counsel in t his Court are not agreed as to which of the plots are part of the occupancy holding and w...
Tag this Judgment!Emperor Vs. Ewaz Ali and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-25-1915
Reported in: (1915)ILR37All624
Tudball, J.1. The five appellants have been convicted by the learned Sessions Judge on the following facts as found by the court below. Musammat Jamni is a chamar girl about the age of 13 or 14 years. She was married and she lived with her husband and his parents. For reasons best known to herself She ran away apparently more than once from her home, and on the present occasion she got clean away, and was making her way along the public road to Agra when she was met by the appellant Ewaz Ali, who was a road chaukidar. He stopped her and at first decided to take her to the police station. Subsequently however after questioning her, he agreed to take her into his house and she stayed with him for about a month. At the end of that month he made her over to the three appellants Hira Lal, Shankaria and Musammat Surja. Apparently these persons were well aware of the circumstances of the girl. They bored her nose and made her as far as possible appear to be a jat female. They then passed her ...
Tag this Judgment!Ghasi Ram and anr. Vs. Musammat Kishna and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-25-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All422; 30Ind.Cas.564
Chamier, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiffs for possession of property which was mortgaged as long ago as. September 6th, 1856. by Shambbu, under whom the plaintiffs claim, to a man named Hulasi. The plaintiffs claimed to be entitled to redeem the mortgage. They said that defendants Nos. 1-7 were owners of the mortgagee rights. Those defendants resisted the suit on the ground that they had become proprietors of the property, in April 1877, the rights and interests of the mortgagee were put up to sale and purchased by one Ghasi. In January 1884, Ghasi sold to defendants Nos. 1-3 half the rights which he had acquired at the auction-sale, and in December 1888, he sold to the predecessor-in-titlo of defendants Nos. 1-7 not only the mortgagee rights which lie had acquired at the auction-sale, but what he represented to be an absolute proprietary interest in the property, for a sum of Rs. 100. The suit has been decreed as against defendants Nos. 1-3 on the ground...
Tag this Judgment!Ewaz Ali and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-25-1915
Reported in: AIR1915All390; 30Ind.Cas.647
Tudball, J.1. The five appellants have been convicted by the learned Sessions Judge on the following facts as found by the Court below. Musammat Jamni is a Chamar girl between the age of 13 or 14 years. She was married and she lived with her husband and his parents. For reasons best known to herself she ran away apparently more than once from her home, and on the present occasion she got clean away, and was making her way along the public road to Agra when she was met by the appellant, Ewaz Ali, who was a road chaukidar. He stopped her and at first decided to take her to the Police Station. Subsequently, however, after questioning her he agreed to take her into his house and she stayed with him for about a month. At the end of that month he made her over to the three appellants, Hira Lal, Shankaria and Musammat Surja. Apparently these persons were well aware of the circumstances of the girl. They bored her nose and made her, as far as possible, appear to be a Jat female. They then pass...
Tag this Judgment!Sheoraj Singh Vs. Jahangir and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-23-1915
Reported in: (1915)ILR37All600
Henry Richards, C.J. and Rafiq, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiff for a declaration that a certain deed of gift made by one Musammat Sanjia in favour of the defendant should be held to be null and void after her death. The court of first instance dismissed the plaintiff's suit. The lower appellate. court gave him a decree.2. Having regard to the fact that this is a second appeal, the learned vakil on behalf of the defendant appellant was bound to admit that the only question that could be argued was the admissibility in evidence of a pedigree relied upon by the plaintiff, on the strength of which the lower appellate court decreed the plaintiff's claim. Objection to the admissibility of evidence taken at a late stage in litigation is not to be encouraged. The proper time to object to the admissibility of evidence is at the trial when the evidence is tendered, and it is then that the court should rule as to the admissibility or inadmissibility of the evidence...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »