Allahabad Court November 1916 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.
Bijai NaraIn Singh and ors. Vs. Sri Maharaja Parbhu NaraIn Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-02-1916
Reported in: AIR1917All102; 37Ind.Cas.395
George Knox, J.1. The facts of the case out of which this appeal arose are stated very clearly in the elaborate and well-reasoned judgment of the learned District Judge. I need not detail them. It is sufficient to note the points put forward by the learned Counsel for the appellants. These points are that the contents of the kabuliyat dated the 4th of September 1879 are not admissible in evidence, that even if they are admissible in evidence they do not prove that Bishesar Singh was a tenant of the plaintiff-respondent and that in any circumstance after the expiration of the term fixed by the kabuliyat, Bishesar Singh and his successors became trespassers whose adverse possession has ripened into full proprietorship after a lapse of more than twelve consecutive years. There was a fourth ground taken in appeal, but that was abandoned in argument. As to the admissibility in evidence of the contents of the kabuliyat the learned Counsel has taken me through a series of decisions of this Co...
Gobind Singh Vs. Kalyan Dass
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-02-1916
Reported in: 38Ind.Cas.673
Walsh, J.1. These are two applications in revision. No 62 is an application to revise au order of the District Judge of Agra, dated the 20th December 1915. No. 63 is an application to revise an order of the Subordinate Judge of Agra of the 24th of July 1915. The matter arose in this way. The applicant lives outside the jurisdiction of the Agra Court and is employed in some capacity in a Native State. On the 11th of January 1915 (to go no further back), a summons was issued to him to attend the trial of a suit which was brought against him by the respondent to this application. The summons reached him on the 6th of February. By the summons it appeared that the date fixed for the hearing was the 8th. On the 8th of February the summons was endorsed by a Judge in the Native State. The 7th happened to be a Sunday, but it was obviously impossible under any circumstances for the defendant to prepare for a trial on the 8th for which be received a summons on the 6th, and any Court ought to have...
Emperor Vs. Jeoli
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-01-1916
Reported in: (1917)ILR39All161
Henry Richards, C.J. and Pramada Charan Banerji, J.1. Musammat Jeoli has been convicted of the murder of one Madhania and sentenced to death. She was also convicted of an attempt to murder Harwa (her husband). She has also been sentenced to 10 years' rigorous imprisonment for an offence under Section 328. The sentences were directed by the learned Sessions Judge to run concurrently. The evidence establishes beyond all possible doubt that Madhania died as the result of eating halwa which had been prepared by the accused, The accused has all along, even in her petition of appeal to this Court, admitted that she prepared the halwa and put into it a certain drag. Besides the husband Harwa and Madhania two other brothers of Harwa and a cousin also partook of the halwa and suffered considerably. Madhania, however, was the only person who died. Sometime previous to the commission of the alleged crime an intrigue had been going on between the accused Masammat Jeoli and a Lodh of the name of Ga...
Musammat Jeoni or Jeoli Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-01-1916
Reported in: AIR1917All455; 36Ind.Cas.473
1. Musammat Jeoli has been convicted of the murder of one Madhania and sentenced to death. She was also convicted of an attempt to murder Harwa (her husband). She has also been sentenced to 10 years rigorous imprisonment for an offence under Section 328. The sentences were directed by the learned Sessions Judge to run concurrently. The evidence establishes beyond all possible doubt that Madhania died as the result of eating halwa which had been prepared by the accused. The accused has all along even in her petition of appeal to this Court admitted that she prepared the halwa and put into it a certain drug. Besides the husband Harwa and Madhania two other brothers of Harwa and a cousin also partook of the halwa and suffered considerably. Madhania, however, was the only person who died. Sometime previous to the commission of the alleged crime an intrigue had been going on between the accused Musammat Jeoli and a lodh of the name of Ganna. The accused has all along stated that the poison ...