Allahabad Court April 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.
Musammat Kirpia Vs. Hardeo and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-13-1916
Reported in: AIR1916All11; 34Ind.Cas.57
1. This appeal arises out of a suit in which the plaintiff sought possession and to set aside an agreement which, she said, had been brought about by fraud and undue influence. It is true that this latter relief was added by amendment after the plaint was originally filed. The case was referred to a Full Bench because it was thought that a somewhat important question as to the admissibility of unregistered documents of compromise in the Revenue Court in mutation proceedings was involved. This question has been dealt with by a Full Bench of this Court in Letters Patent Appeal No. 4 of 1915. Under the circumstances of the present case we do not think that the question of law arises. The plaintiff herself came into Court mentioning the agreement and alleging that it was not binding upon her because it was brought about by fraud. In the Court of first instance the documents were all admitted without objection on the part of the plaintiff. The question of fraud or no fraud was heard and dec...
Chhotey Lal Vs. Firm Lakhmi Chand and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-13-1916
Reported in: 34Ind.Cas.113
P.C. Banerji, J.1. This is an application for revision under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act. The suit out of which it arises was instituted in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Muttra, who was vested with the powers of a Judge of Court of Small Causes. By an order of the District Judge the case was transferred to the Court of the Munsif of Muttra. The learned Munsif passed an ex parte decree on the 29th of September 1915, the defendant not having entered appearance. The defendant thereupon applied to have the ex parte decree set aside, on the allegation that he had been prevented by illness from attending the Court on the date fixed for hearing. He did not deposit with his application the amount of the decree, nor did he furnish security in respect of that amount as required by Section 17 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act. The plaintiff objected to the hearing of the application, on the ground that no deposit had been made or security furnished. The lear...
Ram Charan Lal Vs. Rahim Baksh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-12-1916
Reported in: AIR1917All486; (1916)ILR38All416
Pramada Charan Banerji and Piggott, JJ.1. The question raised in this appeal is whether under the Benares School of the Mitakshara law, by which the parties to this case are governed, the mother's brother's son succeeds as a bandhu in preference to the mother's sister's son. The question arises out of the following facts. One Hori Lal, who is said to have originally owned the property in dispute, died many years ago leaving him surviving his mother Musammat Jhumma, who succeeded him and remained in possession till her death, 7 or 8 years ago. Musammat Jhumma had two brothers, Kishun Das and Jhanjhan Rai,and two sisters, Musammats Lachminia and Behia. Narayan Das, son of Behia, is admittedly alive but is not a party to this suit. Three of the sons of Kishun Das sold three-fourths of what they alleged to be their interest in the property to the plaintiff appellant. On the strength of the sale deed executed in his favour the plaintiff brought the present suit for partition of a 9/20th sha...
Ramji Vs. Koman Das and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-12-1916
Reported in: AIR1916All28; 35Ind.Cas.603
1. This appeal arises out of a suit in which the plaintiff claims that the defendant No. 1 might be ordered to render correct accounts of the profits of certain property and that upon the taking of those accounts the document, dated 4th August 1910, should be held to be valid only for the amount that should be found due on taking of the accounts. The circumstances are shortly as follows. The plaintiff is one of the three sons of one Tipsi. Defendant No. 2 is the widow of Tipsi and mother of the plaintiff and the defendants Nos. 3 and 4 who are still minors. Defendant No. 1 is the mortgagee under a mortgage, dated the 4th of August 1910, executed by Musammat Gopi as mother and guardian of the plaintiff and of his brothers, defendants Nos. 3 and 4, under authority granted by the District Judge. It appears that Koman Das, defendant No. 1, held 8 usufructuary mortgages. One of these was executed by one Musammat Unku as well as by Tipsi. Musammat Unku was the widow of a brother of Tipsi. Th...
Ram Charan Lal Vs. Rahim Bakhsh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-12-1916
Reported in: 34Ind.Cas.108
1. The question raised in this appeal is whether under the Benares School of the Mitakshara Law, by which the parties to this case are governed, the mother's brother's son succeeds as a bandhu, in preference to the mother's sister's son.2. The question arises out of the following facts: One Hori Lal, who is said to have originally owned the property in dispute, died many years ago leaving him surviving his mother, Musammat Jhamma, who succeeded him and remained in possession till her death 7 or & years ago. Musammat Jhamma had two brothers, Kishun Lal and Jhanjhan Rai, and two sisters, Musammats Lachhminia and Behia. Narain Das, a son of Behia, is admittedly alive but is not a party to this suit. Three of the sons of Kishun Lal sold three-fourths of what they alleged to be their interest in the property to the plaintiff-appellant. On the strength of the sale-deed executed in his favour the plaintiff brought the present suit for partition of a 9/20ths share, for possession of that share...
Emperor Vs. Lal Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-10-1916
Reported in: (1916)ILR38All395
Piggott, J.1. The following are the essential facts out of which this application arises. On the 16th of November, 1915, a Magistrate of the first class convicted four persons on a charge framed under Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code. Three of these accused he sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months each; but on one person, named Lal Singh, he passed a sentence of one month's rigorous imprisonment only. The three convicts who had received the longer sentence, a sentence in itself on the face of it appealable, exercised their right of appeal to the Sessions Judge. On the 3rd of December, 1915, the Sessions Judge quashed the convictions on the merits and ordered the release of the three convict appellants. Presumably information of the success of this appeal reached the convict Lal Singh and stirred him up to make an effort on his own behalf. It was not, however, till the 13th of December, 1915, that he managed to file in the court of the Sessions Judg...
Kunwar Sen and ors. Vs. Darbari Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-10-1916
Reported in: AIR1916All79; (1916)ILR38All411; 34Ind.Cas.171
Henry Richards, C.J. and Pramada Charan Banerji, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit in which the plaintiffs sought to redeem a mortgage, dated the 17th of July, 1874. The mortgage was made by one Dulha Rai. The plaintiffs alleged that their ancestor (what ancestor they do not say) was the real owner and that it was only on account of private arrangements that Dulha Rai made the mortgage instead of the ancestor. They then go on to claim that only a small sum is now due on the mortgage, but they are willing to pay whatever the court finds to be due and so redeem the property. The court of first instance, after calling attention to the very vague way in which the plaintiffs alleged their right, held that the plaintiffs had not proved that they had any connection with Dulha Rai, or that their ancestor was the owner of the property. The plaintiffs had alleged and produced some evidence to show that they had been in receipt of certain sewai income. They also proved, (which apparently is t...
Sheikh Alla-ud-dIn Hadi Vs. the G.i.P. Railway Company
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-07-1916
Reported in: 34Ind.Cas.104
P.C. Banerji, J.1. This is an application for revision of a decree passed by the Judge of the Small Cause Court at Cawnpore, dismissing the claim of the plaintiff for damages brought under the following circumstances:The plaintiff consigned 67 bundles of dry hides at the Attarra railway station to be delivered to him at the Cawnpore General-ganj railway station, both these stations being on the same Railway, namely, the Great India Peninsula Railway. The bundles weighed 120 maunds and 29 seers and were charged for at maund rates, the amount charged being Rs. 73-12-0. The goods appear to have been despatched in four waggons. When these arrived at Cawnpore the defendant Company charged an additional sum of Rs. 124-8-0 at waggon rates. The plaintiff paid this amount under protest and brought the present suit for recovery of the said amount by way of damages, on the ground that the excess charge was illegally made. The defendant Company contended that under the terms of the consignment not...
Bhairon Prasad and ors. Vs. Mahant Samarpuri
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-07-1916
Reported in: AIR1917All296; 34Ind.Cas.441
Walsh, J.1. This is an action brought upon an agreement against ex-proprietary tenants. The facts were that the rate of rent having been fixed by the Collector under Section 36 of the Land Revenue Act at Rs. 50 on the 26th of April, the defendants on the 10th of July of the same year executed an agreement undertaking to pay Rs. 72 6 for the same interests. The first Court has found that the plaintiff's conduct in the matter had been perfectly honest and that the transaction was unimpeachable as a matter of fact. The defendants attempted to dispute the agreement on the merits. That attempt wholly failed. A further attempt was made by the defendants to dispute the agreement on the ground that two of them were minors. That was found against them as a fact in the first Court and the point was abandoned in the lower Appellate Court. It is raised here in the seventh paragraph of the memorandum of appeal, but the fact that it was abandoned in the Court below is sufficient ground for me to dis...
Suraj Bhan and ors. Vs. Boot and Equipment Factory
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-05-1916
Reported in: AIR1916All174; (1916)ILR38All407
Piggott, J.1. This is an appeal by the decree-holders in an execution case. The judgement-debtor is a company registered under the Indian Companies Act (Act VII of 1913). For purposes of this appeal we may take it that this Company has gone into voluntary liquidation. The court of first instance held that this circumstance afforded no reason for staying execution of the decree j but this decision has been reversed by the District Judge on appeal. In the Indian Companies Act (No. VII of 1913), there is no statutory provision as to stay of suits or other legal proceedings in the case of a company which has gone into voluntary liquidation, corresponding to the provisions of Section 171 of the Act, with regard to the consequences of a winding up order. The, learned District Judge points out that it would be open to the present decree-holders to obtain a winding-up order and assumes that this circumstance is in itself sufficient to deprive them of their remedy by way of execution. We have b...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »