Allahabad Court May 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.
In Re: Bhagwanti
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-23-1916
Reported in: AIR1917All314; 39Ind.Cas.28
Sundar Lal, J.1. I have considered the case and the ruling referred to. In my opinion the section refers to cases where a decree in favour of the respondents (i.e., all the respondents where there are more than one) is set aside, and the case is sent back 'for a second decision.' The proviso refers to cases where the decision in favour of the respondents is set aside qua a portion only of the subject-matter of the suit, but in either case the decree appealed against must be set aside qua all the respondents. Where the decree is left standing as to some of the respondents the decision so far as these respondents are concerned is left standing, and the appeal against them is dismissed. The Court in appeal in such cases does not set aside the decision of the case but affirms it, so far as these respondents are concerned- It sets aside only a part of the decision of the Court of first instance against some respondents only. The Court-fee paid by the appellants was necessary and required in...
G.i.P. Railway Company Vs. Mt. Nannhi Bai and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-21-1916
Reported in: AIR1926All702
1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiffs-respondents against the 6. I.P. Railway for damages under Section 1 of the Fatal Accidents Act 13 of 1855. The plaintiffs are Mt. Nannhi Bai, the wife aged 25, and Mt. Shiaman, the daughter, aged 8 of a deceased schoolmaster named Brindaban Bihari Saran, who was killed in a Railway accident on the 10th May 1921 between Jhansi and Manikpur. In this appeal no question is raised except the amount of damages awarded by the lower Court. The lower Court has awarded a sum of Rs. 6,500, whereas the appellant claims that a sum of Rs. 4,000 offered originally by the Railway Company should have been deemed sufficient.2. The Subordinate Judge has taken the following factors into consideration in awarding the sum of Rs. 6,500. The deceased was of 30 years of age, and at the time of his death was earning a salary of Rs. 30 per mensem as a schoolmaster and Rs. 15 per mensem by giving private tuition. There was evidence that there was nothi...
Mr. James E. Powell and anr. Vs. Mr. L.B. Powell
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-20-1916
Reported in: AIR1916All251; 36Ind.Cas.567
1. This appeal arises out of a suit in which the plaintiff claimed a declaration that he and his lessees were owners of certain stretches of the river Asan and other reliefs. The Court of first instance granted the plaintiff a decree. The lower Appellate Court reversed the decree of the Court of first instance and dismissed the plaintiff's suit. The family to which the plaintiff Mr. James E. Powell and the defendant belong originally owned lands on the south side of the river Asan. They also owned land on the north side, but this part of the property does not appear to be in dispute in the present suit. In the year 1869 the family entered into an agreement for partition. The actual carrying out of this agreement occupied considerable time and involved disputes. The claim of Mr. James E. Powell apparently is that as the result of the partition he acquired land which abutted the river on the south side and also the bed of the river up to the middle of the stream, and this carried with it...
Ganga Ram and ors. Vs. Mahant Ram Saran Alias Risbiji
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-19-1916
Reported in: AIR1916All225; 34Ind.Cas.502
1. This suit relates to a religious institution which has been described as the samad of Babu Lal Chand. The plaintiff's case is that the defendant Nanak Saran was at one time the mahant of this samad, that by reason of certain acts of which he has been guilty he has forfeited the position of mahant and that the plaintiff has been appointed mahant of the gaddi. The claim does not describe how the plaintiff was appointed and who appointed him, but it goes on to say that the defendant Nanak Saran has, without legal rights, granted a lease of the property to the defendant Ganga Ram for a term of 24 years. The plaintiff sues for possession of the property and for an injunction. The suit was dismissed by the Court of first instance. In the first place the Court held that it was a suit under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure. It also held that as the plaintiff was not in possession of the property in suit, he was not entitled to bring a declaratory suit. The learned Judge in appeal h...
Mohammad Shakur Vs. Gopi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-18-1916
Reported in: AIR1916All313; 35Ind.Cas.202
Sundar Lal, J.1. This was a suit on foot of a mortgage, dated the 17thof March 1902, for a sum of Rs. 150 payable by instalments of Rs. 14 a year, the last instalment being one of Rs. 10. The plaintiff's case was that the instalments had been paid up to the year 1909. He has brought the present suit to recover the amount which has remained un-paid. The document also contains a covenant' that in the event of non-payment the mortgagee was entitled to recover possession of a certain cultivatory holding in which the mortgagors had rights of occupancy. This covenant in the mortgage-deed is void in law. But if the money was really advanced to the defendants on the conditions set out in the deed, namely, that it was payable by instalments specified which the defendants covenanted to pay, the suit for money on such a covenant was clearly maintainable. The Court below has relied upon a decision of this Court in the case of Sita Ham Tiwari v. Sukhdeo Kunbi 6 A.L.J. 88 (Notes). In that ease the m...
Gokul Singh and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-18-1916
Reported in: AIR1916All360; 35Ind.Cas.527
Walsh, J.1. This is a very grave case of brutal, unjustifiable and determined assault, by persons in authority whose duty, as the Judge has rightly pointed out, it is to afford protection to the person and the property of the public, committed presumably in the name of the law upon an unprotected and apparently defenceless cultivator of feeble constitution. Nothing could be said, and Mr. Alston has rightly refrained from attempting to say one word, in mitigation of their conduct, which has been established by clear evidence and their own admission. The circumstances are that the principal accused Gokul Singh, a young constable of 28 years with 11 years' experience in the force and whose record has presumably been a good one, went to a village with a view to investig ting a theft and in particular to obtain, if he could, information from the deceased man who was supposed to know something about it. The deceased denied all knowledge of the matter. It is found that the constable Gokul Sin...
Badri Prasad and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-17-1916
Reported in: AIR1916All175; 35Ind.Cas.519
Walsh, J.1. This is a criminal revision, in which I reserved judgment; not because the case presented any legal difficulty, but because the circumstances of the convictions, the course of the proceedings and the nature of the punishments are unusual and, I trust, exceptional.2. The trouble arises out of a dispute over a crop of moong in a certain village said to be about 20 miles from Allahabad. There had been some litigation about the land in the Revenue Court. One Beni Madho had been put in possession. Ram Dulare, the complainant in this case, claims to hold as sab-tenant of Beni Madho. One Badri, the principal accused, claims to hold a share by arrangement with Ram Dulare, and to have cultivated his share of the crop.3. Disputes having begun some few days before between the complainant and Badri as to Badri's right to any share in the crops, Badri brought matters to a head on November 30 by beginning to cut his alleged share. There was no concealment about it. Badri employed two men...
Tursi Vs. Mohan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-16-1916
Reported in: AIR1916All280; 35Ind.Cas.302
walsh, J.1. I agree with the judgment of the Court below and . with the reason given therein. The contention of the appellant seems to me subversive of the whole legislation on this point and none of the authorities cited to us apply to this case. I would dismiss the appeal with costs.Sundar Lal, J.2. The only question in this case is, whether the suit as framed lies in a Civil Court and whether the judgment of the Board of Revenue, dated 6th March 1915, is conclusive of the question whether the defendant is or is not a lessee of the plaintiff. The facts of the case as they appear are as follows:--One Harkishen had three sons, Khanjan, Dale and Fateh. Khanjan died and the names of Dugar and Hulasi, sons of Dale, were recorded in his place. We finally find the name of Mohan, son of Fateh, plaintiff-respondent in the present case, recorded in respect of the holding. In 1907, the plaintiff sued for the ejectment of the defendant. The matter in controversy between them was settled by a com...
Wesal-ud-dIn and anr. Vs. Fazal Ahmad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-15-1916
Reported in: (1916)ILR38All481
Walsh and Lindsay, JJ.1. This is an appeal arising out of the execution of a decree for sale of property. The decree-holder has applied for sale of a certain village. The question before the Court is whether the proceedings in execution should be in accordance with the rules relating to sale of ancestral property as defined in chapter IV, Rule 5, of the General Rules of Practice for Civil Courts, or that proceedings should continue as for sale of non-ancestral property. The court below issued to the judgement-debtor a notice under Rule 66 of Order XXI. According to the decree-holder the property was non-ancestral. The judgement-debtor appeared to show cause and has urged that in this particular case the property should have been held to have been ancestral land within the meaning of that term as used in Rule 5 of that chapter. Under Clause (a) of that rule all lands being mahals or shares in or portions of mahals which have been owned continuously, in the province of Agra by the propri...
Fazal Ahmad Vs. Wesal-ud-dIn and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-15-1916
Reported in: AIR1916All107; 35Ind.Cas.742
1. This is an appeal arising out of the execution of a decree for sale of ^property. The decree-holder has applied for sale of a certain village. The question before the Court is whether the proceedings in execution should be in accordance with the rules relating to sale of ancestral property as defined in Chapter IV, Rule 5, of the General Rules of Practice for Civil Courts or that proceedings should continue as for sale of non-ancestral property. The Court below issued to the judgment-debtor a notice under Rule 66 ' of Order XXI. According to the decree-holders the property was non-ancestral. The judgment-debtor appeared to show cause and has urged that in this particular case the property should have been held to have been ancestral land within the meaning of that term as used in Rule 5 of that Chapter. Under Clause (a) of that rule all lands, being mahals or shares in or portions of mahals which have been owned continuously, ira the Province of Agra by the proprietor from the 1st J...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »