Allahabad Court December 1917 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.
Bharat Singh Vs. Tej Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-11-1917
Reported in: AIR1918All131; (1918)ILR40All246
Pramada Charan Banerji, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought for the recovery of the share of profits of a co-sharer, for the year 1318 Fasli, The plaintiff is the assignee of the profits from the co-sharer who is the second defendant in the suit. The suit was brought against Kundan Singh, who was the lambardar in the year in question. The plaintiff claimed a share, not only of the profits actually realized but also of the profits which, according to him, had not been realized by the lambardar through gross negligence and misconduct. During the pendency of the suit the lambardar died, and his legal representative, Tej Singh, was brought upon the record. He contended that-he was not liable for amounts which his predecessor in title, namely, Kundan Singh, had neglected to collect. The court of first instance repelled this contention, and made a decree for what it held to be the total amount shown in the rent roll and other sums which had not been shown in the rent roll but which...
Emperor Vs. Harak Chand Marwari
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-08-1917
Reported in: AIR1918All174; (1918)ILR40All84
Tudball, J.1. Criminal Reference Nos. 757, 758 and 759 are all similar and more or less connected with each other. One Harak Chand was prosecuted on two charges under Section 266 of the Indian Penal Code before a Magistrate in respect of two measures of length which he was using in the shop. The one measure was 35 inches, and the other measure was 35 1/2 inches long. The Magistrate who tried the case came to the conclusion that in the village where these persons live and sell their wares the prevailing standard of measurement was a yard of 35 1/2 inches long. In respect to the one measure he therefore convicted Harak Chand and in respect to the other measure he acquitted him on the ground that fraudulent intent was not proved. He appealed against the conviction. The Sessions Judge altered the conviction from one section to another but maintained the sentence. In regard to the charge on which the accused has been acquitted, the learned Sessions Judge has sent the record to this Court wi...
Angad Singh and ors. Vs. Zorawar Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-07-1917
Reported in: AIR1918All270; 44Ind.Cas.542
1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought in the Revenue Court for profits. One of the plaintiffs happened to be the Lambardar, but we think that this fact ought to be left out of consideration for the purposes of the case. The plaintiff is not suing as Lambardar. He is suing as one of the co-sharers. The learned Assistant Collector at the commencement of his judgment says: 'The peculiarity of this case is that one of the plaintiffs is the Lambardar; and the defendants being only pattidars have so much land as sir and khudkasht that the Lambardar instead of distributing profits has been reduced to the position of a sharer claiming profits.' The defence to the suit was that the defendants were not in the habit of making any collections, and that any profits that they had in their hands were the profits from their own sir and khudkasht, and that they bad not more sir and khudkasht than represented their share in the village. Another defendant pleaded much the same thing but also allege...
Parbhu Lal Vs. Musammat Janki
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-06-1917
Reported in: AIR1917All150; 40Ind.Cas.706
George Knox, J.1. One Musammat Janki had made over custody of certain valuables to a man named Parbhu Lal. This much is admitted by Parbhu Lal, although he says that he had not that amount of the valuables which Musammat Janki says she made over to him. Musammat Janki in the first instance went to Babu Sohan Lal and apparently instituted a criminal complaint in his Court against Parbhu Lal. The record of that case is not before me; but an order has been produced in the case which simply says that with reference to certain Police papers Janki's complaint is ordered to be filed. She then went to the Court of Babu Sham Lal, a Magistrate of the second class, a few days after. There is a certified copy of an order passed in the case, which is to the effect that the complainant has failed to produce any evidence, that on her own admission she deposited ornaments with the accused and the accused lost them in a theft at his house. Her case seems to be one for Civil Courts as no breach of trust...
Rahim Bibi Vs. Fazal Ahmad and anr. and
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-05-1917
Reported in: (1918)ILR40All238
Henry Richards, C.J. and Pramada Charan Banerji, J.1. This and the connected appeals arise out of two suits which related to certain property, movable and immovable, which belonged to one Manzur Ahmad, who died on the 2nd of September, 1912. Manzur Ahmad, although he had been married (four times, it is stated) never had any children. His heirs were, first, Fazl Ahmad (his paternal uncle), secondly, his mother Musammat Rahim Bibi, and thirdly his two widows Musammat Qamr-un-nissa and Musammat Jilani Begam. Under the Muhammadan Law of Inheritance, Fazl Ahmad would have been entitled to 10 sihams out of 24, Rahim Bibi to 8 sihams, and the two widows to 6 sihams between them. Fazl Ahmad was not only uncle to the deceased, but he was also the father of Musammat Jilani Begam, his youngest wife. Before his death Manzur Ahmad was possessed of a considerable amount of property. He had deposited in the house of Lala Khub Chand (banker) the sum of Rs. 16,876. He had also in cash in his house the ...
Sheikh Fazal Ahmad and anr. Vs. Musammat Rahim Bibi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-05-1917
Reported in: 51Ind.Cas.633
1. This and the connected appeals arise out of two suits which related to certain property, moveable and immoveable, which belonged to one Manzur Ahmad, who died on the 2nd of September 1912. Manzur Ahmad, although he bad been married (four times it is stated), never had any children. His heirs were, first, Fazal Ahmad (his paternal uncle), secondly, his mother Musammat Rahim Bibi, and thirdly, his two widows Musammat Qamarannissa and Musammat Jilani Begam. Under the Muhammadan Law of inheritance Fazal Ahmad would have been entitled to 10 sihams out of 24, Rahim Bibi to 8 sihams and the two widows to 6 sihams between them. Fazal Ahmad was not only uncle to the deceased but he was also the father of Musammat Jilani Begam, his youngest wife. Before his death Manzur Ahmad was possessed of a considerable amount of property. He had deposited in the bouse of Lala Khub Chand {.banker) the sum of Rs. 16,876. He had also in cash in his house the sum of Rs. 8,500 and 4,000 sovereigns (equal to R...
Amtul Habib Vs. Muhammad Yosuf
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-04-1917
Reported in: AIR1918All234; (1918)ILR40All125
Henry Richards, C.J. and Pramada Charan Banerji, J.1. This is an appeal arising out of execution proceedings. A decree was obtained for dower for a sum of Rs. 5,000 with interest and costs, to be recovered from the estate of the plaintiff's deceased husband in the hands of the heirs. The decree-holder sought to execute her decree and was met with-an objection that she herself being one of the heirs and entitled to one-fourth of the estate, the decree could only be executed for three-fourths of the amount. When making this objection the judgement-debtors deposited three-fourths of the amount of the decree, principal, interest and costs. This objection was allowed in the court of first instance. There was an appeal to the District Judge, who held that the decree being for Rs. 5,000, it must executed for that amount. The High Court uphold this ruling. The execution proceedings then continued; but the decree-holder claimed interest on the full amount of the decree up to the 14th of August,...
Ram Lakhan Das and ors. Vs. Shankar Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-04-1917
Reported in: AIR1918All289; 43Ind.Cas.519
1. The point for decision in this case is a very short one. A mortgage decree was obtained against a number of persons one of whom was a minor, his guardian being one of the adult defendants. An application was made for execution, in which all the defendants were named but the minor defendant was not described as a minor nor was the adult (who in fact has been his guardian ad litem) described as such. If notwithstanding that defect, that application can be paid to be an application for execution 'in accordance with law', admittedly the present application is within time and is not barred by limitation. Notice of the first application to which we have referred was issued to all the persons mentioned in the application, including of course the guardian of the minor although he was not described as guardian. We think that this application was an application 'in accordance with law' within the meaning of Article 182. We accordingly allow the appeal, set aside the order of the Court below a...
Musammat Amtul Habib Vs. Mohammed Yusuf
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-04-1917
Reported in: 43Ind.Cas.520
1. This is an appeal arising out of execution proceedings. A decree was obtained for dower for a sum of Rs. 5,000 with interest and costs, to be recovered from the estate of her deceased husband in the hands of the heirs. The decree-holder sought to execute her decree and was met with an objection that she herself being one of the heirs and entitled to one-fourth of the estate, the decree could only be executed for three-fourths of the amount. When making this objection the judgment-debtors deposited three-fourths of the amount of the decree, principal, interest and costs. This objection was allowed in the Court of first instance. There was an appeal to the District Judge, who held that the decree being for Rs. 5,000 it must be executed for that amount. The High Court upheld this ruling. The execution proceedings then continued, but the decree-holder claimed interest on the full amount of the decree up to the 14th of August 1915, that i.e., until three months after the decision of the ...
Musammat Gaura Vs. Ahmad Khan and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-03-1917
Reported in: (1918)ILR40All235
Henry Richards, C.J. and Pramada Charan Banerji, J.1. This appeal arises out of an application for a final decree in a mortgage suit. The preliminary decree was passed on the 27th of August, 1908, and six months were allowed to the defendant to pay the mortgage-money. It is stated in the petition filed by the decree-holder that no payment was made. He made an application on the 26th of August, 1911, for a final decree under Order XXXIV Rule 5. That application was dismissed for default on the 9bh of April, 1912. On the 10th of September, 1912, the present application was made for a final decree. It was opposed on two grounds, first, that the order dismissing' the previous application was a bar to the present application and, secondly, that the application was time-barred. The court of first instance allowed the first objection and did not decide the second. It dismissed the application now made. Upon appeal the lower appellate court disagreed with the court of first instance and remand...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »