Allahabad Court March 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.
Lala and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-22-1917
Reported in: AIR1918All299; 40Ind.Cas.729
George Knox, J.1. This case has got into a bad tangle. It appears from the evidence for the prosecution that Lala, Udai Ram, Moja, Har Chandi and Puran were convicted of offences under Sections 325 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code, Udai Ram and Moja under Section 323 and the others were convicted under Section 325. The accused applied in revision to the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge of Aligarh. The view apparently taken, though this is not clear, by the learned Sessions Judge was that Lala was attempting to take cattle to the pound; that Kallua, Parshadi, Genda and Heta tried to rescue the cattle by force. Upon their doing so Lala, Udai Ram, Moja, Puran and Harchandi assaulted those who were trying to rescue the cattle. As a result both parties received injuries and one of them Lala accused received grievous hurt. The learned Sessions Judge, being of opinion that the Magistrate had gone wrong in convicting the applicants, was about to report the case to this Court but the part...
Saiyad Ali Asghar Vs. the Collector of Bulandshahr in Charge of the Es ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-21-1917
Reported in: 40Ind.Cas.753
Banerji, J.1. The suit which has given rise to this appeal was brought by the appellant for possession of a half share of the village Wair Badshahpur in the District of Bulandshahr, which had been granted to his father Asghar Ali by the British Government for services rendered during the Mutiny of 1857. Asghar Ali was originally a resident of the town of Palwal in the Gurgaon District, now appertaining to the Punjab. He held various appointments and finally became Tahsildar of Azamgarh, where he rendered the good service for which he obtained the village of Wair Badshahpur. He died in 1876 leaving him surviving two widows, Moti Begam and Sakina Bagam, a son, Ali Asghar, the per sent plaintiff, and two daughters. Sughra Bagam and Saera Begam. The children were the issue of his marriage with Moti Begam. At the time of his death the son Ali Asghar was very young. Saera Begam is dead and her heirs are defendants to the suit, so also is Sughra Begam. In 1892 the widows applied to the Govern...
Dhanpat Mal Vs. Mela Mal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-21-1917
Reported in: 41Ind.Cas.918
Shadi Lal, J.1. There was no valid presentation of this appeal within the period prescribed by law, and the appeal must, therefore, be dismissed. The decree appealed from was passed on the 21st April 1916, and the memorandum of appeal accompanied by a copy of the decree, and not by a copy of the judgment on which it was founded, was presented to this Court on the 26th July 1916. It will be observed that this memorandum did not bear the signature of either the appellant or his Pleader, and it was returned on the 27th July for rectifying this mistake and also for filing a copy of the judgment of the lower Appellate Court. The appeal was re-filed on the 2nd August but again without a copy of the judgment, and it was only after it had been returned again that the said copy was filed on the 8th August.2. Now, Order XLI, Rule 1, lays down that the memorandum of appeal shall be accompanied by a copy of the decree appealed from and (unless the Appellate Court dispenses therewith) of the judgme...
Bandi DIn Vs. Munna Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-19-1917
Reported in: AIR1917All345; 39Ind.Cas.931
1. This appeal arises out of a suit in ejectment. The plaintiffs-respondents claim to be the owners of the house in question. The vendors (defendants-respondents) transferred a share in the house by a sale-deed in 1910 in favour of the present defendant-appellant. The latter had also in the year 1905 acquired a share in the house at an auction-sale. The private sale merely conveyed to him the remaining shares in the house. The plaintiffs' case is that they are the owners of the house, that the vendors are persons who had no right whatsoever to transfer the property and that the appellant-defendant acquired no title by his purchase. It appears that in the year 1865, two documents were executed one by Mathura Prasad and Musammat Gujra, and the other by Imami and Ghure. Each document is a counterpart of the other. If these documents or either of them is admissible in evidence, then the plaintiffs' case is clearly proved and the present appeal must fail. If these documents are neither of t...
Misri Lal Vs. Sham Sundar Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-17-1917
Reported in: AIR1917All354(1); 39Ind.Cas.803
Henry Richards, C.J.1. The complainant instituted proceedings against the accused for having committed an offence punishable under Section 466 of the Indian Penal Code. The charge was that the accused had forged the name of the complainant to a vakalatnama authorising a Vakil to appear for the complainant and others in an appeal pending in the High Court. An objection was taken that the Magistrate could not take cognizance of the offence without the sanction of the High Court having regard to the provisions of Section 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Section 195 provides amongst other things that no Court shall take cognizance of any offence described in Section 463 of the Indian Penal Code when such has been committed by a party to any proceeding in any Court in respect of a document produced or given in evidence in such proceeding, except with the previous sanction of such Court. A vakalatnama authorising a Vakil to appear is brought to the High Court and is there filed, and pe...
Khedu Rai Vs. Sheo Parson Rai and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-16-1917
Reported in: AIR1917All212(2); (1917)ILR39All423
Tudball and Muhammad Rafiq, JJ.1. This is a second appeal preferred by the plaintiff in a suit brought for redemption of certain property. The plaintiff Khedu Rai is the heir of one Zalim Rai. In the year 1869, Zalim Rai ancestor of the plaintiff, mortgaged the property in suit to the predecessors in title of the present defendants, first party. In the year 1876, a dispute arose between the mortgagor and the mortgagees, and a case arose in the Revenue Courts in respect to the entry of names in the record of rights. We are informed that a grove had actually been sold by the mortgagees to the predecessors in title of the defendants, second party. The dispute in the Revenue Court resulted in a compromise in which Zalim Rai give up all his equity of redemption in the properly. The mortgagees agreed to certain property being held by Zalim Rai and his wife as long as either of them should live, it, on their death, reverting to the mortgagees. The compromise was not registered. Entries were m...
Khedu Rai Vs. Sheoparsan Rai and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-16-1917
Reported in: 40Ind.Cas.121
1. This is a second appeal preferred by the plaintiff in a suit brought for redemption of certain property. The plaintiff Khedu Rai is the heir of one Zalim Rai. In the year 1869, Zalim Rai mortgaged the property in suit to the predecessors-in-title of the present defendants first party. In the year 1876 a dispute arose between the mortgagor and the mortgagees and a case arose in the Revenue Courts in respect to the entry of names in the Record of Rights. We are informed that a grove had actually been sold by the mortgagees to the predecessors-in-title of the defendants second party. The dispute in the Revenue Court resulted in a compromise in which Zalim Rai gave up all his equity of redemption in the property. The mortgagees agreed to certain property being held by Zalim Rai and his wife as long as either of them should live, it, on their death, reverting to the mortgagees. The compromise was not registered. Entries were made in the Government record accordingly and from that date th...
Makhdum Bakhsh and ors. Vs. Abdul Hasan and ors. and Mohan Koeri and a ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-14-1917
Reported in: (1917)ILR39All455
Tudball and Muhammad Rafiq, JJ.1. The facts of the case out of which this appeal has arisen are clear and undenied. One Girdhari was the owner of a fixed rate tenancy consisting of four plots of land. He hypothecated those plots of land to the predecessor in title of the present plaintiffs, who are the respondents before us. Girdhari died leaving a widow. The zamindar obtained a decree against the widow for arrears of rent. Then the mortgagees tendered and actually deposited the decretal amount. It was not accepted, and the widow was ejected from the land in execution of the decree. The mortgagees thereupon brought a suit to recover their money by enforcement of the mortgage, and the zamindar was made a party to the suit. He contested the claim, but the claim was decreed and the court directed the sale of the fixed rate tenure. When the property was put up for sale, the zamindar appeared and filed an objection, stating that the fixed-rate tenure no longer existed, that there was merely...
Bacha Lal Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-14-1917
Reported in: AIR1917All350; 40Ind.Cas.700
Edward, J.1. Bacha Lal has been convicted of an offence under Section 163 of Local Act I of 1900 and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 50.2. The allegation against him is that he encroached upon a Municipal drain. What Bacha Lal appears to have done is that he made an erection on the side of the old drain. The breadth of the side of the drain on top of which the erection has been made is fourteen inches and the length of frontage is 76 feet 3 inches. Bacha Lal'a defence was that he did no new work, he only repaired what was there before. The judgment is somewhat confused. I understand from it that Bacha Lal is not responsible for the whole of the erection that has been made on the top side of the drain. The learned District Magistrate says that 'the view most favourable to him which I am on the evidence able to take is that the platform extended over the wall of the drain when he bought the property and that he only raised the front part of it some seven or eight inches over a breadth of ...
Shah Abul Hasan and ors. Vs. Makhdum Bakhsh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-14-1917
Reported in: 39Ind.Cas.944
1. The facts of the case out of which this appeal has arisen are clear and undenied. One Girdhari was the owner of a fixed rate tenancy consisting of four plots of land. He hypothecated those plots of land to the predecessor-in-title of the present plaintiffs, who are the respondents before us. Girdhari died leaving a widow. The zemindar obtained a decree against the widow for arrears of rent, Then the mortgagees tendered and actually deposited the decretal amount. It was not accepted and the widow was ejected from the land in execution of the decree. The mortgagees thereupon brought a suit to recover their money by enforcement of the mortgage, and the zemindar was made a party to the suit. He contested the claim but the claim was decreed and the Court directed the sale of the fixed rate tenure, when the property was put up for sale, the zemindar appeared and filed an objection, stating that the fixed rate tenure no longer existed, that there was merely a non-occupancy tenancy and the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »