Allahabad Court August 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.
Emperor Vs. Ram Saran Lal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-06-1917
Reported in: (1918)ILR40All19
Tudball and Piggott, JJ.1. This is a reference by the Sessions Judge of Farrukhabad, in the case of two persons, Ram Saran Lal and Sheo Narain, who have been, convicted by a Magistrate under Section 62 of the Stamp Act and have been sentenced to a fine of Rs. 5 each. The facts may be very briefly put as follows:---One of the accused, Sheo Narain, sued the other accused, Ram Saran Lal, in suit No. 977 of 1916 in the Munsif's court at Farrukhabad to recover some money on the basis of a simple mortgage. The parties cameto terms out of court. They agreed 'orally' that the defendant was to pay down a certain part of the debt In cash; that the plaintiff was to have a decree for the rest of the money payable in annual instalments, and that in case of any default the plaintiff was to be able to execute his decree at once for the whole sum then due. The agreement was not reduced to writing. The parties walked into court and presented a petition to the Munsif praying that a decree might be passe...
In Re: Stamp Reference by the Board of Revenue
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-06-1917
Reported in: (1918)ILR40All128
Knox, A.C.J.1. This is a reference made to this Court by the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority. It is said to be made under the provisions of Section 57, Sub-section (1) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1889. It is not a case that was referred to the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority under Section 56, Sub-section (2). Therefore if it falls at all under Section 57, Sub-section (1), it must be deemed to be a case otherwise coming to the notice of the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, In its order of reference the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority states it as a case coming to the notice of the Board while scrutinizing the monthly statement of cases of the infringement of the Stamp Law of Agra submitted by the Collector under Rule 204 of the Stamp Manual.2. The point arises whether the record before us is the record of a case within the meaning of Section 57, Sub-section (1). The questions involved, so far as stamp duty is concerned, have been before the Collector of Agra under Section 3...
In Re: Khub Chand and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-06-1917
Reported in: AIR1918All181(2); 47Ind.Cas.299
George Knox, Ag. C.J.1. This is a reference made to this Court by the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, it is said to be made under the provisions of Section 57, Sub-section (1) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1869. It is not a case that was referred to the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority under Section 56, Sub-section (2). Therefore, if it falls at all under Section 57, Sub-section (1), it must be deemed to be a ease otherwise coming to the notice of the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority. In its order of reference the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority states it as a case coming to the notice of the Board while scrutinising the monthly statement of oases of the infringement of the Stamp Law of Agra submitted by the Controller under Rule 204 of the Stamp Manual.2. The point arises whether the record before us is the record of a ease within the meaning of Section 57, Sub-section (1). The questions involved, so far as stamp duty is concerned, have been before the Collector of Agra unde...
Ram Saran Lal and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-06-1917
Reported in: AIR1918All307; 42Ind.Cas.1008
1. This is a reference by the Sessions Judge of Farrukhabad in the case of two persons, Ram Saran Lai and Sheo Narain, who have been convicted by a Magistrate under Section 62 of the Stamp Act and have been sentenced to a fine of Rs. 5 each. The facts may be very briefly put as follows:---One of the accused Sheo Narain sued the other accused, Ram Saran Lai, in suit No. 977 of 1916 in the Munsif's Court at Farrukhabad to recover some money on the basis of simple mortgage. The parties earne to terms out of Court. They agreed 'orally' that the defendant was to pay down a certain part of the debt in cash, that the plaintiff was to have a decree for the rest of the money payable in annual instalments, and that in case of any default the plaintiff was to be able to execute his decree at once for the whole sum then due. The agreement was not reduced to writing. The parties walked into Court and presented petition to the Munsif praying that a decree might be passed in the case in the terms of ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›