Allahabad Court December 1918 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.
Ghansham Singh Vs. Nathu and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-14-1918
Reported in: (1919)ILR61All259
Piggott and Walsh, JJ.1. This is a second appeal by some of the defendants out of a very large number against whom a decree, purporting to be one to enforce a malikana charge or allowance, payable by the defendants generally as co-sharers in a certain mahal in the village of Dundheri Khawajgipur, has been passed by both the courts below. The established facts are that in the year 1838, the former proprietors of this village, who were Rajputs by caste, refused to accept the settlement of the village offered to them under the orders of Government; they were therefore excluded from settlement and a settlement was offered to the cultivators of the village generally, whose successors in interest are the defendants in this suit. At the same time Government, proceeding on the principle now recognized by Sections 74 of the United Provinces Land Revenue Act (Local Act No. III of 1901), prescribed a malikana charge of 12 1/2 per cent. on the land revenue as payable by the new proprietary body to...
Nathu and ors. Vs. Ghansham Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-14-1918
Reported in: AIR1919All331(2); 49Ind.Cas.737
1. This is a second appeal by some of the defendants out of a very large number against which a decree, purporting to be one to enforce a malikana charge or allowance, payable by the defendants generally as co-sharers in a certain Mahal in the village of Dundheri Khawajgipur, has been passed by both the Courts below The established facts are that in the year 1838, the former proprietors of this village, who were Raj outs by caste, refused to accept the settlement of the village offered to them under the orders of Government; they were, therefore, excluded from settlement and a settlement was offered to the cultivators of the village generally, whose successors-in-interest are the defendants in this suit. At the same time Government, proceeding on the principle now recognised by Section 74 of the United Provinces Land Revenue Act (Local Act III of 1901), prescribed a malikana charge of 12 1/2 per cent, on the land revenue as payable by the new proprietary body to the old proprietors who...
Sakhawat Ali Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-1918
Reported in: AIR1919All357; 51Ind.Cas.337
George Knox, J.1. Early in November last an application was presented to a learned Judge of this Court which is described as being a criminal revision against the order of M. Mumtaz-ul-lah Khan, Magistrate of the first class of Basti, dated the 7th of September 1918, charge under Section 145 of the Criminal Procedure Code. It is subdivided into three heads. The first is: --Because there being no order showing that the learned Magistrate was satisfied that a dispute likely to cause a breach of the peace exists and he not having made any order in writing stating the grounds of his being so satisfied, the whole proceeding was without jurisdiction and the order is ultra vires. I need not, at any rate at present, go into the second and third grounds set out in this application. The application is endorsed by an order of this Court which runs as follows:--'I admit this under Section 107 of the Government of India Act. Let notice go to show cause whether proceedings were taken and order made ...
Chhidda Singh and anr. Vs. Abdul Majid Khan and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-1918
Reported in: 49Ind.Cas.721
Piggott, J.1. The plaintiff in this case are two out of a large number of defendants, against whom a suit for ejectment was brought in the Court of an Assistant Collector in respect of certain land described as the tenant holding of all the defendants. The Assistant Collector decreed the suit and his decree was executed by the formal ejectment of all the defendants. His decree was reversed by the Commissioner on appeal, and the Commissioner's order was affirmed by the Board of Revenue upon grounds wholly different from those on which the Commissioner had proceeded. The defendants or some of them, then went to the Assistant Collector and asked to be restored to possession. The decision on this application was much delayed by the institution on the part of the land-holders of a very ill-advised suit for a declaration in the Civil Court, which suit was contested up to this Court in second appeal and was dismissed. Finally the Assistant Collector decided that in view of various facts state...
Lalman and ors. Vs. Chintamani
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-12-1918
Reported in: (1919)ILR61All254
Piggott and Walsh, JJ.1. This is a second appeal from a decree granted by the District Judge in favour of the plaintiffs, who were principals, against their agent for a sum of Rs. 3,396-10-9, depriving the plaintiffs of any sum for interest on the amount due and depriving them of their costs of the suit. The appeal is brought against those decisions, namely, with regard to the interest; and with regard to the costs, There is a cross-appeal by which the defendant objects to the amount of the decree. With regard to the interest the decision appears to us to be right. Upon the facts found, on some date in 1912, the agency of the defendant had been determined and the accounts between the plaintiffs and the defendant had been settled, so that the defendant had nothing to claim from the plaintiffs. He received a sum of money paid to him by customers of the plaintiffs in respect of a transaction which he had entered into on behalf of the plaintiffs, although his employment had come to an end....
Lalman and ors. Vs. Chinta Mani
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-12-1918
Reported in: AIR1919All214; 49Ind.Cas.696
1. This is a second appeal from a decree granted by the District Judge in favour of the plaintiffs, who were principals, against their agent for a sum of Rs. 3,396-10-9, depriving the plaintiffs of any sum for interest on the amounts due and depriving them of their costs of the suit. The appeal is brought against those decisions, namely, with regard to the interest and with regard to the costs. There is a cross-appeal by which the defendant objects to the amount of the decree. With regard to the interest the decision appears to us to be right. Upon the facts found, on some date in 1912, the agency of the defendant had been determined and the accounts between the plaintiffs and the defendant had been settled, so that the defendant had nothing to claim from the plaintiffs. He received a sum of money paid to him by customers of the plaintiffs in respect of a transaction which he had entered into on behalf of the plaintiffs, although his employment had come to an end. That sum of money app...
Kalka Prasad Vs. Raj Rani and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-11-1918
Reported in: AIR1919All427; (1919)ILR61All294; 50Ind.Cas.424
Piggott, J.1. The questions raised by this appeal concern the operation of certain provisions of an Act of the Local Legislature, the Bundelkhand Alienation of Land Act (No. II of 1903), The suit was on a mortgage of the year 1909, and the defendants were described in the plaint as being by caste ghosis, which they admittedly are. The mortgage was a simple mortgage providing for the sale of the mortgaged property in the event of non-payment; that is to say, it was admittedly not a form of a simple mortgage permitted to a member of an agricultural tribe in the Jalaun district by Section 6, Clause (b), of the Act above referred to. The defendants never pleaded that they were members of an agricultural tribe and the court proceeded to pass, on the 9th of October, 1915, a preliminary decree for sale of the mortgaged property. On the 14th of April, 1916, the plaintiff decree-holder applied to the court for the passing of a final decree for sale. The court recorded an order to the, effect th...
Emperor Vs. Sarju Mallah
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-11-1918
Reported in: AIR1919All302(1); 49Ind.Cas.778
George Knox, J.1. Sarju Mallah employed in the River Polios of Benares has been convicted of an offence under Section 403 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to one month's rigorous imprisonment. The Sessions Judge of Benares has referred the case to this Court with a recommendation that the conviction and sentence be set aside. He has forwarded along with his recommendation an explanation from the Joint Magistrate of Benares who convicted and sentenced the accused. It appears that a sheep intended for sacrifice at the Id escaped and strayed away from its owner and was captured the next day by the accused. The constable, instead of sending the animal to the pound, kept it. A few days later he was transferred to another Thana'. He took the sheep with him to the second Thana and kept it there. The learned Judge appears to think that he did not dishonestly misappropriate the sheep, that no offence has been established against him and recommends that the conviction and sentence be set a...
Sita Ram and ors. Vs. Dulam Kunwar and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-10-1918
Reported in: (1919)ILR61All350
Piggott and Walsh, JJ.1. The essential facts governing the decision of this appeal may be stated as follows:Two sisters, Tulsha Kunwar and Dulam Kunwar, had succeeded to the possession of their father's estate. They held the same, of course, with the limited estate of Hindu women and subject to a right of survivorship as between themselves. While they were thus in possession Musammat Tulsha Kunwar made a certain payment out of the income of the estate in her hands, the object of this payment being to save certain property from being sold up on account of arrears of Government revenue due from her nephews, the sons of Musammat Dulam Kunwar, and from certain cousins of the said nephews. The payment so made by her she was entitled to recover from the persons for whose benefit she made it. She brought a suit with that object and obtained a decree. It would seem that she also took out execution of that decree on one or more occasions before her death, but she died while the decree was still...
Emperor Vs. Ram Charan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-10-1918
Reported in: 49Ind.Cas.781
George Knox, J.1. Ram Charan Agarwal was convicted of an offence under Section 34(6) of the Income Tax Act and ordered to pay a fine of Ha. 104. He maintains that the notice in question never reached him and that he is, therefore, not guilty. It appears from the statement made oh the case by the learned Sessions Judge of Cawnpore that though the notice was sent through the Post Office at Cawnpore, it was sent in the ordinary post and was not registered. The learned Sessions Judge maintains that it is necessary, before formal act of service by post can be held to exist, to prove that the letter was sent by registered post. This letter was not sent by registered post and I agree with the learned Sessions Judge that delivery by unregistered post would not amount to the service required by Section 46 of the Income Tax Act. I set aside the conviction and sentence and direct that the fine, if paid, be refunded....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »