Allahabad Court January 1919 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.
Mathura Prasad Vs. Karehru and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-04-1919
Reported in: (1919)ILR61All318
Henry Richards, Kt., C.J. and Pramada Charan Banerji, J.1. This appeal arises under the following circumstances. A zamindar took proceedings before an Assistant Collector of the first class to resume certain land under Section 154 of the Tenancy Act. The defendant pleaded that the land was not resumable under that section, and also that he had held the land rent-free for more than fifty years and by two successors. The Assistant Collector held that the land was resumable under Section 154 and passed a decree for ejectment. The defendant appealed to the Commissioner. By his memorandum of appeal he contended first that the suit was barred by limitation; secondly, that the land was not held at the pleasure of the grantor; thirdly, that the land was a charitable grant and therefore not resumable; fourthly, that the court should have proceeded under Section 158, The Commissioner dismissed the appeal and the defendant filed an application in revision before the Board of Revenue, who held tha...
Bhaeat Indu and ors. Vs. Syed Mohammad Mustafa Khan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-04-1919
Reported in: 52Ind.Cas.836
1. This appeal is connected with Second Appeals Nos 103 and 104 of 1017. They arise out of suits for profits brought against the Lambardar. It appears that the plaintiffs purchased a certain share on the 22nd of January 1912, and that under their purchase they were entitled to arrears of profits. The defendant was appointed Lambardar on the 5th of February 1913. The plaintiffs claim Profits for Kharif of 1320 and Rabi and Kharif in subsequent years. The Court of first instance granted the plaintiff a decree except in respect of Kharif of 1320. The plaintiff appealed and contended that the expenses allowed by the first Court were ton great and that the percentage on the gross rental allowed to him was too little. We also contended that he ought to have got a decree in respect of the Kharif of 1320. The lower Appellate Court upheld the (decision of the Court of first instance on all points and dismissed the appeals. We may say at once that we agree with the Courts below, save in so far a...
Karehru and anr. Vs. Mathura Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-04-1919
Reported in: AIR1919All314; 49Ind.Cas.747
1. This Appeal arises under the following circumstances, A Zemindar took proceedings before an Assistant Collector of the first class to resume certain land under Section 154 of the Tenancy Act. The defendant pleaded that the land was not resumable under that section and also that he had held the land rent-free for more than fifty years and by two successors. The Collector held that the land was resemble under Section 154 and passed a decree for ejectment. The defendant appealed to the Commissioner. By his memorandum of appeal he contended, first, that the suit was barred by limitation; secondly, that the land was not held at the pleasure of the grantor, thirdly, that the land was a charitable grand and therefore not resumable; fourthly, that the Court should have proceeded under Section 158. The Commissioner dismissed the appeal and the defendant filed an application in revision before the Board of Revenue, who held that the land was not resumable and remitted the case back to the Cou...
Ummat-ur-rahman Vs. Zafar Husain
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-03-1919
Reported in: (1919)ILR61All278
George Knox, J.1. This second appeal arises out of a suit brought by Musammat Ummat-ur-Rahman, wife, against Zafar Husain, her husband. The prayer by the plaintiff is that the marriage of the plaintiff with the defendant be dissolved. There is a further prayer for damages and costs. The reason given is that the defendant has treated the plaintiff with cruelty, intends to kill her or cut off her nose, stated before several persons that the plaintiff had illicit intercourse with her brother, Aziz-ur-Rahman, and imputed fornication to her.2. The written statement filed by Zafar Husain is to the effect that the plaintiff's claim has been brought on false allegations. There was no ill-feeling between the plaintiff and himself nor quarrel. No charge has been made by the husband against the wife of misconduct with her brother. The story had been invented by the members of the wife's family. The plaintiff is literate and sensible and has always been obedient and doing her duty towards the defe...
Emperor Vs. Parwari
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-03-1919
Reported in: (1919)ILR61All311
Knox, J.1. This is a case in revision. The Sessions Judge of Saharanpur had before him an appeal by a woman one Musammat Parwari, so called at any rate. The appellant had been convicted of the offence of defamation and sentenced under Sections 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code to two months' rigorous imprisonment. The complaint had been instituted against her by one Chhajju Singh. Chhajju Singh, according to the prosecution was step brother of one Musammat Parwari, Rajput by caste, and Musammat Parwari was the wife of Pirthi Singh, also Rajput, Parwari, some two years before the complaint was lodged, had gone to the house of Umrao Singh, her sister's husband. There she fell ill and died on the 21st of June, 1916. After her death, Pirthi Singh gave it out that she was still alive, and that Umrao Singh's story that she was dead, was false, and the woman was really in concealment in Umrao Singh's house. Parwari's husband and relations had wanted, so the complainant says, to out-caste h...
Zafar HusaIn Vs. Ummat-ur-rahman
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-03-1919
Reported in: AIR1919All182; 49Ind.Cas.256
George Knox, J.1. This second appeal arises out of a suit brought by Musammat Ummat-ur-Rahman, wife, against Zafar Husain, her husband. The prayer by the plaintiff is that the marriage of the plaintiff with the defendant be dissolved. There is a further prayer for damages and costs. The reason given is that the defendant has treated the plaintiff with cruelty, intends to kill her or out off her nose, stated before several persons that the plaintiff had illicit inter-course with her brother, Aziz-ur-Rahman, and imputed fornication to her.2. The written statement filed by Zafar Husain is to the effect that the plaintiff's claim has been brought on false allegations. There was no ill feeling between the plaintiff and himself nor quarrel. No charge has been made by the husband against the wife of misconduct with her brother. The story had been invented by the members of the wife's family. The plaintiff is literate and sensible and has always been obedient and doing her duty towards the def...
Parwari Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-03-1919
Reported in: AIR1919All276; 49Ind.Cas.855
George Knox, J.1. This is a case in revision. The Sessions Judge of Saharanpur had before him an appeal by a woman, one Musammat Parwari, so called at any rate. The appellant had been convicted of the offense of defamation and sentenced under Sections 499 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code to two months' rigorous imprisonment, The complaint had been instituted against her by one Chhajju Singh. Chhajju Singh, according to the prosecution, was step-brother of one Musammat Parwari, Rajput by caste, and Musammat Parwari was the wife of Pirthi Singh, also Rajput. Parwari, some two years before the complaint was lodged, had gone to the house of Umrao Singh, her sister's husband. There she fell ill and died on the 21st of June 1916. After her death, Pirthi Singh gave it out that she was still alive and that Umrao Singh's story that she was dead was false, and the woman was really in concealment in Umrao Singh's house. Parsvari and her husband and relations had wanted, so the complainant says, t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›