Allahabad Court November 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.
Udit NaraIn and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-13-1919
Reported in: AIR1919All64(1); 54Ind.Cas.172
Ryves, J.1. Two persons, Udit Narain and Mahadeo, were convicted by a Magistrate of the First Class under Section 380 and sentenced to 8 months' rigorous imprisonment. They appealed : their appeal was dismissed. Among the grounds taken in the lower Court it was urged that the trial was irregular because no vernacular record of the evidence was prepared as is required by Section 356. The learned Sessions Judge says: 'the objection does not seem to have any force. Section 355 of the Code of Criminal Procedure empowered the Magistrate to make a memorandum of the sub-stance of the evidence of each witness, as the offence was one of those mentioned in Clause (d), Sub-section (1) of Section 260 the procedure adopted by him was in full conformity with the provisions of law.' In my opinion the learned Sessions Judge was mistaken. Section 355 applies to summons cases. This was not a summons' case, as shown by the fact that the sentence of 8 months' rigorous imprisonment was passed. Secondly, Cl...
Mahadeo Sahu and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-13-1919
Reported in: AIR1919All59; 54Ind.Cas.408
Ryves, J.1. The circumstances of this case are somewhat peculiar. Two persons Ramanand and Nauransi Lal applied in the Court of the District Judge of Gorakhpur to be declared insolvents as long ago as the 8th of October 1913 and were declared insolvents on the 26th of August 1914. A Receiver was appointed, who reported on the 31st of March 1915 that certain property, among others, in the possession of Mahadev and Jagrup under the sale deed of the 1st of July 1911 was really the property of the insolvents and had been fraudulently transferred in order to defeat their creditors. The then District Judge of Gorakhpur found that the transfer was a fraudulent one, and this order was confirmed by the High Court on the 15th of May 1917 and the property was then sold by the Receiver. Some time in May 1919 it appears that the file of the insolvency case was before the present District Judge of Gorakhpur. There is a docket on the record before me, dated the 31st of May 1919, which was sent by the...
Sheikh Sanaoo Vs. Emperor Through Rama Kant
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-13-1919
Reported in: 54Ind.Cas.416
Ryves, J.1. This is an application in revision asking this Court to quash the order sanctioning prosecution of the applicant under Section 211, Indian Penal Code. It is found that the applicant and the person against whom he brought a case under Section 408, Indian Penal Code, are on bad terms with each other. The Magistrate who tried the case acquitted the accused and subsequently gave him sanction to prosecute the applicant, and the learned Sessions Judge has refused to interfere. It seems to me that if the trial Court was of opinion that in the interests of public justice proceedings should be taken against the applicant, it could and should have Acted under Section 476 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. I am very loath to give sanction to a private individual, specially in a case where he and the opposite party are actuated by enmity. These cases are not brought to vindicate public Justice but to satisfy private spite. In this case, however, the learned Sessions Judge says that the...
Jhabbu Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-13-1919
Reported in: AIR1920All209; 54Ind.Cas.483
1. Jhabbu, blacksmith, has been found guilty under Section 302, Indian Penal Code, of the murder of Musammat Resham, the wife of his own brother Jhamman. In his petition of appeal to this Court, Jhabbu says that he did not kill his brother's wife : that he was not in his proper senses at the time when the woman was killed, or for some time previously, and that he does not know who killed her. In the Sessions Court Jhabbu refused to answer any of the questions put to him by the Sessions Judge. In the Court of the Committing Magistrate he was asked whether he had struck his sister-in-law Musammat Resham with a hammer, causing her such bodily injury as led to her death. To this he replied, 'I do not remember if I did so.' Only one further question was asked of him and in reply to that he said that he did not know why he was being accused of the crime. The case for Jhabbu has been very satisfactorily argued before us by Counsel, and as so laid before us that case involves two distinct poin...
Emperor Vs. Bhanwar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-12-1919
Reported in: AIR1919All63(1); (1920)ILR42All136
Ryves, J.1. Bhanwar has been convicted by the learned Sessions Judge of Agra under Section 454 of the Indian Penal: Code and under the provisions of that section read with Section 75 of the Indian Penal Code has been sentenced to five year' rigorous imprisonment. There can be no doubt whatever on the evidence, which was believed by both the assessors and the learned Judge, that the accused did commit the offence with which he was charged; but with regard to the application of Section 75 I have great doubt. The accused admits two previous convictions, one under Section 411, Indian Penal Code, and another under Section 407 Both these convictions were made by 'the Digh Nizamat in the Bharatpur State. I have no information as to the nature or constitution of this Court. The question is whether Section 75, as amended by Act III of 1910, contemplates a conviction by a court of this kind. The point was considered in Bahawal v. King-Emperor (1913) 48 Punj. Rec. Cr.J. 64, and it was held that a...
Bhanwar Alias Chiranji Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-12-1919
Reported in: 54Ind.Cas.624
Ryves, J.1. Bhanwar has been convicted by the learned Sessions Judge of Agra under Section 454, Indian Penal Code,, and under the provisions of that section, read with Section 75, Indian Penal Code, has been sentenced to five 'years' rigorous imprisonment. There can be no doubt whatever on the evidence, which was believed by both the Assessors and the learned Judge, that the accused did commit the offence with which he was charged : but with regard to the application of Section 75. I have great doubt. The accused admits two previous oouviotions, one under Section 411, Indian Penal Code, and another under Section 407. Both these convictions were made by the Dig Nizamat in the Bharatpur State. I have no information as to the nature or constitution of this Court. The question is whether Section 75, as amended by Act III of 1910, contemplates a conviction by a Court of this kind. The point was considered in Bahawal v. Emperor 20 Ind. Cas. 1007 : 17 P.R. 1913 Cr. : 14 Cr.L.J. 527 : 42 P.W.R...
Lachmi NaraIn and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-11-1919
Reported in: AIR1920All357; 54Ind.Cas.494
Ryves, J.1. In this case a number of directors of the Kharidar Kapra Company, Limited, Cawnpore, were tried for an offence under Section 76 of the Indian Companies Act, and convicted and ordered to pay a fine. Under that section a general meeting of every company shall be held once at the least in every year, and not more than 15 months after the holding of the last preceding meeting, and, if not so held, the Company and every officer of the Company who is knowingly a party to the default shall be liable to a fine. The last ordinary general meeting of the Company was held on the 6th of February 1916. There was no other general meeting of the Company within 15 months from that date. A written statement was shown to the Court but returned on the ground that it was not necessary to file it. Referring, however, to that written statement the Magistrate holds that the directors admit that technically an offense under Section 76(1) of the Companies Act has been committed. He, therefore, appar...
In Re:Â the National Insurance and Banking Company, Ld. Is Liquidatio ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-06-1919
Reported in: AIR1919All25; 54Ind.Cas.384
1. This is an application by the Official Liquidator of the National Insurance and Banking Company, Ld., which is now in liquidation. The winding-up order was made by the Chief Court of the Punjab, and under Section 164 of the Indian Companies Act VII of 1913, proceedings subsequent to that order are now being had in the Court of the District Judge of Lahore. According to this petition, which is supported by affidavit, the District Judge of Lahore has passed a number of orders against contributories residing at various places within the jurisdiction of this Court. The prayer in this application is that this Court should make an order under Section 164 aforesaid, permitting these subsequent proceedings to be had in the various District Courts specified at the foot of the application. Under Section 200 of Act VII of 1913 the orders made by the District Judge of Lahore require to be enforced by the Court which would have had jurisdiction in respect of the company concerned if the register...
Muhammad YamIn Vs. Razia Begam
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-03-1919
Reported in: AIR1919All11; (1920)ILR42All134; 54Ind.Cas.223
Piggott and Dalal, JJ.1. The litigation out of which the application before us arises related to the position of Muhammad Yamin, the appellant in this Court, as the husband of Musammat Razia Begam. He sued for restitution of conjugal rights and for a declaration of his legal status as the woman's husband. There was a cross-suit based upon an allegation by the woman that she had ceased to be the wife of Muhammad Yamin, if she ever was, by reason of the fact that she had exercised against him the option of puberty given by the Muhammadan Law. Appeals are now pending against the decision of the court below, which was in favour of the lady's contention. In this application the prayer is that the defendants be prohibited from giving away Musammat Razia Begam in marriage to any one, before the disposal of the aforesaid appeals. As it stands the prayer in the application must be understood to refer to the defendants other than the lady herself, who are relatives of hers. It is obvious that su...
Chandi Prasad and Co. Vs. Bishan Pado Haldar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-02-1919
Reported in: (1920)ILR42All187
Lindsay, J.1. A suit was brought by the plaintiffs, a firm of chemists in Moradabad against the defendants, also a firm of chemists carrying on business in Benares. The amount in dispute was Rs. 61-10-0, and this sum was claimed by the plaintiffs on account of an alleged breach of contract. The defence to the suit was that there was no contract between the parties. The lower court found in favour of the plaintiffs and decreed the claim. There were several other points, debated in the court below,. but here I am concerned only with the question whether or not there was a binding contract between the parties.2. The facts may be briefly stated as follows: On the 7th of February, 1918, the plaintiffs wrote to the defendants inquiring the price at which they could supply cocaine. The defendants replied on the 13th of February, 1911, informing the plaintiffs that the rate for cocaine was Rs. 20 per ounce ' without engagement.' The meaning of this latter expression is that as the market rate ...