Allahabad Court December 1921 Judgments
Emperor Vs. Sukhnandan Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-16-1921
Reported in: (1922)ILR44All265
Stuart, J.1. The only point raised in this revision is whether the applicants were gambling in a public place. On the finding of the Magistrate who tried the case, they were found gambling in the area occupied by a large grove. At one end of the grove is the shrine of a goddess and a tank. A fair was in progress at the time that they were gambling and visitors to the fair had penetrated to all parts of the grove. The grove is private property, but on the occasion of the fair the public use the grove and there is no interference with their so doing. The decision in the case of Ahmad Ali v. King-Emperor (1904) 1 A.L.J. 120 is not in point, because the grove used for the purpose of gambling in that case was a private grove to which the public did not have access. The question as to whether the grove in this case was or was not a public place presents little difficulty. When the public have access to a place, without their access being refused or interfered with, that place is a public pla...
Tag this Judgment!W.A. Collard Vs. Marie Agnes Collard and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-16-1921
Reported in: AIR1922All7; (1922)ILR44All254
Grimwood Mears, C.J.1. These are appeals by the husband, the wife and the co-respondent in a matrimonial matter. On the 15th of November, 1920, the wife filed a petition against her husband alleging cruelty and adultery. She gave sufficient specific instances of cruelty to make that a complete charge if she had been able to support those instances by evidence. Her petition also alleged, adultery with sufficient precision to enable that to be a complete charge. If the court had accepted the charges of cruelty and adultery she would have been entitled to her decree. The defence of the husband was a complete denial of those charges.2. In the husband's answer of the 13th of December, 1920, he set up not very clearly defined allegations, but said that he had evidence with which he could prove that his wife, the petitioner, had committed adultery with Mr. Dutton; but he said he did not wish to press the charge, and he attributed the divorce proceedings to Mr. Dutton.3. The hearing of the wif...
Tag this Judgment!Baba Ramnath Kalikamli Wala Vs. Lachhman Das
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-16-1921
Reported in: (1922)ILR44All258
Piggott, J.1. The question at issue was whether an execution court on an application by the judgment-debtor under Order XXI, Rule 2(2), of the Code of Civil Procedure, should record as a certified adjustment of the decree an alleged executory contract of adjustment where the factum of the adjustment was denied by the decree-holder and the judgment-debtor had not performed his part of the contract prior to his application in court.2. Dr. Surendra Nath Sen (with Babu Surendra Nath Gupta) for the appellant, contended that a mere denial of an adjustment by the decree-holder was not enough and did not amount to 'showing cause,' and cited--Arjan Singh v. Harcharan Singh Weakly Notes 1884 p. 40, Champa Lal v. Mahesh Sitla Bakhsh Singh Weekly Notes 1888 p. 82, Runglal v. Hem Narain Gir (1885) I.L.R. 11 Calc. 166, Muhammad Kasim v. Rukia Begam (1919) I.L.R. 41 All. 443, and Shaik Davud Rowther v. Paramasami Pillai : (1916)31MLJ207 .3. He, however, conceded that this did not shift the burden of ...
Tag this Judgment!Sukhnandan Singh and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-16-1921
Reported in: 65Ind.Cas.419
Stuart, J.1. The only point raised in this revision is whether the applicants were gambling in a public place. On the finding of the Magistrate who tried the case they were found gambling in the area occupied by a large grove. At one and of the grove is the shrine of a goddess and a tank. A fair was in progress at the time that they were gambling and visitors to the fair had penetrated to all parts of the grove. The grove is private property but on the occasion of the fair the public use the grove and there is no interference with their so doing. The decision in the case of Ahmad Ali v. King-Emperor 1 A.L.J. 129 : 1 Cr. L.J. 272 is not in point, because the grove used for the purpose of gambling in that case was a private grove to which the public did not have access. The question as to whether the grove in ibis case was or was not a public place presents little difficulty. When the public have access to a place without their access being refused or interfered with, that place is a pub...
Tag this Judgment!W.A. Collard Vs. Marie Agnes Collard and W.A. Dutton
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-16-1921
Reported in: 69Ind.Cas.579
Grimwood Mears, C.J.1. These are appeals by the husband, the wife and the corespondent in a matrimonial matter. On the 15th of November-her 1920 the wife filed a petition against her husband alleging cruelty and adultery. She gave sufficient specifies instances of cruelty to make that a complete charge if she had bean able to support those instances by evidence, Her petition also alleged adultery with sufficient precision to enable that to be a complete charge. If the Court had accepted the charges of cruelty and adultery she would have been entitled to her decree. The defence of the husband was a complete denial of those charges.2. In the husband's answer of the 13th of December 1929 he set up not very clearly defined allegation; bat said that he bad evidence with which he could prove that his wife, the petitioner, had committed adultery with Mr. Dutton, but he Said he did not wish to press the charge and he attributed the divorce proceedings to Mr. Dutton.3. The hearing of the wife's...
Tag this Judgment!Lala LachhmIn Das Vs. Baba Kali Kamali Wala Ram Nath
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-16-1921
Reported in: 64Ind.Cas.990
Piggott, J.1. This is a judgment debtor's appeal in an execution case and it comes before us under the following circumstances:--The decree in question is one passed on the 14th of February 1920. It has some bearing on the equities of the case, though not on its legal aspects, that this was a compromise decree under which the judgment debtor was at liberty to satisfy it by easy instalments. There was, however, a provision that, on default being made in respect of two consecutive instalments, execution could be taken out for the entire amount. The decree holder on the 23rd June 1920 applied to the Court which had passed the decree for execution of the same according to its terms, alleging that no instalment had ever been paid, and at the same time asked to have the decree transferred to the Civil Court at Saharanpur within whose jurisdiction the judgment-debtor resided. On the 2nd July 1920 he applied for execution of his decree by arrest of the person of the judgment-debtor. The record...
Tag this Judgment!Chatura Kunwar Vs. Surjan Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-15-1921
Reported in: (1922)ILR44All250
Ryves, J.1. Musammat Chatura Kunwar who was recorded in the khewat as a co-sharer brought the suit, out of which this appeal arises, under Section 164 of the Agra Tenancy Act for her share of the profits for the years in suit against her deceased husband's brother, Baldeo Singh, the defendant appellant here. The main defence was that Lachhman Singh, the husband of Musammat Chatura Kunwar, was the brother of Baldeo Singh, defendant, and joint with him, that on the death of Lachhman Singh, Baldeo Singh had at the request of the plaintiff got her name entered in the revenue papers only for her consolation and that she had no proprietary right. The trial court refused to go into this question and gave the plaintiff a decree as her name was recorded in the khewat. The defendant appealed. During the pendency of the appeal the defendant filed a suit in the Civil Court and obtained a decree which declared that Musammat Chatura Kunwar was not a co-sharer. This decree was passed, it appears, on ...
Tag this Judgment!Surjan Singh and anr. Vs. Musammat Chatura Kunwar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-15-1921
Reported in: AIR1922All356; 64Ind.Cas.964
Ryves, J.1. Musammat Chatura Kunwar, who was recorded in the khewat as a co-sharer, brought the suit out of which this appeal arises under Section 164 of the Agra Tenancy Act for her share of the profits for the years in suit against her deceased husband's brother, Baldeo Singh, the defendant-appellant here. The main defence was that Lachhman Singh, the husband of Musammat Chatura Kunwar, was the brother of Baldeo Singh defendant and joint with him, that on the death of Lachhman Singh, Baldeo Singh had at the request of the plaintiff got her name entered in the revenue papers only for her consolation and that she had no proprietary right. The Trial Court refused to go into this question and gave the plaintiff a decree as her name was recorded in the khewat. The defendant appealed. During the pendency of the appeal the defendant filed a suit in the Civil Court and obtained a decree which declared that Musammat Chatura Kunwar was not a co-sharer. This decree was passed, it appears, on th...
Tag this Judgment!Mahadeo Sahai Vs. the Secretary of State for India in Council and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-14-1921
Reported in: AIR1922All1; (1922)ILR44All248
Piggott, J.1. This is an application in revision against an order rejecting an application for leave to sue in forma pauperis. So far as I am concerned I reserve the question whether an application in revision lies against such an order. Personally I think the question is distinguishable from that decided recently by a Full Bench of this Court (1921) I.L.R. 43 All. 564, in that no suit was ever instituted in the court below, as the suit would only have commenced if the application had been accepted and the petition registered as a plaint. Moreover, the effect of the order brought before us in revision was to dispose, for the time being, of the entire matter pending in that court. However, reserving this point, I am clearly of opinion that the application before us must fail. The court below has written a long order, certain portions of which do in my opinion go beyond the jurisdiction of the court, at the particular stage then reached, as limited by Rule 5 of Order XXXIII of the Code o...
Tag this Judgment!Rai Mahadeo Sahai Vs. the Secretary of State for India in Council and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-14-1921
Reported in: 65Ind.Cas.255
Piggot, J.1. This is an application in revision against an order rejecting an application for leave to sue in forma pauperis. So far as I am concerned, I reserve the question whether an application in revision lies against such an order. Personally I think the question is distinguishable from that decided recently by a Fall Bench See Buddhoo Lal v. Mewa Ram. 63 Ind. Cas. 15 : 9 A.L.J. 558.--[Ed.] of this Court, in that no suit was ever instituted in the Court below, as the suit would only have commenced if the application had been accepted and the petition registered as a plaint. Moreover, the effect of the order brought before us in revision was to dispose, for the time being, of the entire matter pending in that Court. However, reserving this point, I am clearly of opinion that the application before us must fail. The Court below has written a long order, certain portions of which do, in my opinion, go beyond the jurisdiction of the Court at the particular stage then reached, as limi...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »