Allahabad Court April 1921 Judgments
Ashutosh Gangoli Vs. Brij NaraIn Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-09-1921
Reported in: 61Ind.Cas.521
Ryves, J.1. This is an application by Ashutosh Gangoli to set aside a prosecution for perjary sanctioned by a Magistrate of the First Class of Allahabad and upheld by the learned Sessions Judge.2. It has been pointed out over and over again by this Court that, if a Court before whom perjury has been committed which it thinks should be tried, it should order the prosecution of the person whom it thinks guilty under Section 476 and as a rule not to give sanction to a private individual. The offence of perjuiy, if any, was committed on the 8th of September last in the Court of Mr. Bain. Mr. Bain's order aaquitting the accused in that case was dated the 28th September 1910. The application for sanction to prosecute was made in his Court on the 3rd of November 1920 and on the 1st December it was granted. The appeal was dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge on the 17th January 1921. An application against that order was written out and an office report of this Court was taken on the 21st J...
Tag this Judgment!Nanda Ahir Vs. Sri Thakurji
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-08-1921
Reported in: (1921)ILR43All560
Grimwood Mears, Kt. C.J. and Pramada Charan Banerji, J.1. The father of the plaintiff to the suit out of which this appeal has arisen made a gift of a portion of the family property on the 1st of January, 1911, to a deity for the purpose of a temple. Subsequently a relinquishment was obtained from the manager of the temple, but the relinquishment was cancelled at the instance of the manager upon the institution of the suit. On the 18th of September, 1915, one of the sons of the grantor brought a suit to have the gift set aside, but his suit was dismissed. The present plaintiff, who states that he was imprisoned in jail at the time, brought the present suit for a declaration that his father was incompetent to make a gift of a portion of the family property In favour of the idol.2. The suit was decreed by the courts below, and on second appeal to this Court the decrees of those courts were affirmed by a learned Judge. He based his judgment mainly upon the text of the Mitakshara contained...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Thakurji Through Parmeshwar Dass Vs. Nanda Ahir
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-08-1921
Reported in: AIR1921All333; 63Ind.Cas.546
1. The father of the plaintiff to the suit oat of which this appeal has arisen made a gift of a portion of the family property on the 1st of January 1911 to a deity for the purpose of a temple, Subsequently a relinquishment was obtained from the manager of the temple, bat the relinquishment was cancelled at the instance of the manager upon the institution of the suit. On the 18th of September 1915 one of the sons of the grantor brought a suit to have the gift sat aside, but his suit was dismissed. The present plaintiff, who states that he was imprisoned in jail at the time, brought the present suit for a declaration that his father was incompetent to make a gift of a portion of the family property in favour of the idol.2. The suit was decreed by the Courts below, and on second appeal to this Court the decrees of those Courts were affirmed by a learned Judge. Ha based his judgment mainly upon the text of the Mitakshara contained in paragraph 27 of Chapter I. He was of opinion that the w...
Tag this Judgment!Debi Prasad Vs. Kedar Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-08-1921
Reported in: AIR1921All280; 63Ind.Cas.563
1. This appeal arises out of a suit for redemption. The plaintiffs-appellants executed a simple mortgage in 1908. On the 17th of December 1912 they deposited a earn of Rs. 331-10 in Court under Section 83 of the Transfer of Property Act. The suit for redemption, for some reason or another, was not brought until February 1918. It is to be remembered that the mortgagors plaintiffs had all this time been in possession as the mortgage was a simple mortgage. It was found that the amount of tender was insufficient by a small amount, come two or three rupees only. The Court of first instance decreed the suit. It held that the tender under Section 83 of the Transfer of Property Act being insufficient the provisions of Section 84 with regard to the cessation of interest on the principal money from the date of the tender did not apply, It accordingly decreed the suit for redemption on payment of Rs. 1,333-5 9. The plaintiffs appealed. The lower Appellate Court found that, as a matter of fact, th...
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Aziz Vs. Munna Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-07-1921
Reported in: AIR1921All325; 63Ind.Cas.435
1. This is an application in revision. Following the ordinary principles recognised in this Court, we are not disposed to interfere in such cases merely because there has been a mistake in law in the misapplication of a Statute, although it has always been recognised that the powers of the High Court under Section 25 of the Small Cause Court Act are wider than the powers under Section 115 of the Code. But in this case we think the Court has gone altogether wrong, largely misled by the way in which the plaintiff presented his case, and we were at one time disposed to reduce the decree to a comparatively small amount, namely Rs. 18, the balance due in respect of goods delivered within three years, plus interest thereon without reference to any part payment which might be applicable to otherwise Statute-barred items in the other amount. On the whole we have come to the conclusion that this might be hard on the plaintiff and that it would be more satisfactory to remand the case to the Cour...
Tag this Judgment!Lila Dhar, Minor, Through Baid Ram Vs. Piarey Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-07-1921
Reported in: AIR1921All326; 62Ind.Cas.258
1. In this case we have some to the conclusion that the Judge has gone too far. The suit is brought by a minor to declare a mortgage-deed void on the ground that he was a minor. The Court below, in a very sweeping and no doubt correct judgment, held upon the appeal of the money-lender that the minor bad been guilty of fraudulent representation with regard to his age, and that he had induced the mortgagee to part with his money by misrepresentation and that it was untrue to the knowledge of the minor, the truth not being known to the mortgagee. He has then gone on to use this curious and embarrassing language: 'It is unnecessary to consider here whether the whole consideration was paid or not. This will be a matter for consideration if and when the present appellant files a suit on the basis of the mortgage.' This undoubtedly goes much too far and is embarrassing to both parties. It may be used as a decision that the minor was liable if sued upon the bond and it, no doubt, is a direct e...
Tag this Judgment!Musammat Hanifunnissa and anr. Vs. Chunni Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-06-1921
Reported in: AIR1921All321; 63Ind.Cas.184
1. This is an appeal against an order of the First Additional Subordinate Judge of Aligarh, dated the 9th March 1920, holding that an application for restitution under Section 144 of the Civil Procedure Code is time-barred. The litigation out of which the question arises has been a remarkably protracted one. The suit was brought in 1901, and the parties have been to this Court at least five times. The point, however, whish we have to decide is a simple one.2. The facts and so mush of the history of the case as is relevant are fully stated in the judgment of Mr. Justice Piggott, dated the 17th February 1919 (Execution First Appeal No. 139 of 1918), when a Bench of this High Court, consisting of that learned Judge and one of us, allowed an appeal brought by some strangers to the original suit against an order of restitution which the Subordinate Judge had made on the same application whish it now before us for the second time.3. The appellants before us, Musammat Hanifunnissa and Musamma...
Tag this Judgment!Ranchhor Das Vs. Har Kishan Das and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-06-1921
Reported in: AIR1921All335(1); 63Ind.Cas.501
1. The plaintiffs carry on business in Benares.2. A portion of their business is that of commission agents in grain. They instituted a suit against the defendant, on the allegations that the defendant used to purchase grain from other firms and stored that grain with the plaintiffs, that at the defendant's request the plaintiffs paid the sellers of the grain the price of the grain, that the plaintiffs then sold the grain on behalf of the defendant as commission agents, and that on making up accounts, debiting the defendant with what the plaintiffs had paid on his behalf and their commission fees and crediting him with the sale proceeds, there was a balance of account due from the defendant to the plaintiffs. This was a perfectly clear claim. The defendant's reply was an equally clear reply. He stated that there was not a word of truth in the allegations made by the plaintiffs, that what had really happened was this that the defendant employed the plaintiffs as brokers, that from time t...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Thakurji Maharaj Birajman Mandir Thakurduara Vs. Hirde NaraIn and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-04-1921
Reported in: 63Ind.Cas.811
1. The sole issue in this case in the lower Appellate Court was whether or not the wakfnama, dated the 26th November 1896, executed by Chaudhuri Shib Lal was a genuine or fictitious transaction. The Court of first instance, on a consideration of all the fasts and the evidence before it, came to the conclusion that it was genuine. The lower Appellate Court has come to the finding that it is fictitious. It bases its decision on one fast, namely, that though the deed was executed on the 26th November 1895 mutation of names was not applied for until 1902, The only evidence to establish this fact wan a sentence in a judgment passed in the year 1904, in another we, to which the present appellant was also a party. It was not inter parent and had no connection with this case. The learned Judge of the Court below has held that this entry in the judgment is admissible under Sections 42 and 11 of the Evidence Act. Section 42 clearly does not apply. It was a private trust and private property and ...
Tag this Judgment!Chhiddu Vs. Carew and Company Limited
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-02-1921
Reported in: 63Ind.Cas.138
1. The dispute in the case out of which this appeal arises is as follows: The plaintiff-appellant, who is a small contractor of Shahjahanpur, agreed to supply to the defendant firm certain planks of uniform thickness, varying lengths and varying breadths at the rate of 'Rs. 9 per hundred yards,' The contest is with regard to the meaning of those words. The plaintiff-appellant states that he was to receive payment at the rate of Rs. 9 per hundred linear yards, i.e., at the rate of Rs. 3 per hundred running feet irrespective of breadth. In other words, his contention is that if he supplied a hundred feet of planks six inches wide he would receive the same payment as if he supplied a hundred feet of planks twelve inches wide. Under the contract the planks had to be not less than six inches and not more than twelve inches wide. So if the plaintiff's contention were accepted, he would have been a very foolish person if be supplied a plank more than six inches wide, as he would stand to gain...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›