Allahabad Court November 1922 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.
Kedar Nath and anr. Vs. Brij NaraIn Rai and Sital Prasad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-02-1922
Reported in: (1923)ILR45All186
Muhammad Rafiq and Lindsay, JJ.1. The respondents to the present appeal are admittedly descended from a common ancestor. The defendants respondents Nos. 3-7 were indebted to some one in Calcutta and, at the instance of the creditors, were declared insolvents in 1912. The insolvents were residents of Grhazipur and owned property in the district of Ballia. Under the orders of the insolvency court, their property, situate in the district of Ballia, was made over to the official receiver. The latter disposed of the property by private sale in favour of defendant appellant, Raja Brij Narain Rai, on the; 22nd of September, 1916. The deed was registered on the 30th of September, 1916. The plaintiffs respondents Nos. 1 and 2, who are minors, sued under the guardianship of their mother for the recovery of the said property on the ground of pre-emption. They alleged that they and the insolvents were descended from a common ancestor and were co-sharers in the property in which the shares of the i...
M. Fakirullah Khan Vs. Baldeo Sahai and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-02-1922
Reported in: AIR1923All185; 79Ind.Cas.225
Stuart, J.1. The appellant Munshi Fakirullah Khan is an agent in the Supply and Transport Department. He joined the Department before August 1914. He is an Indian soldier within the meaning of Act XII of 1915. Nearly two years after Act XII of 1915 was passed, he instituted a suit in the Court of the Munsif of Nagina, to obtain possession of certain property by the exercise of an alleged right of pre-emption, and appointed a pleader to conduct his ease for him. The date fixed for the hearing of the case was the 9th July 1917. On that date the defendant asked for an adjournment, and the case was adjourned to the 11th August 1917, On the 11th August 1917 the plaintiff's pleader asked for an adjournment and the case was adjourned to the 10th December 1917. On the last mentioned date the plaintiff's pleader was present. According to the entry in the order-sheet, the plaintiff's evidence was ready and witnesses were present, but certain documents had not been filed and the plaintiff's plead...
The Hon'ble Rai Bahadur Pandit Sadanand Pandey Vs. Sheikh Tufail Ahmad ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-02-1922
Reported in: AIR1923All115; 79Ind.Cas.486
Stuart, J.1. The facts of the suit out of which the present appeal arises, in so far as it is necessary to state them, are these: A certain Zahurul Hasan executed a deed of simple mortgage on the 15th July 1895, in favour of Tufail Ahmad and Muhammad Was by which he purported to hypothecate certain property. The plaintiff, the Hon'ble Rai Bahadur Pandit Sadauand Pandey, purchased later certain property which included a portion (at any rate) of the property so hypothecated, from the brother of Zahural Hasan. Tufail Ahmed and Muhammad Wasi instituted in 1911 a suit on the mortgage of 1895. In that suit they made the plaintiff a party. They obtained a final decree on the 20th September 1913. In execution of that decree what purported to be the property hypothecated was brought to sale and was sold on the 20th December 1916 to Tufail Ahmad and Muhammad Wasi. The plaintiff was a party to the suit and to the execution proceedings. On the 9th December 1917, Tufail Ahmed and Muhammad Wasi on t...
Sheikh Muhammad Shakur and ors. Vs. Sheikh Abdul Ghani and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-02-1922
Reported in: AIR1923All362; 71Ind.Cas.369
Stuart, J.1. The learned Counsel for the appellants has taken me very carefully through he whole facts of the case, but he has not been able to satisfy me that the appeal can succeed in face of the findings of face. He took exception, in the first place, to what he suggest d was an improper admission of evidence by the lower Appellate Court. The learned District Judge wrote: 'One thing was wanting in the lower Court which, to some extent, is responsible for the lower Court's judgment, i.e., khasra showing corresponding plots. As it was a matter of Revenue Records I have accepted it now and accept the contention that the sir plots in question really appertained to the old khewat No. 16.'2. The learned Counsel would argue from these words that the learned District Judge had admitted improperly in evidence, in appeal, documents which had been rejected by the Trial Court. He has not, however, been able to point out to me that the learned District Judge admit ed any document in evidence whi...
Ramanand Shukul Vs. Chhotey Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-02-1922
Reported in: AIR1923All124; 71Ind.Cas.417
Piggott, J.1. This is a decree-holder's appeal arising out of the following circumstances: On the 5th of June 1917, Ramanand Shukul obtained a simple money-decree against Nageshar Pande. On the 30th of May 1920 within the prescribed period of limitation, Nageshar having died on some unspecified date during this interval, the decree-holder attached the ancestral family property in the hands of Chhotey Lal, son of Nageshar, and sought to bring it to sale in satisfaction of his decree. Chhotey Lal filed an objection saying that he knew nothing about the decree in question, that he was certain that his father had never executed any document in favour of Ramanand Shukul, that he was not bound by the terms of the decree obtained against his father only, and that Ramanand had recently been worsted in another litigation in which he had tried to make the objector, Chhotey Lal, liable upon a document alleged to have been executed by his father Nageshar. There was also a suggestion that the appli...
Rup Singh and anr. Vs. Bhullan Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-02-1922
Reported in: AIR1923All52; 71Ind.Cas.408
1. The only question for determination in this appeal is whether or not the Court below was, right in holding that the plaintiff-appellants had no right of pre-emption.2. It appears that the property, which forms the subject-matter of the suit, is situated in a certain village in which, undoubtedly the plaintiffs are co-sharers. It is apparent, however, that, sometime ago, a perfect partition was carried out in this village, the result of which was the erection of a number of mahals, and it is an admitted fact that, under the present constitution of the village, the property in dispute lies in a mahal in which the plaintiffs have no rights according to what was decided when the partition took place.3. The plaintiffs in the Court below relied upon the wajib-ul-arz which was prepared for the period from 1278 to 1307 Fasli. In this wajib-ul-arz it was, no doubt, provided that, in the last resort, persons, who were co-sharers in the village, were to have a right of pre-emption.4. We have a...
Raja Birj NaraIn Rai Vs. Babu Kedar Nath and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-02-1922
Reported in: AIR1923All57; 71Ind.Cas.836
1. The respondents to the present appeal are admittedly descended from a common ancestor. The, defendants-respondents Nos. 3 to 7 were indebted to some one in Calcutta and at the instance of the creditors were declared insolvents in 1912. The insolvents were residents of Ghazipur and owned property in the District of Ballia. Under the orders of the Insolvency Court their property situate in the District of Ballia was made over to the Official Receiver. The latter disposed of the property by private sale in favour of defendant-appellant, Raja Birj Narain Rai, on the 22nd September 1916. The deed was registered on the 30th September 1916. The plaintiffs respondents Nos. 1 and 2, who are minors, sued under the guardianship of their mother for the recovery of the said property on the ground of pre-emption.2. They alleged that they and the insolvents were descended from a common ancestor and were co-sharers in the property in which the share of the insolvents was sold by the Official Receiv...
Emperor Vs. Deo Dat
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-01-1922
Reported in: (1923)ILR45All166
Stuart and Ryves, JJ.1. Deo Dat Koeri, aged 46, has been convicted of the murder of a Kaharin woman, named Musammat Gauri, and sentenced to death. He has appealed. The record is also before us for confirmation of the death sentence passed on him.2. It appears that Musammat Gauri lived in Chunar, first of all with Sheobaran, after his death with Chhedi, and after Chhedi's death she continued to live in the shop which had been occupied by Chhedi, with the accused Deo Dat, and they together carried on a dairy business. -The woman seems to have been of loose character and, recently, she had formed an intimacy with a young man named Gajadhar. The accused undoubtedly became jealous of this, and there were frequent quarrels between her and the accused on the subject. This is borne put by the evidence of neighbours put forward by the prosecution! and whose evidence does not seem to admit of any doubt. The accused himself admits that he had no enmity with any one of them. The woman was last see...
Randhir Singh Vs. Udit NaraIn Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-01-1922
Reported in: (1923)ILR45All169
Rafiq and Piggott, JJ.1. The plaintiff in this case, Diwan Randhir Singh, is a landed proprietor, residing in the Jhansi district. Amongst his property we find certain, land in a village called Kerokhar, held by him, in what is described in this record, as an ubari tenure. We should have preferred to find on the record a little more evidence regarding the precise nature of this tenure and the conditions lo which it is subject. It would seem, however, that the tenure is something of the nature of a special grant from Government and that it is subject to resumption by Government under possible conditions, though what those conditions may be, is not made particularly clear. As long ago as the 9th of March, 1901, Diwan Randhir Singh borrowed a Sum of Rs. 5,500 from a caste-fellow of his own, Diwan Balbhadar Singh residing in the Hamirpur district. One of the few points on which the plaintiff has not, in the course of this litigation, contradicted previous admissions of his own, is the tact...
Deo Datt Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-01-1922
Reported in: AIR1923All90; 71Ind.Cas.54
1. Deo Datt Koeri, aged 46, has been convicted of the murder of a Kaharin woman, named Musammat Gauri, and sentenced to death. He has appealed. The record is also before us for confirmation of the death sentence passed on him.2. It appears that Musammat Gauri lived in Chunar, first of all, with Sheobaran, after his death with Chhedi and after Chhedi's death, she continued to live in the shop which had been occupied by Chhedi, with the accused Deo Datt, and they together carried on a dairy business. The woman seems to have been of loose character and, recently, she had formed an intimacy with a young man named Gajadhar. The accused undoubtedly became jealous of this, and there were frequent quarrels between her and the accused on the subject. This is borne out by the evidence of neighbours put forward by the prosecution and whose evidence does not seem to admit of any doubt. The accused himself admits that he had no enmity with any one of them. The woman was last seen alive up to 8 or 9...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »