Allahabad Court December 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.
Ghasi Ram Vs. Malony Club, Through Chiranji Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-05-1922
Reported in: 75Ind.Cas.603
Gokul Prasad, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit for ejectment ana recovery of Rs. 6-12 arrears of rent. The defence taken was that the defendant took a lease of the land from the Municipal Board on the 24th November 1898, and had built a pucca house on the land leased worth about Rs. 2,000 and had been in possession for 22 years. It was further contended that the notice given was one not in accordance with law. The tacts of the case are briefly as follows: The land originally belonged to Government. It was banded over to the Municipal Board later on and the Municipal Board leased the disputed land to the defendant. The Board then transferred the ownership to the plaintiff, the Malony Club, and the defendant was informed of this fact and continued paying rent to the Club. The so-called lease was for a period of thirty years at Rs. 4-8 a year, determinable on the failure of the defendant to pay rent or to give it up to the Municipality when required to do so. The pl...
Harihar Prasad Vs. Udai Nath Sah
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-04-1922
Reported in: (1923)ILR45All260; 74Ind.Cas.113
Piggott and Walsh, JJ.1. This appeal in an insolvency matter raises a pure question of law. The name of the insolvent is Champa Prasad and he was so adjudicated on the 21st of June, 1918. Champa Prasad's mother was one Ganeshi Kunwar, the daughter of one Durga Prasad. This gentleman died possessed of considerable property, which passed with a widow's estate to his widow, Musammat Mula Kunwar. This lady died in the month of December, 1919, and it is admitted that, thereupon, the property passed to Ganeshi Kunwar, also with the limited estate, of a Hindu widow. That lady, however, proceeded to execute at once a deed of gift conveying the whole estate to her grandson, Harihar Prasad, the son of the insolvent Champa Prasad, who joined with her in the execution of the document.2. On the death of Musammat Ganeshi Kunwar, the creditors of the insolvent, claimed to take this property as that of the insolvent Champa Prasad. On objection taken by Harihar Prasad, the insolvency court has gone int...
Raj NaraIn Mal and anr. Vs. Santi Lal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-04-1922
Reported in: AIR1923All203; 79Ind.Cas.85
1. This is an appeal in an execution matter. The difficulty which the Court below has felt is due to the fact that a procedure perfectly legal, but somewhat unusual, and in respect of which this Court has not seen fit to lay down any definite rules, was followed in connection with the execution of a mortgage-decree. Instead of patting up the mortgaged property for sale by auction in the usual way, the Court appointed a Receiver whom it authorised, by an order of the 17th of July 1915, to take all the properties covered by the decree into his possession and to make arrangements for selling the same for the highest price which he could obtain in respect of each of them. It was specially provided that before parting with an item of property he must report to the Court, stating the price offered, and obtain the sanction of the Court before he actually sold it. For some reason or other the Receiver's proceedings were much protracted and it was not until the 22nd of October 1917 that he ente...
Emperor Vs. Durga Prasad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-01-1922
Reported in: (1923)ILR45All258
Ryves, J.1. Durga Prasad, Kewal and Khalil-ur-Rahman have, been convicted, the former of keeping a common gaming house and the two latter of gambling. It appears that on information being given to the Superintendent of Police, he was satisfied that gambling was going on in a house rented by Durga Prasad and issued a warrant for a search. On a raid being made, a number of persons were found in the house making wagers on satta. A number of books were found in which the bets were recorded. At that time, it seems that this was the only form of wagering that was being carried on. On a search of the house, there is evidence that cards, dice and cowries were found somewhere. But these certainly were not being used. The court below has distinguished this case from, the case of Lachchi Ram v. Emperor (1922) 20 A.L.J. 218 by saying that it was not shown in that case that the owner was in the habit of charging commission.2. The evidence in this case is that the owner bet Rs. 9-8-0 to one against ...
Durga Prasad and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-01-1922
Reported in: 76Ind.Cas.969
Ryves, J.1. Durga Prasad, Kewal and Khalil-ur-Rahman have been convicted, the former of keeping a common gaming house and the two latter of gambling. It appears that on information being given to the Superintendent of Police, he was satisfied that gambling was going on in a house rented by Durga Parsad and issued a warrant for a search. On a raid being made, a number of persons were found in the house making wagers on satta. A number of books were found in which the bets were recorded. At that time, it seems that this was the only form of wagering that was being carried on. On a search of the house, there is evidence that cards, dice and cowries were found somewhere. But these certainly were not being used. The Court below has distinguished, this case from the case of Lachchi Ram v. Emperor 65 Ind. Cas. 852 : 20 A.L.J. 318 : (1922) A.I.R. (A.) 61 : 23 Cr. L.J. 196 by saying that it was not shown in that case that the owner was in the habit of charging commission.2. The evidence in this...
Gaya Prasad and anr. Vs. Methai Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-01-1922
Reported in: 75Ind.Cas.624
Gokul Prasad, J.1. The facts are as follows:Ode Beni owned two houses. He died leaving a widow, Ram Dei, the stepmother of his son Mata Ghulam, who survived him. After the death of Mata Ghulam. Sheo Pal, his uncle, is said to have get the property as his heir. on the 6th of July 1918 Sheo Pal sold the two houses to the plaintiff. One Amrit Lal obtained a money-decree from the Court of Small Causes against Sheo Pal and Ram Dei. The amount of this decree was recoverable from the assets of Beni. In execution of this decree he attached the houses purchased by the plaintiff. The plaintiff objected but his objections were disallowed on the 9th of August 1919. On the 24th of November 1919 Musammat Ram Dei sold the bouses to Gaya Prasad and Sattidin who paid off the amount of the decree. On the 9th of August 1920, that is, within a year from the date of the disallowance of his objection, the plaintiff brought the present suit for possession against Gaya Prasad and Sattidin, the purchasers. The...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›