Allahabad Court February 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.
Pandit Mohan Lal and anr. Vs. Ganga Prasad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-15-1922
Reported in: 71Ind.Cas.975
1. Prior to the hearing of these connected appeals a question has been raised by a petition presented to this Court from Mr. Sital Prasad, Vakil of Agra. It appears that there are two minors, Bala Prasad and Nanhe, whose interests are concerned in both these appeals. The Court having failed to find any other person fit and willing to act as their guardian for the purposes of these appeals, has appointed Mr. Sital Prasad, Vakil, to be such guardian. That gentleman appeals to us to make a proper order as to the costs to be incurred by him in order that he may, obtain the legal assistance necessary to the proper representation of the minors at the hearing of the appeals. We have been asked to consider whether such order can properly be made by us under Order XXXII, Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure. We are clearly of opinion that a Vakil of the Court is an officer of that Court for the purposes of this rule, and that, therefore, we have jurisdiction to make the order prayed for.2. We ...
Bohra Birbal Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-10-1922
Reported in: 65Ind.Cas.864
Ryves, J.1. For the reasons given by the learned Sessions Judge, I accept the reference, acquit the accused and direct that the fine, if paid, be refunded....
Mohammad Shafi Vs. Babu Bindeshari Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-10-1922
Reported in: 70Ind.Cas.483
Walsh, J.1. I agree with the judgment of the Court below. I think this is an action for trespass and for possession of the land. The plaintiff was prepared to allow the defendants to remove the trees. That is not the same thing as an action for removal of the trees. The learned Judge below has decreed possession. So far as the suit for possession is concerned, the period is twelve years. The defendants set up title and claimed adverse possession. I think the planting of trees one another person's land is an active trespass and, certainly, the owner is entitled to treat it as such if he wishes. The period is twelve years. I do not think Musharf Ali v. Iftkhar Hussain 10 A. 634 : A.W.N. (1888) 257 : 6 Ind. Dec. (N.S.) 427 applies. I have great doubts whether I should agree, with it, if it did. The appeal is dismissed with costs....
Musammat Purna Kuar and ors. Vs. Mangat Rai and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-10-1922
Reported in: 70Ind.Cas.488
1. The only question which has been raised by the appellant in this case is, whether the claim of the plaintiffs is time-barred. The facts are that certain property belonged to one Rehari Rai who died leaving a widow, Musammat Phuljhari, and two daughters, Jumna and Purna. Musammat Phuljhari executed a deed of gift in favour of Musammat Purna. She died in 1906, and upon her death Musammat Jumna brought a suit against Musammat Purna for her half share of the property left by her deceased father. She obtained a decree against Musammat Purna on the 21st of January 1908 and in execution of that decree she obtained formal possession on the 6th of May 1908. After this, Musammat Jumna made a usufructuary mortagage in favour of the present plaintiff. Musammat Purna brought a suit for pre-emption in respect of the usufructuary mortgage and obtained a decree. She then transferred her rights under the decree to one Ram Chander and Ram Chander conveyed those rights to the present plaintiffs. The p...
Makhan Lal and anr. Vs. Suraj Prasad and
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-09-1922
Reported in: (1922)ILR44All382
Piggott, J.1. The suit out of which this appeal arises was brought to enforce a mortgage-deed of the 7th of June, 1906. The executants were Reoti Prasad, his step-mother Musammat Man Kunwar and his brother's widow Musammat Hukam Kunwar. It is fully established, and has been practically admitted before us in argument, that the whole of the property affected by the mortgage was the property of Reoti Prasad. The ladies concerned were simply living with him as female members of a joint undivided Hindu family in the enjoyment of their right of maintenance. It so happened, however, that their names had been shown in the village papers in respect of fractional shares in the property. On the case as admitted before us, we must take it that these entries had in fact been made as a mere formality out of consideration for the feelings of the two widows, and that the property was Reoti Prasad's. The consequence, however, was that the mortgagee, before entering into the transaction, insisted upon e...
Suraj Prasad Vs. Makhan Lal and anr. and Musammat Kamla Devi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-09-1922
Reported in: AIR1922All51; 66Ind.Cas.134
Piggott, J.1. The suit cut of which this appeal arises was brought to enforce a mortgage-deed of the 7th of June 1906 The executants were Reoti Prasad, his step-mother, Musammat Man Kunwar, and his brother's widow, Musammat Hukam Kunwar. It is fully established, and has been practically admitted before us in argument, that the whole of the property affected by the mortgage wag the property of Reoti Prasad. The ladies concerned were simply living with him as female members of a joint undivided Hindu family in the enjoyment of their right of maintenance. It so happened, however, that their names had been shown in the village papers in respect of fractional shares in the property. On the ease, as admitted before up, we must take it that these entries had in fact been made as a mere formality out of consideration for the feelings of the two widows and that the property wag Reoti Prasad's. The consequence, however, was that the mortgage, before entering into the transaction, insisted upon e...
Babua Singh and ors. Vs. Angnu Kewat
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-09-1922
Reported in: AIR1922All31; 66Ind.Cas.527
1. Under Section 435, Clause (3), I am precluded from interfering in revision in a matter under Section 145, Criminal Procedure Code. It is, however, contended that this is not a proceeding contemplated by that section, because it is aid that there is no finding that there was any likelihood of a breach of the peace. It is true that there is no finding directed to this fact, but the notice shows that the Magistrate was satisfied that there was a serious dispute between the parties and, in consequence, ha issued the notice, and in the judgment it appears that there is a quarrel between the parties with reference to the possession of several plots of land. I cannot say that this is not a proceeding contemplated by Section 145, Criminal Procedure Code, I, therefore, cannot interfere. The application is rejected....
Jagannath Singh Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-08-1922
Reported in: 66Ind.Cas.422
1. The accused, Jagannath Singh, has been convicted of the murder of a woman called Radhika Kunwar and also on a charge of having poisoned Radhika Kunwar. There can be no doubt as to the fact that the appellant's conduct has been most suspicious. This woman, who was a widow, was his mistress and the mother of his illegitimate child. He had been put out of caste owing to his connection with her. On the 2nd of November she was seen at midday sitting outside her door vomitting and purging, and she attributed her illness to something which the appellant had given her to eat. She retired later inside the house and got worse. She stated that the appellant had given her vinegar, which was making her worse, Later on, she was heard screaming. Finally, she was found dead. The appellant cremated her body with all the speed that was possible. In her room were found two pieces of rope stained with human bleod and to which were adhering human hair. Further, bajra cakes containing arsenic were found ...
Prag NaraIn Vs. Angad and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-07-1922
Reported in: AIR1922All55; 70Ind.Cas.495
Stuart, J.1. The defendants were, at the time of the suit, tenants cultivating seven plots. They have cultivated these plots, on the facts, for 20 continuous years. They had thus acquired a right of occupancy in the holding under Section 11, Act II of 1901. The learned District Judge appears to have formed the conclusion that they are not occupancy tenants because they had not claimed to be occupancy tenants. It is true that the patwari is still recording them as non-occupancy tenants, although he states that they have been cultivating the plots for twenty years. It is not shown that they have claimed occupancy rights, but this circumstance does not affect the fact that they are occupancy tenants, for the section clearly says that a tenant, who has held the same land continuously for a period of 12 years shall have a right of occupancy in the land. There is no necessity to claim this right. The right is created by continuous occupation for 12 years; It is thus the case that the defenda...
Debi Singh Vs. Pandit Bansidhar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-07-1922
Reported in: AIR1922All44; 66Ind.Cas.480
1. This appeal arises out of execution proceedings. Bansidhar got a decree on the 30th of January 1917 in a suit which he brought against Debi Singh describing him as a member of a joint family and heir of one Tej Singh, deceased, and claiming a certain sum of money as assets of Tej Singh in the hands of Debi Singh after Tej Singh's death. Debi Singh did not contest that suit and it was decreed expert. The decree was in terms of the prayer, namely, against the assets of Tej Singh in the hands of Debi Singh after Tej Singh's death. An application for execution of this decree was filed on the 23rd of January 1920 and certain property was attached. Debi Singh objected on the ground that he wa9 not the heir of Tej Singh but was his natural son born of a Brahmin woman who was living with Tej Singh and that, as far back as the 28th of January 1905. Tej Singh had made a gift of all the property of which he was then possessed and which had been attached. He, therefore, asked for the removal of...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »