Allahabad Court November 1923 Judgments
Sharif Ahmad Alwi Vs. Muhammad and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-30-1923
Reported in: (1924)ILR46All148
Lindsay and Sulaiman, JJ.1. This appeal raises a somewhat difficult question of interpretation in connection with the provisions of a certain wajib-ul-arz relating to pre-emption.2. According to what is stated in the wajib-ul-arz, an the occasion of a transfer, the first right to take the property is given to a class which is defined in the wajib-ul-arz as 'shurkayan shikmi.' In is provided that in case the members of the first class decline to accept the offer of the property then the offer is to be made to the second class of persons who are described as 'digar malikan thok o mahal ke.' A great deal of controversy has arisen regarding the meaning to be attached to the words 'shurkayan shikmi.' We have been referred to a decision of a Bench of this Court reported in Abdul Shakur v. Mendai (1901) I.L.R. 23 All. 260. In that case it was sought to attribute to the expression 'hissedaran shikmi' a meaning derived from blood relationship. In other words the suggestion was that hissedaran s...
Tag this Judgment!Babban Pande Vs. Lachhman Chaudhri and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-30-1923
Reported in: (1924)ILR46All205
Lindsay and Sulaiman, JJ.1. We cannot maintain the judgments of the courts below in this case. We think that the plaintiff was entitled to succeed and that it was established that a custom of pre-emption exists.2. The plaintiff brought into court extracts from the wajib-nl-arzes of 1833, 1860 and 1885 and he also claimed to have in support of his case a decree in which the right of pre-emption had been recognized.3. Clearly it lay heavily on the defendants to rebut this evidence led on behalf of the plaintiff.4. We have had a number of these Basti cases before us recently and it seems to us that the position regarding these wajib-ul-arzes in Basti and Gorakhpur is not properly appreciated by the courts there.5. It was brought to the notice of the learned judge of the court below in this case that the wajib-ul-arz prior to the year 1885 was a document of special importance.6. We have in other cases found it necessary to draw attention to the fact that in the Gorakhpur and Basti settleme...
Tag this Judgment!Babban Panday Vs. Lachhman Chaudhri and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-30-1923
Reported in: AIR1924All371; 79Ind.Cas.584
1. We cannot maintain the judgments of the Courts below in this case. We think that the plaintiff was entitled to succeed and that it was established that a custom of pre-emption exists.2. The plaintiff brought into Court extracts from the wajib-ul-arzes of 1833, 1860 and 1885 and he also claimed to have in support of his case a decree in which the right of pre-emption had been recognized.3. Clearly, it lay heavily on the defendants to rebut this evidence led on behalf of the plaintiff.4. We have had a number of these Basti cases before us recently and it seems to us that the position regarding these wijib-ul-arzes in Basti and Gorakhpur is not properly appreciated by the Courts there.5. It was brought to the notice of the learned Judge of the Court below in this case that the wajib-ul-arz prior to the year 1885 was a document of special importance.6. We have in other cases found it necessary to draw attention to the fact that in the Gorakhpur and Basti Settlement rules relating to the...
Tag this Judgment!Jawahir Lal Vs. Jarau Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-29-1923
Reported in: AIR1924All350; (1924)ILR46All192; 79Ind.Cas.861
Lindsay and Kanhaiya Lal, JJ.1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiff appellant for the recovery of possession of certain property and for an account of the profits thereof on the allegations that the said property belonged to Balmukand; that he was succeeded by his two daughters, Musammat Godavari and Musammat Gopi, and that on the death of Musammat Gopi, the entire property devolved on Musammat Godavari, the mother of the plaintiff. On the death of Balmukand, mutation of names was effected in respect: of the property left by him, in favour of Musammat Godavari and Musammat Gopi. Musammat Gopi died in Sambat 1935', leaving a son, Moti Lal, who died three years later. The defendant Jarau Lal is the son of Moti Lal; and the other defendants, Panna Lal and Hira Lal, are his grandsons.2. On the 31st of December, 1899, a partition is said to have been effected between Musammat Godavari and her sons, Jawahir Lal and Ganeshi Lal, on the one hand, and Jarau Lal, the grands...
Tag this Judgment!Emperor Vs. Kishan Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-29-1923
Reported in: (1924)ILR46All174
Stuart, J.1. After examining the evidence, I am of opinion that the conviction cannot be interfered with, but the sentence, as passed by the Sessions Judge, cannot stand. The appellant, who is a boy of 12, was convicted under Section 436 of the Indian Penal Code for having committed mischief by setting fire to a cow-shed in the hills and was sentenced, under the provisions of Section 5 (Act IV of 1909), to 15 stripes and also to a fine. Under Section 5 he could be punished with whipping in lieu of any other punishment to which 'he may for such an offence be liable.' If the sentence of whipping is passed, no other sentence can be passed, for the whipping is considered to be in lieu of either a single punishment or a combined punishment. This is clear from the words of the Section itself. A similar point arose in a Bombay case, Queen-Empress v. Dagadu (1891) I.L.R. 16 Bom. 357. It arose under the old Act XL of 1860. The words of the head-note, with some slight alteration, will apply to t...
Tag this Judgment!Kishun Singh Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-29-1923
Reported in: AIR1924All455; 81Ind.Cas.260
Stuart, J.1. After examining the evidence I am of opinion that the conviction cannot be interfered with, but the sentence, as passed by the Sessions Judge, cannot stand. The appellant, who is a boy of 12 was convicted under Section 436 of the Indian Penal Code for having committed mischief by setting fire to a cow-shed in the hills and was sentenced under the provisions of Section 5 (Act IV of 1909) to 15 stripes and also to a fine. Under Section 5 he could be punished with whipping in lieu of any other punishment to which he may for such an offence be liable. If the sentence of whipping is passed, no other sentence can be passed for the whipping is considered to be in lieu of either a single punishment or a combined punishment. This is clear from the words of the section itself. A similar point arose in a Bombay case, Queen-Empress v. Dagadu 16 B. 357 : 8 Ind. Dec. (N.S.) 716. It arosrf under the old Act VI. of 1864. The words of the head-note, with some slight alteration, will apply ...
Tag this Judgment!Emperor Vs. Gobind Ram
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-28-1923
Reported in: (1924)ILR46All146
Walsh and Ryves, JJ.1. The facts found or admitted in this case are that one Ram Chandar, which is alleged to be a pseudonym for Gobind Ram appellant, despatched from Kotah (a Native State) 111 bags of maize containing a large quantity of opium. The goods were addressed to the same name, Ram Chandar the consignee at Cawnpore, and arrived at Cawnpore in the train by which Gobind Ram and his servant travelled. He went to a dharamsala, and, being suspected of traffic in opium, he was there arrested and searched, and he was taken to the railway station where the truck containing the bags of maize was, and in his presence the truck was emptied and the maize examined and opium was discovered. In his possession was the railway receipt addressed by Ram Chandar in Kotah to Ram Chandar in Cawnpore. There cannot be the slightest doubt thafhe is the Ram Chandar indicated in the railway receipt. His possession of the railway receipt is almost conclusive on the subject, and no explanation has been t...
Tag this Judgment!The Municipal Board of Benares Vs. A.C. Mukerji and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-28-1923
Reported in: (1924)ILR46All175
Grimwood Mears, Kt., C.J. and Piggott, J.1. The suit out of which-this appeal arises was instituted by the Municipal Board of Benares against five defendants, the sons of one Jogesh Chandar Banerji, deceased, a man who had been for many years in the service of the said Municipal Board as head accountant. The plaint was signed and verified by Rai Bahadur A.C. Mukerji as Executive Officer of the Board. In the written statement filed by the defendants certain pleas were taken which, involved the suggestion that if any liability did attach to the late Jogesh Chandar Banerji, that liability was at least shared by certain superior officials in the employment of the Municipal Board, and more particularly by its Executive Officer. Upon this A.C. Mukerji addressed to the Chairman of the Municipal Board a letter, dated the 27th of August, 1922, which is to be found at page 199 of our record. He referred to the allegations made in the written statement of the defendants as allegations against him...
Tag this Judgment!Gobind Ram Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-28-1923
Reported in: AIR1924All558; 81Ind.Cas.100
1. The facts found or admitted in this case are that one Ram Chander, which is alleged to be a pseudonym for Gobind Ram appellant, despatched from Kotah Native State 111 bags maize containing a large quantity of opium. The goods were addressed to the same name, Ram Chander the consignee at Cawnpore, and arrived at Cawnpore in the train by which Gobind Ram and his servant travelled. He went to a dharamsala, and being suspected of traffic in opium he was there arrested and searched, and he was taken to the Railway Station where the truck containing the bags of maize was, and in his presence the truck was emptied and the maize examined and opium was discovered. In his possession was the Railway, receipt addressed by Ram Chander in Kotah to Ram Chander in Cawnpore. There cannot be the slightest doubt that he is the Ram Chander indicated in the Railway receipt. His possession of the Railway receipt is almost conclusive on the subject, and no explanation has been tendered, except the absurd ...
Tag this Judgment!A.C. Mukerji Vs. the Municipal Board
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-28-1923
Reported in: AIR1924All467; 80Ind.Cas.241
1. The suit out of which this appeal arises was instituted by the Municipal Board of Benares against five defendants, the sons of one Jogesh Chander Banerji, deceased, a man who had been for many years in the service of the said Municipal Board as Head Accountant. The plaint was signed and verified by Rai Bahadur A.C. Mukerji as Executive Officer of the Board. In the written statement filed by the defendants certain pleas were taken which involved the suggestion that, if any liability did attach to the late Jogesh Chander Banerji, that liability was at least shared by certain superior officials in the employment of the Municipal Board, and more particularly by its Executive Officer. Upon this A.C. Mukerji addressed to the Chairman of the Municipal Board a letter, dated August 27, 1922, which is to be found at page 199 of our record. He referred to the allegations made in the written statement of the defendants as allegations against himself, and asked the Board to place him in such a p...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »