Allahabad Court November 1923 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.
Khan Muhammad Khan Vs. Zamani Begam and Asghari Begam
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-21-1923
Reported in: (1924)ILR46All142
Lindsay and Sulaiman, JJ.1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit for pre-emption. The right of preemption was originally based both on an alleged custom and on the Muhammadan Law. Both the courts below have found that the existence of custom has not been established in this case. That finding is in no way challenged in appeal and must, therefore, be accepted as final.2. On the question of the applicability of the Muhammadan Law, the court of first instance was of opinion that the demands required by that law were not fully complied with. It accordingly dismissed the suit. On appeal, the learned District Judge has come to a contrary conclusion and has held that there has been no flaw in the performance of the necessary conditions.3. In appeal four points have been urged as showing that the demands were not in accordance with the requirements of the Muhammadan Law.4. The first is that the demands were made before the actual registration of the sale-deed in question.5. The s...
Gadodia and Co. Vs. the Great Indian Peninsula Railway Company
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-21-1923
Reported in: AIR1924All254; (1924)ILR46All161
Grimwood Mears, Kt., C.J. and Piggott, J.1. On the 30th of April, 1919, the plaintiff, through his agent, tendered to the defendant company 5 bales of cotton tussore to be carried from Sholapur to Cawnpore.2. Over some portions of their railway the defendant company carry goods at a reduced or 'owner's risk' rate. It appears quite clearly that whilst the company had an established owner's risk rate from Sholapur to Itarsi, they had published no such rate between Itarsi and Cawnpore and no consignors of goods between these two latter stations could require the company to carry them at owner's risk. The goods would go via Itarsi to Cawnpore. The consignor signed an owner's risk-note by which he agreed to hold the company free from, responsibility in a number of contingencies. The Subordinate Judge has found that in fact the consignor paid a total sum made up of the reduced rate from Sholapur to Itarsi and of the ordinary rate from Itarsi to Cawnpore. The figures are not mathematically ex...
Puran Singh Vs. Dat Ram and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-21-1923
Reported in: AIR1924All447; (1924)ILR46All165
Lindsay and Sulaiman, JJ.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of a suit for pre-emption. Under a sale deed, dated the 1st of March, 1920, certain plots, described therein as sir plots, within the zamindari of the executant were sold to the vendee. A suit was brought to pre-empt the sale by enforcement of the right of pre-emption. Various pleas were taken in the written statement; but at the time when issues were framed by the first court, the denial of the existence of custom does not seem to have been pressed, with the result that there was no issue framed as regards the existence or non-existence of a custom of pre-emption. The learned Munsif, in his judgment, did not deal with this matter at all. The suit was decreed. On appeal, the defendants raised before the lower appellate court the point, that the wajib-ul-arz on which reliance was placed by the plaintiff did not apply to the sale in question. The learned District Judge, relying on the cases of Ishri v. Thakur Din Weekly...
Purun Singh Vs. Dat Ram and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-21-1923
Reported in: 79Ind.Cas.645
1. This is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of a suit for pre-emption. Under a sale-deed dated the 1st of March 1920 certain plots described therein as sir plots -within the Zemindari of the executant were sold to the vendee. A suit was brought to preempt the sale by enforcement of the right of pre-emption. Various pleas were taken in the written statement but at the time when issues were framed by the first Court the denial of the existence of custom does not seem to have been pressed, with the result that there was no issue framed as regards the existence or nonexistence of a custom of pre-emption. The learned Munsif in his judgment did not deal with this matter at all. The suit was decreed. On appeal, the defendants raised before the lower Appellate Court the point, that the wajib-ul arz on which reliance was placed by the plaintiff, did not relate to the sale in question. The learned District Judge, relying on the cases of this Court reported in Saheb Ram v. Kishen Singh A.W.N. (18...
Musammat Zamani Begam Vs. Khan Muhammad Khan and Musammat Asghari Bega ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-21-1923
Reported in: 81Ind.Cas.586
1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit for pre-emption. The right of pre-emption was originally based both on an alleged custom and on the Muhammadan Law. Both the Courts below have found that the existence of custom has not been established in this case. That finding is in no way challenged in appeal and must; therefore, be accepted as final.2. On the question of the applicability of the Muhammadan Law the Court of first instance was of opinion that the demands required by that law were hot fully complied with. It accordingly dismissed the suit. On appeal, the learned District Judge, has come to a contrary conclusion and has held that there has been no flaw in the performance of the necessary conditions.3. In appeal four points have been urged as showing that the demands were not in accordance with the requirements of the Muhammadan Law.4. The first is that the demands were made before the actual registration of the sale-deed in question.5. The second is that there was ...
Ganesh Singh Vs. Jai Mangal Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-21-1923
Reported in: AIR1924All723; 84Ind.Cas.1017
1. These two appeals have been heard and argued together and are to be decided on one common ground. The question in both cases is whether the existence of the custom of pre-emption was established. The lower Appellate Court has held that the custom was established and it has given a decree for pre-emption accordingly.2. It is now argued before us that the evidence upon which the learned Judge relied in his finding was not adequate to establish the existence of the custom alleged.3. We may say at once that the case in many respects resembled a case which was reported in Sarju Rai v. Bhuinlot Misir 11 Ind. Cas. 258 : 8 A.L.J. 947.4. The principal piece of evidence upon which the plaintiffs took their stand was a wajib-ul-arz prepared in the year 1860. It is admitted before us that no wajib-ul-arz for the Settlement of 1833 was before the Court.5. We start, however, with this wajib-ul-arz of 1860 and on the principles which govern all the decisions in matters of this kind it must be pres...
Sat NaraIn Vs. Sarju
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-21-1923
Reported in: 83Ind.Cas.350
Stuart, J.1. These are three applications by which the High Court is asked to transfer cases pending before a pan-Ghayai constituted under Local Act VI of 1920 from the panchayat seised with hearing the cases to some other Court or panchayat competent to entertain the same. The applicants applied to the ' Collector, ' that is to say, to the Sub-Divisional Officer exercising the powers of a Collector under Section 74. He refused to interfere in. the matter on the ground of the vagueness of their allegations. In respect of the merits of the matter both my learned brother and myself are satisfied that there is no reason for interfering and these applications will be dismissed on the facts. But inasmuch as in the order of reference by which the matter came before us certain points have been raised as to our jurisdiction I consider it advisable to express my own opinion on the competence of the High Court to entertain such applications. It appears to me clear that a village panchayat consti...
Emperor Vs. Badlu Shah and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-20-1923
Reported in: (1924)ILR46All138
Stuart, J.1. This appeal has presented considerable difficulty owing to the fact that the Sessions Judge did not apply his mind to the question whether he had jurisdiction in respect of certain persons who were tried by him and owing to his having not considered with care the evidence in certain instances. The following facts are clear. Musammat Dulari, a girl of under sixteen years of age, was kidnapped from the lawful guardianship in the village at Rumasu, in the Bndaun district, by two men Dungar and Badlu Shah. These men took her by train to Kasganj, Etah district, where they met two other men called Hari Singh and Ahsan, and the four men took the girl to Karnal district in the Punjab to the house of a woman called Dallu. The Sessions Judge convicted Dungar of an offence under Section 366 on his plea of guilty. He convicted Badlu Shah of an offence under the same section. He convicted Badlu Shah, Hari Singh, Ahsan, Musammat Dallu and Ghafur of an offence under Section 368 of the In...
Badlu Shah and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-20-1923
Reported in: AIR1924All454; 81Ind.Cas.40
Staurt, J.1. This appeal has presented considerable difficulty owing to the fact that the Sessions Judge did not apply his mind to the question whether he had jurisdiction in respect of certain persons who were tried by him and owing to his having not considered with care the evidence in the certain instances. The following facts are clear. Musammat Dulari, a girl of under sixteen years of age, was kidnapped from the lawful guardianship in the village at Rumasu, in the Budaun District, by two men, Dungar and Badlu Shah. These men took her by train to Kasganj, Etah District, where they met two other men called Hari Singh and Ahsan, and the four men took the girl to Karnal District in the Punjab to the house of a woman called Dallu. The Sessions Judge convicted Dungar of an offence under Section 366 on his plea of guilty. He convicted Badlu Shah of an offence under the same section. He convicted Badlu Shah, Hari Singh, Ahsan, Musammat Dallu and Ghafur of an offence under Section 368 of t...
Mohammad Taqi Khan Vs. Dori and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-20-1923
Reported in: 78Ind.Cas.881
Kanhaya Lal, J.1. In this case certain issues were remitted by this Court on the 21st of June 1923. The effect of the findings on those issues is that the plaintiff is entitled to a decree for possession of the disputed land and for the removal of the construction made thereon by the defendants. The people of the village have evidently been using the land as a threshing floor for some time past. It was recorded as kharmangat or threshing floor in the khasra prepared at the last Settlement. They had, however, no right to construct an enclosure thereon and thereby to appropriate the whole land to their exclusive use. As held in Chatterpal v. Gajadhar Upadhya 25 Ind. Cas. 59, a tenant cannot enclose and construct a house upon a plot of open land in the abadi without the consent of the landlord, though he may have been using it for temporary purposes for a long time.2. The appeal is, therefore, allowed and the claim of the plaintiff decreed for possession of the disputed land and for the r...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »