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.
Emperor Vs. Kunwar Jaswant Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-16-1923
Reported in: (1924)ILR46All137
Kanhaiya Lal, J.1. This is an application asking the Court to set aside an order of committal under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code. Section 298 requires that the order of committal should not be passed till the Magistrate has heard the complainant and taken such evidence as may be produced in support of the prosecution or on behalf of the accused. The complainant against the accused persons was originally made under Section 342 of the Indian Penal Code. After the evidence for the prosecution was heard and the statements of the accused persons were taken down, the Magistrate framed a charge against the accused, under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code without asking the accused whether they had any evidence to produce. After the charge was read over and explained to them, an application appears to have been made on their behalf, asking that certain witnesses should be summoned. That application is not on the record; but Mr. Dillon, who appears on behalf of the accused, has satis...
Kuar Jaswant Singh and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-16-1923
Reported in: AIR1924All317; 81Ind.Cas.112
Kanhaiya Lal, J.1. This is an application asking the Court to set aside an order of committal under Section 395 of the Penal Code. Section 208 requires that the order of committal should not be passed till the Magistrate has heard the complainant and taken such evidence as may be produced in support of the prosecution or on behalf of the accused. The complaint against the accused persons was originally made under Section 342 of the Penal Code. After the evidence for the prosecution was heard and the statements of the accused persons were taken down the Magistrate framed a charge against the accused under Section 395 of the Penal Code without asking the accused whether they had any evidence to produce. After the charge was read over and explained tothem an application appears to have been made on their behalf, asking that certain witnesses should be summoned. That application is not on the record; but Mr. Dillon, who appears on behalf of the accused has satisfied the Court from a certif...
Nagina Rai Vs. Sangam Rai and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-15-1923
Reported in: AIR1925All67
Sulaiman, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of a suit for recovery of possession of a plot of land and a clump of bamboo trees. The Court of first instance decreed the suit but on appeal the suit has been dismissed.2. The main point which is raised in second appeal is that the finding of the lower Appellate Court that the plaintiff's claim was barred fey the principle of res judicata was not correct. What happened was that the present plaintiff used to live in Bengal far away from his village. In 1918 some of the present defendants brought a suit against the plaintiff's own brothers and uncle for the possession of the plot of land and certain trees including the property now in dispute. The members of the present plaintiff's family pleaded therein that the property then in suit belonged to their family. The suit was hotly contested and ultimately a decree was given to the plaintiff's relations. In that suit the present plaintiff was not impleaded at all.3. The reason probab...
Ram Prasad Vs. Sarab Sukh Das and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-15-1923
Reported in: (1924)ILR46All130
Lindsay and Kanhaiya Lal, JJ.1. The suit which has given rise to this appeal was instituted by the plaintiff respondent for the partition of a one-third share of certain property, comprising landed property, houses and movables. The parties are descended from one Sewa Ram, who died about 40 or 45 years ago, leaving two sons, Bhagwan Das arid Gobardhan Das. The plaintiff is the grandson of Bhagwan Das. His father, Dharam Das, died in 1904, while Bhagwan Das was alive. One of the defendants was Gobardhan Das, who died during the pendency of the suit. The other defendants were the descendants of Bhagwan Das.2. The allegation of the plaintiff was that the property in dispute was joint family property and that the defendants were refusing to make a partition. The defendants pleaded that the village Ram Dandi and gher No. 5 mentioned in the schedule attached to the plaint, were waqf property, endowed for the purpose of a temple to be constructed in the latter and that, excepting house No. 10...
Emperor Vs. Kamla Pati
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-15-1923
Reported in: (1924)ILR46All128; 81Ind.Cas.711
Stuart, J.1. It is not necessary to go into this application at great length. In the United Provinces Gazette of 16th of September, 1922, Part I, page 1016, there is a notification (No. 889/XIV--25) by which 713 acres in patti Ramgarh Malia Juthia village were disforested according to principles stated in paragraph 24(5) of the Grievances Committee report. It was a block of forest of less than 2 square miles which was added to the Eeserves by the 1911--1917 Forest Settlement. On the facts as stated by the District Magistrate of Naini Tal this particular area had formerly been 'protected forest' within the meaning of Chapter IV, Act VII of 1878, and in 1916 it had been removed from the category of 'protected forest' and placed in the category of 'reserved forest.' The learned Counsel for the applicant urges that on the passing of the notification it became either 'village forest,' or land in no way subject to the provisions of Act VII of 1878. I agree with the learned District Magistrat...
Nohar Ahir Vs. Pratab Ahir
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-15-1923
Reported in: AIR1924All231; 79Ind.Cas.367
Sulaiman, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit for joint possession of the plaintiff's share in certain tenancy lands.2. The main defence put forward on behalf of the defendant was that these lands were not joint tenancies at all but belonged exclusively to the defendant and that the plaintiff was the defendant's sub-tenant.3. The Court of first instance dismissed the plaintiff's suit but on appeal the decree has been set aside and the suit for joint possession decreed.4. It was admitted that, prior to the institution of the present suit in the Civil Court, the defendant No. 1 brought a suit in the Revenue Court for ejectment of plaintiff Pratab under Section 58 of the Agra Tenancy Act claiming that Pratab was his sub-tenant. So far as the record before me goes, there is nothing whatsoever to show what ultimately happened in the Revenue Court.5. Mr. Sastry on behalf of the defendant wanted to tender before me a certified copy of an order purporting to have been passe...
Musammat Faiz Bibi Vs. Qudrat Ullah and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-15-1923
Reported in: AIR1924All935; 78Ind.Cas.977
Stuart, J.1. The remand findings have now been received. They are to the effect that the deed in suit was executed during the death illness of Sadal Khan. Much that has been said by the learned District Judge who has arrived at the remand finding would go to show that Sadal Khan was not in a condition to know what he was executing on the date when the alleged deed of gift is said to have come into being. But it is not open to the Court to arrive at a decision to the effect that he was not in a condition to know what he had executed, in view of the finding of Mr. Hunter. That finding cannot be attacked in second appeal. On the remaining point, however, as to whether the deed is of no effect under the doctrine of Marz-ul-maut it is for this Court to arrive at a finding The deed was executed on the 23rd August 1919. From the copy produoed and from the evidence it appears that it was not signed by Sadal Khan but that it bore his thumb-impression. Sadal Khan died according to the plaintiff-...
Lala Sarab Sukh Das and ors. Vs. Ram Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-15-1923
Reported in: 78Ind.Cas.1018
1. The suit which has given rise to this appeal was instituted by the plaintiff-respondent for the partition of a one third share of certain property, comprising landed property, houses and moveables. The parties are descended from one Sewa Ram, who died about 40 or 45 years ago, leaving two sons, Bhagwan Das and Gobardhan Das. The plaintiff is the grandson of Bhagwan Das. His father, Dharam Das, died in 1904, while Bhagwan Das was alive. One of the defendants was Gobardhan Das who died during the pendency of the suit. The other defendants were the descendants of Bhagwan Das.2. The first question for consideration in this appeal is, whether the property in dispute was joint family property, and whether there had been any partition in the family at or about the time alleged by the defendants.3. The allegation of the plaintiff was that the property in dispute was joint family property and that the defendants were refusing to make a partition. The defendants pleaded that the villages, Ram...
Abdul Qaiyum Khan Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-14-1923
Reported in: AIR1925All99; 81Ind.Cas.116
Stuart, J.1. In this appeal there have arisen some points of difficulty. The main facts, however, present no difficulty. The appellant has been convicted of using as genuine a forged document in an audacious attempt to secure landed property which belonged to certain of his own relatives who reside at some distance from his village. The appellant is lambardar of his village. On the facts it is difficult to say whether one is more impressed by his moral obliquity or his extraordinary foolishness, He apparently thought that it would-be easy to obtain the fabrication of a sale-deed by which his absentee relatives purported to transfer some property in his village to his brother and by forging powers of attorney on behalf of the alleged vendors to obtain mutation of names in the Revenue Courts. As apparently he was already in actual possession of the property it is difficult to see why he wished to pile crime on crime to cover up what was presumably his previous dishonesty in misappropriat...
Sri Ram Mahadeo Vs. East Indian Railway Company
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-13-1923
Reported in: (1924)ILR46All125
Sulaiman, J.1. This is an application in revision arising out of a Small Cause Court matter. The plaintiff was the consignee of 126 bags, which were loaded at Kidderpur station and were despatched to Cawnpore. The waggon admittedly arrived at Cawnpore on the 27th of December, 1921, and the seals on the waggon were found intact. As the railway company had many other waggons to unload, this waggon was put on a siding and remained there for two days. On the 29th of December it was reported that the seals on one side of the waggon were broken. When the contents were checked, it was discovered that six bags were missing. After a lengthy correspondence, which came to nothing, the plaintiff instituted the present suit to recover damages for the loss of the bags.2. The railway company took several pleas in defence, but three main issues were framed by the trial court. The first was whether the risk-note absolved the defendant company of all liability or not. The second was whether the goods we...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »