Allahabad Court December 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. S.M. Bose
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-1923
Reported in: (1924)ILR46All218
Grimwood Mears, Kt., C.J.1. I am of opinion that this application in revision must be rejected. The facts are very simple. In November, 1919, Mr. Bose sent a prospectus to the Registrar, Joint Stock Companies, a memorandum and articles of association; and from those documents it appeared that five persons consented to be Directors of the Company, and as such had undertaken to take up 500 shares of Rs. 10 each. Three of those persons subsequently did discharge their obligations; but Raja Ram Gopal Singh of Manda and Goshain Rampuri never paid any sums due from them, and, beyond the fact that their names, were given out as Directors of the Company, they did nothing whatever. On the 10th of September, 1920, nearly a year after, Mr. Bose made a declaration, as required by statute, to the Registrar of Joint Stock Companies, With the object of inducing the Registrar to grant permission to allow the Company to commence business. In that declaration he stated: 'Every Director of the Company ha...
S.M. Bose Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-1923
Reported in: AIR1924All314; 77Ind.Cas.826
Grimwood Mears, C.J.1. I am of opinion that this application in revision must be rejected. The facts are very simple. In, November 1919 Mr. Bose sent a prospectus to the Registrar, Joint Stock Company, a memorandum and articles of association, and from those documents it appeared that five persons consented to be Directors of the Company, and as such had undertaken to take up 500 shares of Rs. 10 each. Three of those persons subsequently did discharge their obligations but Raja Ram Gopal Singh of Manda and Goshain Rampuri never paid any sums due from them and beyond the fact that their names were given out as Directors of the Company, they did nothing whatever. On the 10th of September 1920, nearly a year after, Mr. Bose made a declaration, as required by Statute, to the Registrar of Joint Stock Companies, with the object of inducing the Registrar to grant permission to allow the Company to commence business. In that declaration he stated 'Every Director of the Company has paid to the ...
Umed Singh Vs. Emperor Throug Uchhab Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-12-1923
Reported in: 77Ind.Cas.824
Stuart, J.1. The matter now before me has dragged on for nine months The facts can be stated very shortly. A certain Uchhab Singh of Kumaon tock water from the bands of a certain Uchhab and for so doing was put out of caste by a meeting of his caste-fellows. The claige is that the applicant Umed Singh told that men Sohan Singh, Nar Singh, and Balkrishan not to take water from tie hands of Uchhab Singh, as if they did so they would be liable to be put cut of caste. This statement has been found to be true. Uchhab Singh had taken water from the lands of Lachhi and had been put out of caste and anyone who took water from the hands of Uchhab Singh was liable to be put out of caste. On these allegations Umed Singh was found guilty of the offence of defamation and sentenced under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code to one month's imprisonment. He has already served this Sentence. The Magistrate in his judgment has laid stress on the fact that Umed Singh the applicant is a scheming busy body...
Dalganjan and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-12-1923
Reported in: AIR1924All696; 77Ind.Cas.881
Sulaiman, J.1. The present applicants have been convicted under Section 323 read with Section 147 of the Indian Penal Code. One Jalpa tenant was in possession of a certain mango grove in village Osa which belonged to the raja Sahed of Bara. On his death he left two step sons and a step daughter, who was married to a cousin of Thukurdin. It is found that Thakurdin was in possession of this grove about May 1923. He applied to the Raja Sahed for the grant of a lease of the crops to him; while that application was pending the Raja Saheb's sazawal auctioned the crops to one Rameshwar Kurmi and made a report with a recommendation that the lease to Rameshwar should be sanctioned. On the 10th of May the Raja Saheb accepted the lease in favour of Thakurdin and not Rameshwar. The sazawal after having been informed of this order put Thakurdin in actual possession of the crops. He did not, however inform Rameshwar of this. What next happened may well be described in the words of the learned Additi...
Gupta Nand Bharthi Vs. Hari Shanker and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-11-1923
Reported in: AIR1925All39
Sulaiman, J.1. This second appeal arises out of a suit brought for possession of the site of a house by removal of the materials standing thereon. The main question in the case was one of fact whether the plaintiffs were or were not the owners of the land. Both the Courts below have decreed the claim holding that the plaintiffs' title is fully established. The lower appellate Court has found as follows : 'From the voluminous documentary evidence referred to in the judgment of the lower Court it was conclusively proved that Plaintiff No. 1, who is Respondent No. 1, was the purchaser of all the rights of the appellant in Sarai Goshain, a Mohalla in which the house in dispute was situated and the Plaintiff No. 2 was the auction-purchaser of the rights of the other zemindar Tikam Bharti in this house and, therefore, neither the appellant nor the other zemindar had any right left in themselves in respect of the site or the materials.' It is contended on behalf of the defendant-appellant tha...
Mahant Gupta Nand Bharthi Vs. Hari Shankar and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-11-1923
Reported in: 78Ind.Cas.1016
Sulaiman, J.1. This second appeal arises out of a suit brought for possession of the site of a house by removal of the materials standing thereon. The main question in the case was one of fact whether the plaintiffs were or were not the owners of the land. Both the Courts below have decreed the claim holding that the plaintiffs' title is fully established. The lower Appellate Court has found as follows: 'From the voluminous documentary evidence referred to in the judgment of the lower Court it was conclusively proved that plaintiff No. 1, who is respondent No. 1, was the purchaser of all the rights of the appellant in Sarai Goshain, a Mohalla in which the house in dispute was situated, and the, plaintiff No.2 was the auction-purchaser of the rights of the other zemindar Tikam Bharti in this house and, therefore, neither the appellant nor the other zemindar had any right left in themselves in respect of the site or the materials.' It is contended on behalf of the defendant-appellant tha...
Bishunath Ojha Vs. Sheopragash Ojha and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-11-1923
Reported in: AIR1924All842; 78Ind.Cas.1043
Mukerji, J.1. The question for determination in this Second Appeal is whether a certain petition filed in the Revenue Court on 22nd December 1914 in a mutation proceeding is admissible in evidence, and, if so, whether it gives the appellant the property which he claims.2. The question has to be decided with reference to the peculiar facts of this case, having regard, of course, to the principles laid down in various cases by this High Court.3. It appears that on the death of Musammat Udha, the widow of one Monohar Ojha, certain persons, including the appellant, claimed title. Applications were made in the Revenue Court. It does not appear clearly on what ground the present appellant claimed. The compromise in question was filed. This compromise will be examined later on. It will be sufficient here to mention that by this compromise the parties to it aeked the Revenue Court to record the names of themselves in certain shares. An order was made in accordance with the compromise. But it a...
Ganeshi Lal Vs. NobIn Chandra Bose and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-05-1923
Reported in: AIR1925All36
1. The property claimed by the plaintiff-appellant is 5/6ths of a certain property once owned by one Mt. Chanda. She mortgaged the whole of it in 1914 and died a year later. She left her surviving two heirs, her mother Mt. Nasiban and her son Siddiq. The son was a minor. The mother sold the entire property in 1915 to the respondent No. 1 in this appeal for a sum of Rs. 500. She received in cash a sum of Rs. 100 and left with the transferee the sum of Rs. 400 for the purpose of payment of the mortgage which had been executed by Mt. Chanda in 1914. Siddiq attained majority some time is 1919 and in 1921 sold the property to the appellant. The appellant brought the suit out of which this appeal has arisen for recovery of 5/6ths of the property being the share of Siddiq ia it.2. The Court of first instance held that the appellant was entitled to recover the 5/6ths of the property but subject to payment of 5/6ths of the sum of Rs. 400 that went to pay off the mortgage created by Mt. Chanda.3...
Babu Ram Vs. Musammat Kokla
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-05-1923
Reported in: (1924)ILR46All210
Stuart and Mukerji, JJ.1. This is an appeal by a husband whose suit for restitution of conjugal rights has been dismissed by the lower appellate court. The learned District Judge not having decided certain points, we propose to decide them ourselves under the provisions of Section 103 of the Code of Civil Procedure. These are the facts as we find them. The appellant is a Brahman. Many years ago he turned his wife out of doors stating that he suspected her chastity. The woman went to live with her uncle, who supported her. She then applied to the Criminal Court for a maintenance order under Section 488 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and she obtained an order awarding her sufficient maintenance. It is to he noted that under the law she could not have received maintenance if without sufficient reason she refused to live with her husband or if they were living separately by mutual consent. The plaintiff has admitted that when the maintenance proceedings were in progress before the Magis...
Hira Lal Vs. Khairati Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-05-1923
Reported in: AIR1924All360; (1924)ILR46All211; 78Ind.Cas.1037
Grimwood Mears, Kt., C.J. and Piggott, J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment of the Subordinate Judge of Aligarh. The action was one brought by Hira Lal for specific performance of an agreement, Khairati Lal being the defendant. The plaintiff and defendant each had a certain share in a house in mohalla Dhusaran in Aligarh. They had frequent quarrels and those quarrels brought them to the criminal courts, and it appears that when the Deputy Collector was investigating or about to investigate one of those criminal complaints, it was suggested that as these parties could not live pleasantly in close proximity to each other, it would be a very good thing if one sold his share of the house to the other and removed himself to a distance. That view seemed, in the circumstances, to both of them to be a wise thing to do, and on the 4th of September, 1919, when the parties were before a Magistrate of the second class, they agreed that one Sohan Lal, a pleader, should act in preparing an estim...