Allahabad Court May 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.
Jamna Prasad and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-16-1923
Reported in: AIR1924All128; 73Ind.Cas.518
Kanhaiya Lal, J.1. This is a reference by the Sessions Judge of Mainpuri in a case in which certain persons have been convicted of an offence under Section 4 of Act No. III of 1867, and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 10 each. It appears that on the 18th of October 1922 the Superintendent of Police received credible information that a common gaming house was maintained by Puttu Lal, son of Changi Mal, by caste (sic), resident of Mainpuri. Put-tu Lal was employed as a miscellaneous clerk in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Mainpuri, but at that time he was on leave. The Suprintendent c f Police issued a warrant for the search of the house of Puttu Lal but omitted to get the boundaries of that house noted in the warrant or to enter to whom it was addressed. The caste of Puttu Lal was also misdescribed. The Sub-Inspector to whom the warrant in question was handed over waited for a suitable opportunity to make the search. On the 2nd of December 1922 he is (sic) to have received informa...
Mohan Singh Vs. Muhammad Mumtaz Ali Khan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-15-1923
Reported in: (1923)ILR45All419
Salvensen, J.1. The appellant in these two appeals which have been consolidated was the defendant in a separate suit brought by each plaintiff (respondent) for a declaration to the effect that he was an Tinder-proprietor of certain land situated in the village of Badhia Farid. This village forms part of the estate called the Bilaspur estate in the Gorida district of Oudh. The Munsif's Court granted to each plaintiff a declaratory decree in terms of the plaintiffs' prayer; these decrees were affirmed in appeal and the defendant obtained special leave to appeal to His Majesty in Council. There is no distinction between the two cases so far as the points in controversy are concerned and they may, therefore, be treated as one.2. There has, unfortunately, been a considerable amount of litigation between the defendant and the plaintiffs who have the rise or occupation of the land described. As far back as the year 1891 the defendant issued notices of ejectment under Sections 54 and 55 of the...
Emperor Vs. Tara and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-15-1923
Reported in: (1923)ILR45All633
Walsh, J.1. This is a very difficult case which has given us a great deal of trouble, and the results which probably involves a miscarriage of justice, but, speaking for myself, I have no doubt whatever as to the legal principles applicable to it, and as to the applicability of them to the peculiar circumstances of the various appellants before us. Now there are three cases, each of them involving a large number of alleged dacoits who were tried together for participation in three separate dacoities, committed at different times and at different places, but round about the same season and round about the same neighbourhood. Their connection arose more from the alleged co-operation of a large number of the accused in each of them, than from any other circumstance showing direct connection between the three dacoities. There were really Tour in all, and I desire to say at once, because I shall have something to say hereafter by way of criticism, that the police and the Sessions Judge were...
Har Prasad and anr. Vs. Raghubar Dayal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-14-1923
Reported in: AIR1924All62; (1923)ILR45All628; 74Ind.Cas.817
Walsh and Kanhaiya Lal, JJ.1. In this case, in the course of an application in execution to enforce a decree passed in terms of an award, the learned Judge has gone into the merits, and finding on the evidence that a mistake had been made in the demarcation of a dividing line as shown upon a map which became a part of the decree, he has endeavoured to amend the mistake by giving effect to what he considers the real intention of the arbitrators. It is quite clear that no execution court has any jurisdiction to do anything of the kind. It may be that by an unfortunate chapter of accidents, the decree-holder has suffered loss by reason of the decree not in fact representing the true intention of the arbitrators, and at first sight it may seem illogical for a court of justice to refuse to remedy a mistake of that kind, but when the matter is carefully considered, it is clear that no such critcism can really be made. The decision of arbitrators is final. If there is on the face of the award...
Musammat Manki Kunwar Vs. Gauri Shankar and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-14-1923
Reported in: (1923)ILR45All624
Grimwood Mears, C.J. and Piggott, J.1. In the lower court this was a suit for specific performance of a contract for sale embodied in a document, dated the 2nd of December, 1918. That document set forth that a dispute had arisen between Musammat Manki Kunwar and the defendant and other parties in like interest in relation to about 17 acres of land in mauza Lachipur. That land had been bought by Gauri Shankar a few years before. That land was the subject of a pre-emption suit brought by the present plaintiff, which at the date of this agreement of the 2nd of December, 1918, had been through two courts, and in each court had been decided adversely to the lady. At the date of this agreement there was an appeal pending in the High Court. With a view to put an end to the dispute relating to this land in mauza Lachipur, and also with a view to put an end to a rivalry between the parties with regard to certain land under the control of the Maharaja of Benares, they entered into the agreement ...
Bhagelu Vs. Dharma and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-14-1923
Reported in: AIR1924All79; (1923)ILR45All623
Ryves and Daniels, JJ.1. The facts out of which this appeal arises are as follows: Bhagelu brought a suit against Musammat D harm a .for restitution of conjugal rights, and, as Musammat Dharma was a minor, her uncle Sampat was made guardian ad litem. The trial court decreed the suit. An appeal was filed in the lower appellate court on behalf of the minor by the minor's father Manbodh. There had been no order removing Sampat from guardianship. The lower appellate court commented on the fact that although Sampat had been appointed guardian ad litem in the lower court, the appeal had been filed through Manbodh. In the result the court allowed the appeal and dismissed the suit.2. On appeal before us it has been urged that there was no valid appeal before the lower appellate court, and our attention was called to the recent decision of a Bench of this Court in Shambhu v. Kanhaya (1922) I.L.R. 44 All. 619 which is exactly in point. It was there held that where a guardian ad litem to a minor ...
Muhammad Iftikhar-ullah Vs. Banke Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-14-1923
Reported in: AIR1924All104; (1923)ILR45All630
Walsh and Kanhaiya Lal, JJ.1. This appeal arises out of an application made by the decree-holder respondent for the recovery of certain costs, awarded to him by an appellate decree of this Court, from the person of the judgment-debtors. It appears that the decree-holder obtained a preliminary decree for the sale of certain property against the present judgment-debtors and other persons, which provided that in the case of non-payment of the decretal money, including the costs awarded by the trial court, the mortgaged property was to be sold. From that decree some of the heirs of the original mortgagor appealed to this Court. Their appeal was unsuccessful and was dismissed, excepting in so far that the time for the payment of the money was extended; and the decree-holder respondent was awarded his costs as against them. The effect of the dismissal of the appeal with the modification mentioned above was that the decree of the trial court, as amended, merged in the decree of this Court, an...
Hardial Vs. Alam and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-14-1923
Reported in: AIR1924All459; 74Ind.Cas.177
Gokul Prasad, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of a suit for recovery of certain crops, or, in the alternative, the value thereof. The plaintiff's allegation was that he had sown wheat, lahi, and mustard in 4 bighas of alluvial land bearing No. 169, that the defendants Nos. 1 to 9, having colluded with the Patwari, the defendant No. 10, forcibly cut away the crops sown by the plaintiffs about the 20th of March 1941. The defendant No. 10 is the Patwari of the village and was to receive one-tenth of the crops to be appropriated by defendants Nos. 1 to 9. The plaintiff again sowed some wheat, etcetera, on another plot of 7 bighas but the defendants Nos. 1 to 9 in collusion with defendant No. 10 cut and removed the crops. The plaintiff, therefore, brings the suit for recovery of the grain removed by the defendants or Rs. 347 the value thereof.2. The defence of the defendants Nos. 1 to 9 was that they had been ploughing and sowing the field in question as it emerged from the ri...
Muhammad Afzal and ors. Vs. Muhammad Mahmood and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-14-1923
Reported in: 74Ind.Cas.343
1. The question raised by this appeal is whether a certain deed of the 27th of March 1880 was a waqf under Muhammadan Law, that is to say, a dedication of property for charitable and religious purposes, or was a gift in favour of certain specified individuals. Under the terms of the deed certain named persons' were to take the property becoming owners thereof immediately and they and their descendants after them were to enjoy the property for ever without any power to alienate. If it was in fact a transfer by way of gift in favour of these specified donees, then, as the Court below has rightly held, the condition against alienation fails and the descendants of the donees take the property with full ownership and power of alienation. If, on the other hand, the document in question is in law a deed of waqf other consequences follow. It is quite true that the word waqf is used in more than one place by the executant, in describing the document itself. On the other hand, there is nothing i...
Bhagelu Vs. Musammat Dharma and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-14-1923
Reported in: 75Ind.Cas.898
1. The facts out of which this appeal arises are as follows:--Bhagelu brought a suit against Musammat Dharma for restitution of conjugal rights and, as Musammat, Dharma was a minor, her uncle Sampat was made guardian ad litim. The Trial Court decreed the suit. An appeal was filed in the lower Appellate Court on behalf of the minor by the minor's father Mahbodh. There had been no order removing Sampat from guardianship. The lower Appellate Court commented on the fact that, although Sampat had been appointed guardian ad litem in the lower Court, the appeal had been filed through Manbouh. In the resule, the court allowed the appeal and dismissed the suit.2. On appeal before us it has been urged that there was no valid appeal before the lower Appellate Court and our attention was called to the recent decision of a Bench of this Court in Shambhu v. Kanhaya 75 Ind. Cas. 457 : 44 A. 619 : 20 A.L.J. 599 : (1922) A.L.R. (A.) 332, which is exactly in point. It was there held that, where a guardi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »