Allahabad Court November 1924 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.
(Babu) Madho Dass and anr. Vs. His Highness the Maharajah of Benares
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-25-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All252; 84Ind.Cas.521
Daniels, J.1. This is a revision against an order refusing to restore a case which had been decided on the merits under Order 17, Rule 3. The point taken in revision is that the Court should have decided the case ex parte under Order 17, Rule 2. The defendant had taken time for framing of issues, and on the date finally fixed he did not appear. The plaintiff was present. The Court framed issues took evidanca on behalf of the plaintiff, and decided the case on that evidence. The learned Judge of the Court below has held that as the Trial Court in fact decided the case on the merits under Order 17, Rule 3, his remedy was by way of appeal. That decision is in accordance with the decision of a Bench of this Court in the case of Nasir Khan v. Itwari A.I.R. 1924 All. 144. There the rule was laid down that the right of appeal does not depend on what a Court ought to have done, bat on what it actually did. If the Court actually decided a case on the merits, then the remedy of the aggrieved per...
Nagar and ors. Vs. Khase and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-25-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All440
Sulaiman, J.1. This is a defendants' appeal arising out of a suit for recovery of possession filed by the plaintiffs who alleged themselves to be the reversioners of the last male owner.2. The facts found by the Court below are that the property belonged half and half to two brothers Gopal and Dewan. Mt. Nanhi was first the wife of Gopal. Gopal died some 30 or 32 years ago. On his death Mt. Nanhi became the karao wife of his brother Dewan. The judgments do not exactly say when Dewan died but the oral evidence is that he died one or two years after the death of Gopal. It therefore seams that the death of Dewan must have taken place not later than 1889 when certain compromise was arrived at between the reversioners. Mt. Nanhi made two mortgages in 1890 which the present plaintiffs now seek to avoid on the ground that they were not binding on thorn for want of any legal necessity.3. The Court below appears to have believed that among Jats to which caste the parties belong there is a preva...
Thakur Rudrapal Singh and ors. Vs. Matabadal Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-25-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All484; 85Ind.Cas.480
Mukerji, J.1. This appeal presents only a question of Jaw for determination, the facts being all admitted.2. The history of the ease is briefly this. There was a mortgage by father and son Earn Saran Singh and Mahadeo in favour of the predecessor-in-title of the defendants. Mahadeo brought a suit for redemption after having deposited in Court the full amount of the mortgage money, viz., a sum of Rs. 100, under Section 83 of the Transfer of Property Act. Evidently because the mortgagees did not withdraw the money from Court, Mahadeo brought a suit for redemption and a decree was spassed in his favour on the 26th of June, 1918. The language of the decree is important and is as follows:That the suit for possession by redemption >of the mortgage get up by the plaintiff be decreed and the claim for mesne profits up to the date of the suit be dismissed. The plaintiff will get pendente lite and future mesne profits, the amount of which will be determined in the execution department, If the am...
Bechan Teli Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-25-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All614
Daniels, J.1. This is a reference by the learned Sessions Judge of Ghazipur recommending this Court to quash an order passed against Bechan Teli under Section 137 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Deputy Magistrate found that Bechan Teli had built a wall which had encroached on a public lane to the extent of twelve inches and directed him to demolish his wall to that extent. Notice under Section 133 was duly issued against Bechan and he was required to appear and show cause. He put in a written statement alleging that he had merely rebuilt his wall on the old foundation and that he had made no encroachment. He said that only his neighbour Jaikaran against whom proceedings were also taken had made an encroachment. The Deputy Magistrate very properly inspected the spot on 29th July. Ho records in his order that on that day he directed the parties to produce their evidence on the next day. On 31st July neither party produced any evidence and the Deputy Magistrate made his order absol...
Gulab Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-25-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All667
Daniels, J.1. This is an appeal against an order passed under Section 476-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the learned Sessions Judge of Farrukhabad, directing the prosecution of the appellant Gulab for an offence under Section 211 of the Indian Penal Code. The facts are as follows.2. On 28th November 1923, Gulab filed a complaint against a Sub-Inspector under Section 165, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. His ease was that he possessed a very fine pair of bullocks, that the Sub-Inspector had tried to get these bullocks from him, and that as he would not give them to the Sub-Inspector the Sub-Inspector had caused his house to be searched and instituted various proceeding against him. The Deputy Magistrate before whom the complaint was filed, after recording evidence under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, dismissed it under Section 203. His order clearly shows that ho considered the complaint to be false and got up. He did not, however, at that time take any stop...
Mahadeo Prasad and anr. Vs. Sooraj Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-25-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All682; 85Ind.Cas.704
Mukerji, J.1. A preliminary objection has been taken that no second appeal is competent. In order to answer this plea it will be necessary to see what was to nature of the suit.2. Briefly, the plaintiffs' case was this. They are minors. Their father purchased certain property and entrusted the management of the same to the defendant who is the maternal uncle of the plaintiffs. The father advanced certain sums of money from time to time to the defendant in order that the same might be lent to the tenants. The father died in September, 1918. The defendants refused to render an account of the moneys that he received and realised, sometime in 1921, hence the suit.3. It appears to me that on the allegations made in the plaint the suit was one for accounts and was, therefore, exempted from the cognizance of the Small Cause Court by Article 31 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act. It is clear that, if the defendant can satisfactorily explain what he did with the money there will be no dec...
Banwari Lal Vs. Municipal Board of Cawnpore
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-24-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All276
Daniels, J.1. This application arises out of a claim by the applicant who was at one time employed by the Municipal Board of Cawnpore for certain arrears of pay to which he says he was entitled. The suit has been dismissed by the Small Cause Court on the ground that it was beyond the period of six months limitation provided by Section 326(3) of the U.P. Municipalities Act. It is not now contended that that section does not apply, and the section has been applied in a similar case in Abdul Wahid v. The Municipal Board A.I.R. 1923 All. 267. The contention pressed before me is that the cause of action really arose on 14th May, 1923, which was within limitation, the suit having been originally filed on 13th October, 1923, though it was returned for presentation and subsequently presented to the proper Court on a later date. The date when the plaintiffs' service ceased was 18th November, 1922, and this was given as his cause of action in the plaint as originally framed. On 23rd January, 192...
Laijam Singh Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-24-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All405
Walsh, J.1. This is an appeal by one Laijam Singh against a conviction for dacoity, which, if true, discloses a bad case, inasmuch as he was apparently one of the ring-leaders in a dacoity in which something like 15 men are alleged to have taken part, in which a considerable amount of loot was obtained, and in which one prominent man was possessed of a gun. Three out of the 4 assessors thought the ease was proved, but in a case of this kind they are not unlikely to be influenced by the view of the learned Judge who was satisfied with the evidence. Together with the appeal, an application in revision has been filed by the Goverment Advocate raising the question of the section under which the conviction was passed, and of the comparatively light sentence having regard to the fact that the accused was armed with a gun which he fired during the dacoity if his guilt is established. It is possible that the learned Judge was inclined to take a lenient course because, as he expressed it, it wa...
Ram Prasad Singh and ors. Vs. Babu Lal Sonar and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-21-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All417
Sulaiman, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit for recovery of possession by means of redemption of a mortgage, dated the 10th of January, 1912, executed by one Mt. Bhagwanti. The plaintiff claimed to be the nearest reversioner of Mt. Bhagwanti's son Ram Nandan. The property in dispute is a fixed rate tenancy which would devolve as land. Both the Courts below have decreed the claim. I am not now concerned in appeal with the question as to how much of the mortgage money was for legal necessity.2. The main point which has been urged In the course of argument by the learned Vakil for the appellants is that the lower Appellate Court has conceded that Mt. Bhagwanti was the step-mother of Ram Nandan. His argument, therefore, is that she was not the legal heir under the Hindu Law of the estate of Ram Nandan and the estate in her hands was not a Hindu widow's estate. It is, therefore, urged that the mortgage made by her was made by a trespasser and the plaintiff cannot succe...
In Re: Rameshwar Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-21-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All501
1. We have read the reference of the Board of Revenue in this case. Our opinion is that the document which was executed on the 14th of January, 1924, by Rameshwar Prasad is sufficiently stamped.2. The document is an agreement upon which stamp duty is leviable under Schedule I, Article 5, of the Indian Stamp Act as amended by the United Provinces Stamp (Amendment) Act, 1923.3. According to Clause (c) of Article 5, the duty on the document would under this amended schedule, be 12 annas. We are told that the document was stamped with a one rupee stamp. It is clear, therefore, that the document was sufficiently stamped. We cannot accept the view that this 'document of the 14th of January, 1924, is a fresh mortgage. It is merely an agreement whereby, in consideration of Rameshwar Prasad the mortgagor's promising to pay an enhanced rate of interest, the mortgagee agrees to extend the period of the mortgage.4. Let this answer be returned to the reference....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »