Allahabad Court December 1924 Judgments
Sheopujan Misra and anr. Vs. Mangu Rai and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-23-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All324
Lindsay, J.1. This case has been decided by both the Courts below on a question of limitation. The finding of both the Courts is that the suit was filed beyond time, that is to say, more than one year beyond the date of the registration of the sale-deed.2. The sale-deed was registered at Ghazipur on the 6th of October 1921. Only a very small portion of the property comprised in the deed was situated in Ghazipur. The rest of the property is situated in Ballia.3. After registration at Ghazipur, the registration office at Ballia was informed of the registration and an entry was made by the Sub-Registrar of Ballia in his register on the 24th of November 1921.4. The plaintiffs-pre-emptors argued that limitation ran only from the 24th of November 1921, that is to say, the date on which the entry was made in the Ballia register, but we think both the Courts below were quite right in holding that limitation began to run from the 6th of October 1921. That undoubtedly was the date on which the s...
Tag this Judgment!Harakh Chand Vs. Ganga Prasad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-23-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All371
Kanhaiya Lal, J.1. His Lordship stated facts and after discussing evidence and holding that the plaintiff's statement as to the use of the filthy language by the defendants with reference to him in public was amply proved continued:The next question for consideration is how far the use of such language had lowered the plaintiff in the estimation of the people and caused him harm or damage and was defamatory. Mere verbal abuse, not tending to lower a man in the estimation of others or to bring him into obloquy, contempt or ridicule or to injure him in his profession or trade may not be actionable without special damage. An abuse may be uttered merely to cause an affront to the feelings of another or as an insult to his sense of dignity or self-respect without other persons knowing of it or without producing an impression in the minds of others hearing it prejudicial to his position or dignity. It may, however, be uttered in circumstances tending, if not vindicated, to lower the persons ...
Tag this Judgment!Lala Birj Lal Vs. Choudhuri Muhammad Ibrahim
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-23-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All824; 87Ind.Cas.713
Mukerji, J.1. The appellant in this case has my full sympathy, but I am unable to help him,2. It appears that the respondent's father, who was an ex-proprietary tenant, sub-let the holding to the appellant. The respondent brought the suit, out of which this appeal has arisen, for recovery of arrears of rent for three years. The defendant pleaded payment of five items and his plea of payment succeeded in the Court of first instance. On appeal the learned District -fudge has allowed only one item and has disallowed the remaining four. So far as the, question of fact is involved, viz. whether the appellant has succeeded in proving payment, this Court cannot entertain it. The only question before this Court is whether the two sums of Rs. 75 and Rs. 144-5-0, which were admittedly expended by the appellant, should have been given credit for.3. The abovementioned two items were paid in this way. The zamindar held decrees for rent against the ex-proprietary tenant. The non-payment of the decre...
Tag this Judgment!Sheopujan Misra and anr. Vs. Mahngu Rai and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-23-1924
Reported in: 86Ind.Cas.130
1. This case has been decided by both the Courts below on a question of limitation. The finding of both the Courts is that the suit was filed beyond time, that is to say, more than one year beyond the date of the registration of the sale-deed.2. The sale-deed was registered at Ghazipur on the 6th of October 1921. Only a very small portion of the property comprised in the deed was situated in Ghazipur. The rest of the property is situated in Ballia.3. After registration at Ghazipur, the registration office at Ballia was informed of the registration and an entry was made by the Sub-Registrar of Ballia in his register on the 24th of November 1921.4. The plaintiffs-pre-emptors argued that limitation ran only from the 24th of November, 1921, that is to say, the date on which the entry was made in the Ballia register, but we think both the Courts below were quite right in holding that limitation began to run from the 6th of October, 1921. That undoubtedly was the date on which the sale-deed ...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: a Vakil
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-22-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All247
Mears, C.J.1. A Vakil appears before us to show cause why he should not be removed from the roll of vakils or otherwise dealt with for that he, on the 10th of April, 1923, drafted and presented to a Criminal Court a complaint in which he suppressed certain facts then professionally known to him, which would, if stated, have shown that one Nand Kishore had not committed the offence alleged against him or any criminal offence.2. It appears that there are two rival firms in Cawnpore who import betel leaves from the District of Midnapur in Bengal. Consignments are sent from one of two stations, Denteen or Nikersen. Both these firms employed the same claims agent, one Nand Kishore, and in December 1922, the firm of Baldeo Prasad Lachman Prasad had a claim against the Railway Company in respect of a consignment of betel leaves which had, according to them, gone bad, by reason of some default of the Railway. At this date or later the other firm also had claims on several consignments against ...
Tag this Judgment!Debigir Tapdhari Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-22-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All322
Mukerji, J.1. This is a reference by the learned Sessions Judge of Bulandshahr with the recommendation that the conviction of one Debigir Tapdhari under Section 173 of the Indian Penal Code may be set aside and the fine inflicted may be remitted.2. It appears that a police constable took a summons to Debigir Tapdhari for the purpose of serving it on him. Debigir refused to take the summons and sign an acknowledgment. This is all that hag been proved in the case. The learned Magistrate thinks that this is enough to constitute an offence under Section 173 of the Indian Penal Code and the learned Sessions Judge thinks that something more is necessary than a refusal to accept a summons for a conviction under the said section. I agree with the learned Sessions Judge.3. I accept the reference, set aside the conviction and sentence and order that the tine, if paid, be refunded....
Tag this Judgment!Gopi Nath and anr. Vs. Ram Nath
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-22-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All356
Daniels, J.1. This is an appeal by two preference share-holders in the Muttra District Co-operative Bank. The appellants were the plaintiffs in the trial Court. They brought a suit against four defendants for a declaration that the latter had not been legally elected Directors of the Bank and for an injunction to restrain them from acting as such. The Directors were elected for a period of three years. Owing to the delay which has taken place in the hearing of the appeal, that period has now expired and it may be for this reason that the three surviving defendants are not now represented before us. The fourth defendant died while the suit was pending.2. The facts of the case are briefly these:A meeting was held on 21st September, 1921 for the appointment of four Directors under the bye-laws of the Society. The society was one constituted under the Co-operative Societies Act of 1912. The meeting was a disorderly one and about 4 p.m. it was adjourned by the Chairman. It was adjourned on ...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Pandit Kishori Lal, Vakil
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-22-1924
Reported in: 86Ind.Cas.408
1. Kishori Lal, Vakil, appears before us to show cause why he should not be removed from the roll of Vakils or otherwise dealt with for that he on the 10th of April 1923 drafted and presented to a Criminal Court a complaint in which he suppressed certain facts then professionally known to him, which would, if stated, have shown that one Nand Kishore had not committed the offence alleged against him or any criminal offence.2. It appears that there are two rival firms in Cawnpore who import betel leaves from the District of Midnapur in Bengal. Consignments are sent from one of two stations, Denteen or Nikersen. Both these firm's employed the same claims agent, one Nand Kishore, and in December 1922 the Firm of Baldeo Prasad-Lachman Prasad had a claim against the Railway Company in respect of a consignment of betel leaves which had, according to them, gone bad, by reason of some default of the Railway. At this date or later the other firm also had claims on several consignments against th...
Tag this Judgment!Bhagwan Das Vs. Saddiq Ahmad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-19-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All318
Walsh, J.1. In this case I am unable to accept the view of the Sessions Judge. One important point of law arises. The Sessions Judge definitely holds that the evidence does not constitute an offence under Section 504, Indian Penal Code and he refers the case to the High Court for the conviction to be set aside on this ground. It is on this ground that I disagree with him. The Government Advocate was quite right in pointing out that it raises an important question. In my opinion whatever the previous provocation may be, a man who pulls the beard of a Mohammedan in the public street, intentionally insults him and thereby causes him provocation, knowing that such provocation is likely to cause the victim to break the public peace. Human nature being what it is, nothing is more likely than that a self-respecting person, who has his beard pulled, or his nose pulled, or is submitted to any other painful and humiliating treatment in public, should lose his temper and attempt to strike his ass...
Tag this Judgment!Ramzani and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-19-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All319
1. In this case two men appeal, one Ramzani against a conviction for murder and one Shafiq Ahmad against a conviction for rioting, he having been found to have been the ring leader in an undoubted fight. Seven other persons were put upon their trial. Six of them were convicted and sentenced and have not appealed and one Bashir was acquitted. But in the view which we take of this case, it is not necessary to go into the question of differentiating between the eases of the various accused. We propose to take a broader view of the matter a great deal of which is fatally clear. In a group of villages or hamlets in which there are rival zamindars and apparently rival factions, Mt. Mango was a tenant of two brothers, Usman and Sultan, who lived at a village named Malpur, a mile away. Sultan was the man who was killed. Mt. Mango is the woman over whom the trouble began. She was living with the wife of her nephew who had been sent to jail, and there is no doubt that for some reasons, which it ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »