Allahabad Court December 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.
Mata DIn and ors. Vs. Anand Madho
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-19-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All812; 87Ind.Cas.590
Kanhaiya Lal, J.1. The dispute in this appeal relates to Plot No. 364 khasra measuring 72 in Mouza Iknaur and the question for consideration is whether the plaintiff is entitled to treat the said land as having been held by the defendants without the consent of the plaintiff within the meaning of Section 34 of the U.P. Act II of 1901.2. The land in question appears to have formed a part of a large grove, of which a portion still exists on Plot No. 365 khasra and the rest has been denuded of trees. The allegation of the defendants was that they held the said grove land as a muafi tenure free from any liability for the payment of rent for over two generations and that they are not liable to ejectment. There is a finding that the land was held under a grove tenure but no finding as to when the portion in dispute was denuded of trees and brought under cultivation, and how long the defendants have been in occupation of the same and in what capacity. In 1833 Grove No. 389 old khasra measurin...
In Re: Chunni Lal Kalyan Das
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-18-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All287
Walsh, J.1. We have no hesitation in answering the question submitted to us in this case by the Commissioner of Income-Tax in the statement of the case dated the 23rd of May, 1924, 'are the profits or losses arising from wagering contracts to be taken into account in an assessment for income-tax purposes', in the affirmative. There is no ground for saying that the profits arising from an illegal business are not taxable. There is not a word in the Act to suggest anything of the kind, arid it is a fallacy to say because the taxing authority levies from a person who is carrying on a profitable business, but an improper and illegal business, or profession, that therefore the authorities are countenancing such a profession. They are doing nothing of the kind. Their permission is not required and is not given, and cannot be withheld to a person who chooses to carry on an illegal business, but the tax upon the profit arising therefrom has to be paid in common with the tax paid by every hones...
Emperor Vs. Sital Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-18-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All313
Walsh, J.1. We must allow this appeal on the ground that the provisions of Section 71 of the Excise Act, have been entirely ignored. The charge was one of adulteration under Section 64 for having committed a broach of one of the conditions of the licence namely the condition that prohibits the sale of. adulterated liquor. The charge was established by showing that the son had done it, and that the licensee was absent at the time. But the Magistrate convicted on the ground that the father was aware of the conduct of his son. The learned Sessions Judge has acquitted the licensee following the decision in the case of Ram Das v. Emperor (1918) 40 All. 568 on the word 'wilfully' used in Section 64. That case contains no reference to Section 71, and Section 71 places the burden upon the licence-holder, for any offence wilfully committed by any person in his employ and acting on his behalf of establishing that he took all due and reasonable precaution to prevent the commission of the offence....
Sheodarahan Singh Vs. Beni Chaudhari and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-18-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All492
Mukerji, J.1. The facts of this case briefly are these : The original plaintiff who is the appellant before this Court, viz., Sheodarshan Singh brought a suit for redemption in the Court of the Munsif of Ballia. He obtained a decree on the 22nd April, 1919, on condition of payment of Rs. 1,747-8-6 for principal mortgage money and interest and Rs. 69-2-0 costs. In all he was declared entitled to obtain possession of the property on payment of Rs. 1,81610-6. This sum was deposited in Court. The mortgagees however did not acquiesce in this decree and appealed. In the meanwhile the final decree wag prepared on the 26th of June, 1919, in accordance with the preliminary decree passed by the first Court. The plaintiff obtained delivery of possession on the 15th of July, 1919. The appellate Court by its decree dated the 2nd of December, 1920, varied the decree of the Court of first instance and the main question to be decided in this appeal is what is the true interpretation of that decree.2. ...
Khem Singh and ors. Vs. Raghubir Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-17-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All578
1. This appeal arises out of execution proceeding under the following circumstances. One Khushal Singh obtained a mortgage from one Chattar Singh and on foot of it sued his widow Mt. Jai Debi. Khushal Singh obtained a decree and put it in execution. Just before the property was sold Mt. Jai Debi died. Before the sale, Khushal Singh also died and the names of his four sons Raghubir Singh, Sher Singh, Rajindar Singh and Karan Singh were substituted in his place as the decree-holders. These decree-holders made an application to the Court stating that on the death of Mt. Jai Debi they themselves had succeeded to the property of the judgment-debtor, viz., the property that had been sold, and that it was not necessary to proceed with the execution any further. The execution proceedings were being carried on before the Collector, the property being ancestral. Before the Collector there appeared two other sets of claimants. One Yograj Jang Bahadur claimed that he was the next reversioner to th...
Kewal Vs. Tufail Ahmad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-17-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All592
Ryves, J.1. On the facts as they appear in the judgment of the learned Judge it seems to me that, having regard to the decision of this Court in the matter of the petition of Govind Prasad (1878-80) 2 All. 465, the offence of criminal trespass has not been made out.2. It has been argued that, as a matter of fact, the decision arrived at by the Magistrate on the evidence of the case was to the effect that the applicant had been turned out of the house and that the possession of it had been made over to the complainant who had, afterwards, been forcibly ousted by the applicant. If those were the real facts then obviously the conviction would be right, but I do not think that the first Court really meant that. What it said was that 'the dakhalnama is a decisive proof that the complainant was put in possession of the house and that the accused Kewal was ousted by an order of the Court.' The dakhalnama apparently only gave formal possession of the house and actual physical possession was no...
Ram Ugrah Singh Vs. the Benares Hindu University
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-16-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All253a
Piggott, J.1. The plaintiff, Ram Ugrah Singh, is a graduate of the Benares Hindu University. In the month of July, 1924, he presented himself at an examination held under the authority of the said University, described as the 'Previous LL. B. Examination.' The results were publish-on the 11th of August, 1924, and the plaintiff's name did not appear in the list of candidates who had passed the examination. On the 30th of August, 1924 the plaintiff addressed to the Vice-Chancellor of the Benares Hindu University a petition (Exhibit 5), in which he protested that, under the regulations of the University in force at the time when he sat for the examination and which continued in force until after the results of the said examination had been published, he (the petitioner) had in fact passed the examination in the third class. He, therefore, requested the Vice-Chancellor to re-consider the whale situation, to adjudge the petitioner to have passed the Previous LL. B. Examination and to promot...
Mt. Bhuta Vs. Bisheshar Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-15-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All432; 87Ind.Cas.564
Mukerji, J.1. The appellant in this case was a judgment-debtor in the lower Court. There is a decree for money against her, and in execution of it, her two houses were attached. She came to Court with the allegations that she was: an agriculturist and the houses were occupied by her and that therefore, these were exempt under Section 60, Clause (c) of the Civil Procedure Code from attachment. The decree-holder in his reply did not state at all what was her occupation, if the judgment-debtor was not an agriculturist. He simply stated that the judgment-debts were due and she was bound to pay. The learned Subordinate Judge examined evidence and came to the conclusion that the appellant had ceased to be an agriculturist inasmuch as she had sold her fixed rate tenancy in 1919.2. In this Court it has bean urged that the evidence has been wrongly weighed by the lower Court and that it does establish that the appellant is an agriculturist.3. It appears that the decree-holder himself was examin...
In Re: Shyam Lal Shah and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-15-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All648
Mukerji, J.1. This is a reference under Rule 17 of the Kumaun Rules by the Local Government for the opinion of this Court.2. The facts, which have given rise to this reference, are briefly these : A Hindu resident of Kumaun, by caste a Vaisb, namely, Lachi Ram, died and he was succeeded by his wife Musammat Niraja. He left him surviving, besides the wife, a daughter and two daughter's sons. The daughter's sons were the defendants in this suit out of which this reference has arisen. At the time when Nimja died, three of the brothers of Lachi Earn were living, namely, Tula Ram, the plaintiff, and Parsi and Ganji, the respective fathers of the two other plaintiffs. The plaintiff's claimed that by the custom obtaining in Kumaun they were entitled to the property of Lachi Earn to the exclusion of his daughter's sons. To this claim the defendants filed a written statement and denied the existence of the custom. They pleaded that they were entitled under the Hindu Law to succeed to the grandf...
Tula Ramsah Jagati and ors. Vs. Shyam Lal Sah Thulgharia and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-15-1924
Reported in: 86Ind.Cas.729
Mukerji, J.1. This is a Reference under Rule 17 of the Kumaun Rules by the Local Government for the opinion of this Court.2. The facts, which have given rise to this Reference, are briefly these: A Hindu resident of Kumaun, by caste a Vaisa, namely, Lachi Ram, died and he was succeeded by his wife Musammat Nimja. He left him surviving, besides the wife, a daughter and two daughter's sons. The daughter's sons were the defendants in this suit out of which this Reference has arisen. At the time when Nimja died, three of the brothers of Lachi Ram were living, namely, Tula Ram, the plaintiff, and Parsi and Gangi, the respective fathers of the two other plaintiffs. The plaintiffs claimed that by the custom obtaining in Kumaun they were entitled to the property of Lachi Ram to the exclusion of his daughter's sons. To this claim the defendants filed a written statement and denied the existence of the custom. They pleaded that they were entitled under the Hindu Law to succeed to the grandfather...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »