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.
Ajudhia Prasad and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-02-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All664
1. These are two appeals against convictions for rioting in a fight which is said to have taken place between two rival factions at the village of Kundri in the Shahjahanpur district. There are in all ton appellants before us. There appears to have been a long-standing quarrel between what in this Court has boon called group A and group B. Group A in this Court consists of Ajudhia Prasad, Misri Lai, Chetram. Jwala Prasad and Jangi Lal; group B of Hardwari, Lal Bahadur Bhagwandin, Gokul and Tika Ram. Ail of these people are the appellants before us. The first four persons in group A are represented by Mr. Desanges. Jangi Lal was not represented but at our request Mr. Desanges was good enough to bear his interest in mind and has at the end discussed the case of Jangi Lal separately with a view to assist him. Group B are represented by Mr. Jamini Mohan Banerji.2. There is no doubt that for a long time there has been extremely bad blood between these two parties represented by Ajudhia Pras...
Ajodhia Prasad and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-02-1924
Reported in: 87Ind.Cas.597
1. These are two appeals against convictions for rioting in a fight which is said to have taken place between two rival factions at the village of Kundri in the Shahjahanpur District. There are in all ten appellants before us. There appears to have been a long standing quarrel between what in this Court has been called group A and group B. Group A in this Court consists of Ajudhia Prasad, Misri Lal, Chetram, Jwala Prasad and Jangi Lal: group B of Hardwari, Lal Bahadur, Bhagwandin, Gokul and Tika Ram. All of these people are the, appellants before us. The first four per-sons in group A are represented by Mr. Desanges. Jangi Lal was not represented but at our request Mr. Desanges was good enough to bear his interest in mind and has at the end discussed the case of Jangi Lal separately, with a view to assist him. Group B are represented by Mr. Jamini Mohan Banerji.2. There is no doubt that for a long time there has been extremely bad blood between, these two parties represented by Ajudhia...
Mumtaz-ud-daula Mukarram Ali Khan of Pahasu Vs. James R.R. Skinner
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-01-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All263
Mears, C.J.1. This application which is for leave to appeal to His Majesty in Council comas before us under the following circumstances. The plaintiff commenced a suit against the Nawab of Pahasu. That gentleman died on the 26th of March, 1922. The plaintiff alleged that she had been away in the hills and had not in fact heard of the death of the defendant until June 21st, The legal practitioner representing the plaintiff took the view that the plaintiff had six months within which to being the bring upon the record. When three months and two days had expired, namely on the 28th of June, 1922, he made an application in the usual form asking for permission to implead the heirs. The Court on the 6th of November, 1922 rejected that application, holding that the period within which such an application should be made was three months, and declared the suit to have abated.2. On the 9th of December, 1922 a further application was made asking that the order of abatement might, in the special c...
Nanhe Mal and ors. Vs. Jamil-ur-rahman and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-01-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All316
Mukerji, J.1. In this case the question is whether Section 45 of the Criminal Procedure Code or Section 147 of the same Code was the proper rule of law under which the Court below should have proceeded.2. It appears that there is a well in Najibabad from which the Hindus draw water, but they object to the Mohammedans drawing it. A petition of complaint was filed on behalf of certain Mohammedans before the Court of a Magistrate complaining that the Hindus had been so using the well as to make it impossible for the Mohammedans to use the same. They complained, among other matters, that the Hindus were bathing at the well and defiling the well water.3. The learned Magistrate issued notice to some of the Hindus and some of the Mohammedans and started a case under Section 145 of the Criminal Procedure Code. After taking evidence he tame to the conclusion that he was not satisfied as to the exclusive possession of either party and thereupon he ordered the well to be attached under Section 14...
Peerji Mohib Ali Shah Vs. Ram Chander
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-01-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All796; 87Ind.Cas.64
Mukerji, J.1. The question involved in this second appeal is what is the character of the grove in suit and whether the same is saleable in execution of a mortgage decree obtained by the Respondent No. 1 against one Torias widow, the Defendant No. 2.2. The plaintiff's case was that he was the zamindar and lambardar of the village, that Toria was an occupancy tenant of 8 and odd bighas of land within his zamindari, that the grove in question was a part of Toria's said occupancy holding, that Toria made a simple mortgage of the grove in favour of the respondent who obtained a decree for sale, that Toria died and his widow re-married, that the widow was ejected from the entire holding except the grove, and that the grove was excepted from the ejectment suit because the plaintiff was in possession of the same. The plaintiff asked for a declaration that in execution of the decree obtained by the respondent the grove was not liable to be sold.3. The Court of first instance decreed the suit, ...
Nawab Mumtaz-ud-daula Mukarram Ali Khan of Pahasu Vs. James R.R. Skinn ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-01-1924
Reported in: 86Ind.Cas.161
1. This application which is for leave to appeal to His Majesty in Council comes before us under the following circumstances. The plaintiff commenced a suit against the Nawab of Pahasu. That gentleman died on the 26th of March 1922. The plaintiff alleged that she had been away in the hills and had not, in fact, heard of the death of the defendant until June 21st. The legal practitioner representing the plaintiff took the view that the plaintiff had six months within which to bring the heirs upon the record. When three months and two days had expired, namely, on the 28th of June 1922, he made an application in the usual form asking for permission to implead the heirs. The Court on the 6th of November 1922 rejected that application, holding that the period within which such an application should be made was three months, and declared the suit to have abated.2. On the 9th of December 1922 a further application was made asking that the order of abatement might, in the special circumstances...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›