Allahabad Court April 1924 Judgments
Sita Ram Vs. Musammat Govindi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-30-1924
Reported in: (1924)ILR46All458
Walsh, Acting C.J. and Neave, J.1. This appeal raises various important questions with regard to the true interpretation of the Guardians and Wards Act, relating to the class of matters which had become the subject of controversy between this particular ward and his guardian, and also relating to the right of appeal. There being no express, authority in this Court upon the subjects which have been raised before us, we hold ourselves free to take an independent, view of the intention of the Legislature while at the same time paying due regard to the decisions of the High Courts in other Provinces which have been relied upon in the argument on behalf of the guardian.2. So far as the facts are concerned the matter is extremely simple. The controversy relates to the conduct of the guardian and the accounts filed by the guardian when the minor was still a ward. The guardian is the adoptive mother of the ward. It appears that there is a substantial dispute as to the adoption, but this, for t...
Tag this Judgment!Makhan Lal Vs. Bihari Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-30-1924
Reported in: AIR1924All571; (1924)ILR46All688
Walsh, Acting C.J. and Neave, J.1. This is an appeal against an order of the Subordinate Judge of Agra setting aside a decree passed by the Munsif of Agra, and returning the plaint for presentation to the proper court. The facts alleged in the plaint were that the defendant, who is the brother-in-law of the plaintiff, had borrowed from him ornaments to the value of Rs. 500, on the occasion of his son's marriage, for the purpose of presentation and show, and had promised to return them two months after the marriage. This promise was not kept, and the plaintiff brought this suit asking that the defendant might be made to return the ornaments or to pay Rs. 500.2. The plaint was filed in the court of the Munsif. One of the issues framed was whether the suit was cognizable by that court. The Munsif held that it was, on the ground that the facts disclosed an offence of breach of trust committed by the defendant. In appeal the learned Subordinate Judge has dissented from this finding. In our ...
Tag this Judgment!AlimuddIn Alias Allia Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-30-1924
Reported in: AIR1924All569; 82Ind.Cas.36
Ryves, J.1. This is an application in revision by one Alimuddin alias Allia who was sentenced to three years' rigorous imprisonment on failure to furnish security under Section 110 of the Criminal Procedure Code. It is very difficult for this Court in revision to interfere in these cases, but this Court has to be satisfied that the evidence is of a character which will reasonably support the inference that it is necessary in the interest of public security to send the man to prison or bind him down. Alimuddin was convicted of theft in 1916. That cannot have been a very bad case as he was sentenced only to 15 days imprisonment. However a history sheet was started and he came under the suspicion of the Police. In April 1921 he was bound down for one year under Section 110 although the order was not enforced. Evidently he has been a marked man ever since. Between February and May 1923 four dacoities were committed in the Agra District within the Police Circle of Khaliluddin, Circle Inspec...
Tag this Judgment!Sita Ram Vs. Musammat Gobindi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-30-1924
Reported in: 80Ind.Cas.592
1. This appeal raises various important questions with regard to the true interpretation of the Guardian and Wards Act, relating to the class of matters which had become the subject of controversy between this particular ward and his guardian, and also relating to the right of appeal. There being no express authority in this Court upon the subjects which have been raised before us we bold ourselves free to take an independent view of the intention of the Legislature while at the same time paying due regard to the decisions of the High Courts in other Provinces which have been relied upon in the argument on behalf of the guardian.2. So far as the facts are concerned the matter is extremely simple. The controversy relates to the conduct of the guardian and the accounts filed by the guardian, when the minor was still a ward. The guardian is the adoptive mother of the ward. It appears that there is a substantial dispute as to the adoption but this for the purpose of this appeal is immateri...
Tag this Judgment!Lala Makhan Lal Vs. Lala Bihari Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-30-1924
Reported in: 80Ind.Cas.627
1. This is an appeal against an order of the Subordinate Judge of Agra setting aside a decree passed by the Munsif of Agra, and returning the plaint for presentation to the proper Court. The facts alleged in the plaint were that the defendant, who is the brother-in-law of the plaintiff, had borrowed from him ornaments to the value of Rs. 500, on the occasion of his son's marriage, for the purpose of presentation and show, and had promised to return them two months after the marriage. This promise was not kept, and the plaintiff brought this suit asking that the defendant might be made to return the ornaments or to pay Rs. 500.2. The plaint was filed in the Court of the Munsif. One of the issues framed was whether the suit was cognisable by that Court. The Munsif held that it was, on the ground that the facts disclosed an offence of breach of trust committed by the defendant. In appeal the learned Subordinate Judge has dissented from this finding. In our opinion his view is the correct ...
Tag this Judgment!Bhirgu Nath Singh and ors. Vs. Gobind Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-29-1924
Reported in: (1924)ILR46All686
Walsh, Acting C.J. and Ryves, J.1. This is a plain case. An attempt was made in the lower court to destroy the award by alleging misconduct against the arbitrators in the sense that they did not give the parties, or one of the parties, or some of the parties, a proper hearing, or adequate notice of the date of the hearing of the matter in which they were engaged. There are only two ways in which you can get rid of an award--either by getting it set aside in accordance with the provisions of paragraphs 15 and 16 of the Code, in which case it is the duty of the Judge to refuse to file the award and grant a decree in the terms of the award; or if the learned Judge to whom application is made commits material irregularity in the course of the hearing, when he has the parties before him to decide whether or not the award filed was objectionable, then an application in revision may be made to this Court. These matters are really so elementary that it is hardly necessary to repeat them, but t...
Tag this Judgment!Gobind Singh and ors. Vs. Bhirgunath Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-29-1924
Reported in: AIR1924All788; 82Ind.Cas.16
1. This is a plain case. An attempt was made in the lower Court to destroy the award by alleging misconduct against the arbitrators in the sense that they did not give the parties, or one of the parties, or some of the parties, proper hearing, or adequate notice of the date of the hearing of the matter in which they were engaged. There are only two ways in which you can get rid of an award--either by getting it set aside in accordance with the provisions of para graphs 15 and 16 of the Code, in which case it is the duty of the Judge to refuse to file the award and grant a decree in the terms of the award; or if the learned Judge to whom application is made commits material irregularity in the course of the hearing, when he has the parties before him to decide whether or not the award filed was objectionable, then an application in revision may be made to this Court. These matters are really so elementary that it is hardly necessary to repeat them but the distinction, so far as the powe...
Tag this Judgment!Muhammad Abdul Hasan Vs. Fida HusaIn and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-29-1924
Reported in: AIR1924All473; 82Ind.Cas.736
1. This was a suit for sale and on its dismissal the plaintiff has appealed. The mortgagee is the plaintiff Abdul Hasan. The defendants are one mortgagor the representatives-in-interest of two deceased mortgagors and two other defendants Nos. 10 and 11 who are subsequent mortgagees. One plea raised by the subsequent mortgagees was that the registration was a fraud on the registration law and, therefore, invalid. This plea was accepted by the learned Subordinate Judge who held the document to be invalid for want of registration. We do not agree with this finding of the lower Court. The property, a grove situated within the jurisdiction of the Sub-Registrar of Budaun, did exist, and mortgagor and mortgagee had reason to believe that it belonged to one of the mortgagors, Baqar Husain. There was no collusion between the mortgagor and the mortgagee and a fictitious property was not entered with a view to obtain registration in a registration office where it would not otherwise have been pos...
Tag this Judgment!Shah Ram Chand and anr. Vs. Shah Lal Chand and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-28-1924
Reported in: (1924)ILR46All674
Kanhaiya Lal, J 1. This appeal and the cross-objection arise out of a suit for pre-emption, and the main question for consideration is whether the plaintiffs respondents are entitled to a preferential right of purchase as against the defendants vendees. The sale in question was effected by the defendants Nos. 3 to 13 in favour of the defendant No. 1 and the father of defendant No. 2, for a consideration of Rs. 22,000 on the 27th of May, 1919; and the property sold comprised a 3 biswa share in patti No. 14, with the rights appertaining thereto in shamilat pattis Nos. 17 and 18, in the thoh known by the name of thok 12 biswas in the village Kadipur. The allegation of the plaintiffs was that they were co-sharers in that thoh and that the defendants vendees were strangers. - The court below found that the village Kadipur comprised 2 thohs, that the plaintiffs were co-sharers in the thoh in which the property in suit was situated and that the defendants vendees were co-sharers in the other ...
Tag this Judgment!Brij Bhushan Lal Vs. the Municipal Board of Kanauj
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-28-1924
Reported in: AIR1924All567; (1924)ILR46All685; 82Ind.Cas.89
Daniels and Boys, JJ.1. This is a reference under Section 162 of the United Provinces Municipalities Act. The question referred is whether the applicant, who resides outside the Kanauj Municipality but is employed during business hours as a clerk on a salary within Municipal limits, is liable to be taxed under a tax on circumstances and property imposed under Clause (ix) of Section 128(1) of the Act. Section 128 permits the Municipality to impose the tax on all classes of inhabitants as defined in Section 2(7). They have, however, chosen to limit the tax to person's 'residing or carrying on any trade or owning property within the limits of the Kanauj Municipality,' vide Notification No. 6575-XXIII-9, dated the 7th of August, 1920, printed on page 324 of Part III of the United Provinces Gazette for 1920. The expression 'carrying on a trade' has a well recognized meaning and cannot by any straining of language be made to include a person who merely works for an employer as a salaried cle...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »