Allahabad Court May 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.
Jagat NaraIn Vs. Subedar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-15-1924
Reported in: (1924)ILR46All773
Daniels and Neave, JJ.1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit for damages for defamation. The undisputed facts are that the 'defendant is the mukhia of Tillage Bisalpur. About the 1st or 2nd of October one Ishura Ban-jara, who had been in the service of the plaintiff, disappeared from the village. Nothing was heard of him for a week or More, and his father was in great distress about him. The mukhia went to the Superintendent of Police and made a report about the disappearance. At the bidding of the Superintendent, this report was taken down in writing, and it is in this that the defamation complained of is contained.2. The report recited that it was rumoured that Ishura had stolen some gram belonging to the plaintiff, and that the plaintiff with two other men had beaten him till he fell down senseless. Since that time Ishura had disappeared, and it was rumoured in the village that he was dead. The mukhia had-further been informed that the missing youth's parents had been...
Subedar Vs. Dubey Jagat Narain
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-15-1924
Reported in: 80Ind.Cas.25
1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit for damages for defamation. The undisputed facts are that the defendant is the mukhia of village Bisalpur. About the 1st or 2nd of October one Ishura Banjara, who had been in the service of the plaintiff, disappeared from the village. Nothing was heard of him for a week or more, and his father was in great distress about him. The mukhia went to the Superintendent of Police and made a report about the disappearance. At the bidding of the Superintendent this report was taken down in writing, and it is in this that the defamation complained of is contained.2. The report recited that it was rumoured that Ishura had stolen some gram belonging to the plaintiff, and that the plaintiff with two other men had beaten him till he fell down senseless. Since that time Ishura had disappeared, and it was rumoured in the village that he was dead. The mukhia had further been informed that the missing youth's parent had been warned to make no report ...
Musammat Lakhi Vs. Murat Tewari and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-15-1924
Reported in: AIR1924All843; 83Ind.Cas.875
1. This was a suit by the, plaintiff Musammat Lakhi for the recovery of money paid on behalf of the defendants under Article 61 of the Limitation Act. The defendants contended that Article 61 was not applicable, and that the cause of action arose much earlier and was barred under Article 116. The Trial Court held the claim to be within time; the lower Appellate Court has dismissed it. The question of limitation is the sole question to be decided in this appeal.2. The plaintiff, Musammat Lakhi, is the mother of Jagdeo Ram, the original owner of certain zemindari property which he mortgaged to Ram Pat for a sum of Rs. 3,600, on 27th May 1904. The only portion of the consideration money with which we are now concerned is a sum of Rs. 100 which was left with the mortgagee for payment to one Ram Prasad under a hypothecation bond dated 6th August 1899. The bond in question was primarily a usufructuary mortgage of certain sir plots for the sum of Rs. 100, but it was agreed in the deed that if...
Behari and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-15-1924
Reported in: AIR1924All670; 83Ind.Cas.714
Daniels, J.1. In this case eight accused, Behari, Noni, Hulli, Birbal, Narain, Ganga, Ghasi and Umedi have been convicted by the learned Sessions Judge of Bareilly. The first five have appealed. The case of the remaining three has been taken up in revision. Noni has been convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to transportation for life. The learned Judge refrained from passing sentence of death because of the accused's youth, because he found there Was no direct intention to kill and because the wound was inflicted in the course of a scuffle and without premidi-tation. All the accused other than Noni have been convicted under sections 147, 324 read with 149 and 342 read with 149 of the Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to terms of imprisonment varying from three years to one year, the sentences to be concurrent with those passed under Section 342 and Section 147. Notice has been issued to these accused to show cause why they should not be convicted under sect...
Kali Charan and ors. Vs. Piari and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-14-1924
Reported in: (1924)ILR46All769
Daniels and Neave, JJ.1. The two suits which have given rise to these two connected appeals were instituted by Chokhe Lal for cancellation of two deeds of gift dated the 5th of May, 1920, executed in favour of the defendant, Brijbasi Lal, by Musammat Ram Piari and Musammat Ram Lalli, respectively. Chokhe Lal died during the litigation and was succeeded by his three sons, the present appellants. A' pedigree showing the relationship of the parties is given in the judgments of the court's below. Musammats Ram Piari and Ram Lalli were the widows of two brothers who formed a joint family with a third brother Bhagwan Sahai. The family was joint. The husbands of the two Musammats died in their father's life-time. Bhagwan Sahai alone survived his father and became in law the sole owner of the joint family property. The name of the father was Ramdin. On Ramdin's death the names of the two Musammats were entered in the revenue papers as proprietors along with Bhagwan Sahai. The plaintiff's case ...
Kali Charan and ors. Vs. Musammat Peare Alias Peari and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-14-1924
Reported in: AIR1924All740; 83Ind.Cas.754
1. The two suits which have given rise to these two connected appeals were instituted by Chokhe Lal for cancellation of two deeds of gift dated 5th May 1920 executed in favour of the defendant Brijbasi Lal by Musammat Ram Piyari and Musammat Ram Ralli respectively. Chokhe Lal died during the litigation and was succeeded by his three sons, the present appellants. A pedigree showing the relationship of the parties is given in the judgments of the Courts below. Musammats Ram Piyari and Ram Lalli were the widows of two brothers who formed a joint family with a third brother Bhagwan Sahai. The family was joint. The husbands of the two Musammats died in their father's lifetime. Bhagwan Sahai alone survived his father and became in law the sole owner of the joint family property. The name of the father was Ramdin. On Ramdin's death the names of the two Musammats were entered in the revenue papers as proprietors along with Bhagwan Sahai. The plaintiff's case was that their names were recorded ...
Khub Singh and ors. Vs. Mohan Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-14-1924
Reported in: AIR1924All476; 83Ind.Cas.251
1. In this case there has been a misdescription, the names of the appellants having been substituted for the respondents. We order that to-be put right.2. In our opinion our brother Stuart was bound on the facts stated to follow the decision of the Full Bench in Gokaran Singh v. Ganga Singh 52 Ind. Cas. 779 : 42 A. 91 : 17 A.L.J. 1072 : 1 U.P.L.R. (A.) 136. The point of difficulty in this particular case cannot be better put than it was put by Mr. Justice Piggott in the sentence which is quoted at page 97 in the passage beginning with the words' with regard to this I think it sufficient' to remark....3. It is the business of the Trial Court to decide whether a plea is bona fide or not. If it chooses to treat it seriously, it seems to us that it is not for the Court of Appeal to treat it as mala fide, when nobody in the suit in the Court below has ever suggested it. Once it is treated as a serious bona fide issue, and it takes its place among the framed issues, and the Assistant Collect...
Ganga Sahai Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-14-1924
Reported in: AIR1924All763; 83Ind.Cas.692
Boys, J.1. In this case three persons, a father, a son and the son's wife were convicted under Section 182 of the Indian Penal Code of having given false information to the District Magistrate in that they complained to him that the son's wife had been raped by a certain Sub-Inspector. They made between them two complaints, one on the 8th of September and the other on the 6th of November 1923; while the offence was alleged to have been committed on as long before as July the 25th 1923. The complaints were dismissed by the District Magistrate under Section 203 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The three accused were prosecuted to conviction under Section 182, Indian Penal Code. The father, the present applicant before me, Ganga Sahai, is sentenced to four months' rigorous imprisonment and the son and his wife to lines of Rs. 25 each. Ganga Sahai went up in appeal to the Sessions Judge and has now come up here in revision. On his behalf three points are taken,. (1) that he had no guilty kn...
Lachmi NaraIn Vs. Mooli
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-13-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All571; 85Ind.Cas.537
Neave, J.1. The defendant-appellant transferred to the respondent plot No. 922 in December, 1906. This plot was his sir land, and he accordingly became an ex-proprietary tenant of it. There is a pakka well in the plot, and the defendant has been using the water from this well to irrigate adjacent fields which he holds as sub-tenant from another landlord. The plaintiff brought this suit for an injunction prohibiting the defendant from using the water to irrigate any land other than plot No. 922 and for damages.2. The defence was, first, that the suit was not maintainable in a Civil Court, but should have been brought in the Revenue Court under Section 65(2) of the Tenancy Act, and secondly, that the defendant was entitled to use the water of the well for any purpose he might desire. Both the Courts below have found against the defendant on both points.3. With regard to the question of jurisdiction, there can be no doubt that the suit is triable by a Civil Court. Section 65 of the Tenanc...
Kallu Shah and anr. Vs. Raheem Baksh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-13-1924
Reported in: 84Ind.Cas.284
1. There is nothing in this appeal. It was clearly rightly decided. We dismiss it with costs....