Allahabad Court June 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.
Gajraj Singh and ors. Vs. Ram Anjore Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-20-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All668; 87Ind.Cas.59
Mukerji, J.1. This appeal is connected With S.A. No. 95 of 1923. The facts of the two cases out of which these connected appeals have arisen are practically the same.2. An occupancy tenant Bagwanta Singh died before the year 1884. On his death, Bhagwan Singh, the predecessor-in-title of the respondents, took possession of the holding. There was a litigation between him and the widow of Bhagwanta, Mt. Newasi, which ended in a compromise effected on the 17th of June 1884. By that compromise the widow really handed over the entire holding to Bagwan Singh. Later on, the daughter of Bhagwanta Singh brought a suit of her own, but it was held that the compromise held good during the lifetime of her mother. Mt. Newasi died in April 1910. Some time after, her daughter brought another suit to recover the holding, but she was again unsuccessful. After that suit had been dismissed, the two suits out of which these appeals have arisen were brought by co-sharers of the mahal against the descendants ...
Sakalraj Dube and anr. Vs. Mt. Jadu Rani
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-19-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All58
1. We think that the learned judge who has disposed of this application has missed the point. When a vakil re-presents his client the right of audience is, for the time being, vested in him. For the purpose of continuing the hearing oil commencing the hearing, he is the appellant. If he is absent there is default. According to the entry in the order-sheet the appellant was absent as well as his vakil. Possibly he was running after him to see if he could find him, but even if he had been corporeally present in the sense in which the judge whose order is appealed from appears to mean we think that in eyes of the law he was not present in such a sense as to prevent the absence of the vakil from being a default. If a judge is anxious to assist a party in distress he can give him a little time to obtain the assistance of a new vakil, or adjourn the case, and make him pay costal or something of that sort, but for a default of this kind we do not think that, subject to the penalty usually inf...
Hirdey NaraIn Rai Vs. Jagadish NaraIn Rai and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-19-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All125
Mukerji, J.1. This appeal arises under the following circumstances:The respondents who are two in number namely, Jagdish Narain Rai and Musammat Kesha Kunwar, brought a suit in the Civil Court against the appellant Hirdey Narain Rai for possession and mesne profits on the allegation that the parties were joint owners of the plots in suit and the share of the plaintiffs, namely, the present respondents, was two-thirds. The appellant pleaded that ha was, apart from the question of the title being found in the parties, the sole tenant of the entire land in suit, and, therefore, he was not liable to be ejected, his possession being lawful. The respondents' case was that the lands were the khudkasht of the parties and the entry of the appellant's name as a tenant in the village papers was a fictitious one. In accordance with the provisions of Section 202 of the Agra Tenancy Act, the learned Subordinate Judge referred the appellant to the Revenue Court. The suit out of which the present appe...
Bakha Singh and ors. Vs. Ram NaraIn Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-19-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All133
1. The suit which has given rise to this appeal was brought by the plaintiffs-appellants for the redemption of three mortgages of different dates and comprising some common and some separate properties. The first mortgage was effected by Sakaldip Singh and Ghazi Mal in favour of Naurang Singh and Ujagar Singh on the 10th of June, 1865, and the period fixed for redemption was 8 years. The second mortgage was effected byway of a zaripeshgi lease by Sakaldip Singh, Suba Karan Singh and Prayag Singh on the 19th of February, 1869, in favour of the same mortgagees for a period of 10 years. The third mortgage was made by Binda Singh in favour of the same mortgagees on the 31st of March, 1870,2. On the 26th of July 1869, Sakaldip Singh and Prayag Singh sold their interests in the equity of redemption to Bhawani Din Singh, Thakur Prasad Singh and Dawan Sing and left a portion of the sale consideration for the satisfaction of the first two mortgages. Bhawani Din Singh was the uncle and Thakur Pr...
NaraIn Das and anr. Vs. Bankim Chandra Deb
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-19-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All194; 85Ind.Cas.396
1. We agree with the decision in In re Sellamuthu Servai A.I.R. 1924 Mad. 411, which fully supports this decision. There is also a decision of this Court in Bawan Das v. Chiene A.I.R. 1922 All. 79, to the same effect. The appeal must, therefore, be dismissed with costs....
NaraIn Das and anr. Vs. Bankim Chandra Deb, Receiver of the Estate of ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-19-1924
Reported in: (1924)ILR46All912
Walsh, Acting C.J. and Ryves, J.1. We agree with the decision in In re Sellamuthu Servai (1923) I.L.R. 47 Mad. 87, which fully supports this decision. There is also a decision of this Court in Bawan Das v. Chiene (1921) I.L.R. 44 All. 316, to the same effect. The appeal must therefore be dismissed with costs....
Babu Hirdey NaraIn Rai Vs. Babu Jagdish NaraIn Rai and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-19-1924
Reported in: 82Ind.Cas.317
Mukerji, J.1. This appeal arises tinder the following circumstances: 2. The respondents who are two in number, namely, Jagdish Narain Rai and Musammat Kesha Kunwar, brought a suit in the Civil Court against the appellant Hirdey Narain Rai for possession and mesne profits on the allegation that the parties were joint owners of the plots in suit and the share of the plaintiffs, namely, the present respondents, was two-thirds. The appellant pleaded that he was, apart from the question of the title being found in the parties, the sole tenant of the entire land in suit, and, therefore, he was not liable to be ejected, his possession being lawful. The respondents' case was that the lands were the khud-kasht of the parties and the entry of the appellant's name as a tenant in the village papers was a fictitious one. In accordance with the provisions of Section 202 of the Agra Tenancy Act, the learned Subordinate Judge referred the appellant to the Revenue Court. The suit out of which the prese...
Ganesh Rai and ors. Vs. Bhushi Rai
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-18-1924
Reported in: AIR1925All69; 82Ind.Cas.324
1. The question for consideration in this case is not one free from difficulty. On the 13th June, 1908 Tilak Rai, Ganesh Rai and Mahabir Rai borrowed Rs. 160 from Bhushi Rai, the plaintiff-respondent and mortgaged with possession certain occupancy plots.2. There was an agreement that in case the mortgagee was ejected from the occupancy holding or from any portion thereof by any act on the part of the mortgagors or his heirs or legal representatives, he will be entitled to claim possession of the occupancy holding or to recover damages at the rate of 10 maunds per bigha from the date of his ejectment, or to recover the entire money due to him with interest at the rate of 2 per cent, per mensem from the date of his ejectment till the date of realisation from the person and the other property of the mortgagors, including two houses specifically described in the deed. There was a further covenant that the occupancy holding and the two houses aforesaid shall be deemed to be mortgaged and hy...
Bhushi Rai Vs. Ganesh Rai and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-18-1924
Reported in: (1924)ILR46All903
Sulaiman and Kanhaiya Lal, JJ.1. The question for consideration in this case is not one free from difficulty. On'; the 13th of June, 1908, Tilak Rai, Ganesh Rai and Mahabir Rai borrowed Rs. 160 from Bhushi Rai, the plaintiff appellant, and mortgaged with possession certain occupancy plots. There was an agreement that in case the mortgagee was ejected from the occupancy holding or from any portion thereof by any act on the part of the mortgagors or their heirs or legal representatives, he would be entitled to claim possession of the occupancy holding or to recover damages at the rate of 10 maunds per bigha from the date of his ejectment, or to recover the entire money due to him, with interest at the rate of 2 per cent, per mensem from the date of his ejectment till the1 date of realization, from the person and the other property of the mortgagors, including two houses specifically described in the deed. There was a further covenant that the occupancy holding and the two houses aforesai...
Emperor Vs. Kashi Ram and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-18-1924
Reported in: (1924)ILR46All906
Walsh, Acting C.J. and Ryves, J. 1. This is (if it were not for the referring order of Mr. Justice Boys, in which he seems, rightly, in our opinion, to think that further consideration is required of one authority to which we will refer in a moment) a, matter of no importance to anybody except the parties, none of whom seem to be very attractive persons, or to be worth the time which has been already spent upon them by a large number of judicial authorities. Somehow or other Kashi Ram, the present applicant, got it into his head that he had been robbed by to prostitutes and their brother, or one or other of them. Ultimately criminal proceedings were taken against these' persons, or rather against the two women, their brother being omitted from the charge. The two women were acquitted, and now the brother, who was only verbally charged and never put 'upon his trial, wants to vindicate the law and clear himself by taking proceedings against Kashi Ram and his associates who made the charg...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »