Allahabad Court November 1925 Judgments
Atma Ram Vs. Nanak Chand and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-30-1925
Reported in: AIR1926All274
Mukerji, J.1. This is an appeal by an auction-purchaser in the following circumstances:2. One Mahbub Ali Shah was the original owner of a certain share in the property described as 61/3 sihams. He mortgaged four sihams out of the aforesaid share to his wife Sultana Begam as a first mortgagee, and then he mortgaged the entire 61/3 sihams to the respondent decree-holder Peary Lal. Sultana Begam obtained a decree for sale and it appears that in her suit Peary Lal was not a party. Sultana Begam's decree was executed and the four sihams share mortgaged was sold and was purchased, by the respondents Nanak Chand and Mt. Parbati. Peary Lal then brought his own suit. The order that was passed in the decree that followed was that the property mortgaged might be sold; but, if Peary Lal wanted to sell the property purchased by Nanak Chand and Mt. Parbati, he must pay them a sum of Rs. 20,000 as a condition precedent to the sale. Peary Lal never paid the sum of Rs. 20-000, but brought to sale a 2 1...
Tag this Judgment!Babu and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-30-1925
Reported in: AIR1926All276
Sulaiman, J.1. This is a Reference by the Sessions Judge of Muttra recommending that the conviction of the accused under Section 24 of the Cattle Trespass Act (1 of 1871) should be set aside. A report was made by the pound-keeper that the accused had removed a mare from the cattle pound 10 minutes after it had been put into it. The pound-keeper did not make entry in his register as regards this mare although before he put it into the pound he ought to have made such an entry. The accused was tried summarily and the evidence does not disclose on whose land it had trespassed and who had brought the mare to the pound. On the other hand the accused's statement was that the two accused themselves had brought this mare along with a horse because otherwise they would not have found it possible to bring the horse to the pound. The learned Magistrate in a summary trial has convicted the accused on a finding that they removed the mare out of the cattle pound without a finding that it had been pr...
Tag this Judgment!B.B. and C.i. Railway Vs. Gulabbhai Bhagwandas
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-30-1925
Reported in: AIR1926All296
Daniels, J.1. This is a revision against a decree of the Small Cause Court. The goods were consigned at maund-rates. The freight charged in the railway receipt was Rs. 211. At destination the Railway claimed an additional sum of Rs. 819 on the ground that the goods occupied a full eight wheeled wagon. The Judge of the Small Cause Court has decided that this over-charge was not justified as the Railway Company were not entitled to alter the basis of calculation at maund-rates on which the rail receipt was granted to a calculation at wagon-rates or vice versa. This view is supported by the Pull Bench decision in Chunni Lal v. Nizam's Guaranteed State Railway Co. (1907) 29 All 228. The learned pleader for the applicant states that there is a mistake in the judgment in saying that the charge has been made at wagon rates, but I find that the passage in the judgment is reproduced verbatim from the statement made by the defendant's vakil in the Court below. Even if the applicant's case is cor...
Tag this Judgment!indar Singh Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-30-1925
Reported in: AIR1926All302
Sulaiman, J.1. This is a criminal revision from a conviction of the accused under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code.2. The facts are as follows: One Harbans was declared an insolvent and Lala Ram was appointed Receiver of his estate in January 1925. The Receiver attached certain heads of cattle belonging to the insolvent and made them over to the applicant after taking a sapurdnama from him. The Receiver first fixed the 13th February for sale and three days earlier he sent a notice to the applicant to produce the cattle at the place where the auction was to take place but the no ice was returned unserved and no auction took place. On this the Receiver fixed another date for sale and sent a fresh notice to the applicant, but even on that date the cattle were not produced, nor did the applicant turn up. Subsequently the Receiver received a notice from the applicant to the effect that the cattle attached by the Receiver did not belong to the insolvent but belonged to his brother who ha...
Tag this Judgment!NaraIn Das and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-30-1925
Reported in: AIR1926All325; 92Ind.Cas.741
Sulaiman, J.1. This is a reference by the Sessions Judge of Cawnpore recommending that the convictions of the accused Narain Das and Chhote Singh and the sentences passed on them should beset aside and they be either discharged or a re-trial ordered.2. The bullock in question belongs to a family of which Narain Das is a senior member. Chhote Singh, accused, is his mukhtar-am. The animal was employed for driving a cart employed in connexion with the proprietor's brick-kiln. The bullock was first found wounded in the month of February 1925 and the driver Ramdeo was prosecuted and convicted and a fine inflicted on him. It is not probable that the owner and the mukhtar-am came to know all the circumstances of the prosecution. In spite of this conviction a constable again found the bullock being worked in a cart on the 3rd of April Ist while severely wounded. This time the driver was one Mania Singh who was prosecuted and a fine imposed on him. In the course of the trial the learned Magistr...
Tag this Judgment!The Bombay Baroda and Central India Railway Vs. Gulabbhai Bhagwandas
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-30-1925
Reported in: 92Ind.Cas.532
Daniels, J.1. This is a revision against a decree of the Small Cause Court. The goods were consigned at maund-rates. The freight charged in the Kail way receipt was Rs. 211. At destination the Railway', claimed an additional sum of Rs. 219 on the ground that the goods occupied a full eight-wheeled wagon. The Judge of the Small Cause Court has decided that this overcharge was not justified as the Railway Company were not entitled to alter the basis of calculation at maund-rates on which the Rail receipt was granted to a calculation at wagon-rates or vice, versa. This view is supported by the Full Bench decision in Chunni Lal v. Nizam's Guaranteed State Railway Co. 29 A. 228 : 2 M.L.T. 42 :: A.W.N. (1907) 21 : 4 A.L.J. 80. The learned Pleader for the applicant states that there is a mistake in the judgment in saying that the charge has been made at wagon-rates, but I find that the passage in the judgment is reproduced verbatim from the statement made by the defendant's Vakil in the Court...
Tag this Judgment!Babu and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-30-1925
Reported in: 92Ind.Cas.697
Sulaiman, J.1. This is a Reference by the Sessions Judge of Muttra recommending that the conviction of the accused under Section 24 of the Cattle Trespass Act (I of 1871) should be set aside. A report was made by the pound-keeper that the accused had removed a mare from the cattle pound 10 minutes after it had been put into it. The pound-keeper did not make any entry in his register as regards this mare although before he put it into the pound he ought to have made such an entry. The accused was tried summarily and the evidence does not disclose on whose land it had trespassed and who had brought the mare to the pound. On the other hand the accused's statement was that the two accused themselves had brought this mare along with a horse because otherwise they would not have found it possible to bring the horse to the pound. The learned Magistrate in a summary trial has convicted the accused on a finding that they removed the mare out of the cattle pound without a finding that it had bee...
Tag this Judgment!Babu Atma Ram Vs. Lala Nanak Chand and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-30-1925
Reported in: 92Ind.Cas.571
Mukerji, J.1. This is an appeal by an auction-purchaser in the following circumstances.2. One Mahbub Ali Shah was the original owner of a certain share in the property described as 6 1/3 sihams. He mortgaged four sihams out of the aforesaid share to his wife Sultana Begam as a first mortgagee and then he mortgaged the entire 6 1/3 sihams to the respondent decree-holder Peary Lai. Sultana Begam obtained a decree for sale and it appears that in her suit Peary Lai was not a party. Sultana Bagam's decree was executed and the four sihams share mortgaged was sold find was purchased by the respondents Nanak Chand and Musammat Parbati. Peary Lal then brought his own suit. The order that was passed in the decree that followed was that the property mortgaged might be sold, but, if Peary Lall wanted to sell the property purchased by Nanak Ohand and Musammat Parbati, he must pay them a sum of Rs. 20,000 as a condition precedent to the sale. Peary Lai never paid the sum of Rs. 20,000, but brought t...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Saran Das Vs. Girdhari Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-26-1925
Reported in: AIR1926All305; 92Ind.Cas.567
Mukerji, J.1. This is an application to revise an order of a Subordinate Judge of Aligarh who on appeal sat aside an order of the Munsif setting aside a sale held in execution of a decree.2. It appears that a certain property of the judgment-debtor was advertised for sale and a sale actually took place on the 17th of September 1924. The judgment-debtor, who is the petitioner before the Court, on 14th October 1924, took exception to the sale on the ground that there was material irregularity in the publishing and conducting of the sale and that the price fetched was consequently too small. On the 25th of October 1924 the petitioner made an application pointing out that two encumbrances to the total amount of Rs. 5,807 had been shown in the sale proclamation, whereas no such encumbrances actually existed at the date of the advertisement. The Munsif found that this was a fact and on that ground he set aside the sale.3. On appeal the learned Subordinate Judge held that the learned Munsif w...
Tag this Judgment!Ganpat Rai Vs. Firm Kani Ram-munna Lal and Kedar Nath
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-26-1925
Reported in: 92Ind.Cas.535
Mukerji, J.1. This petition in revision is on behalf of the defendant and raises a question of law on which so far as this country is concerned, there does not appear to be any authority.2. It appears that the defendant-applicant was adjudicated an insolvent by the Calcutta High Court on the 22nd of June 1921. He presented a scheme of composition which was ultimately accepted by the High Court and the adjudication was annulled on the 27th of September 1923. The respondents had a money claim as against the petitioner on the allegation that the latter obtained goods from them from time to time between the 15th of July 1916 and the 19th of June 1921, that he paid a portion of the price, and a small balance was still due with interest. On the completion of the insolvency proceedings, by a suit instituted on the 3rd of July 1921, the respondents claimed a sum of Rs. 109 and odd alleged to be due to them, in the Court of Small Causes at Cawnpore. The defendant denied the claim and pleaded, i...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »