Allahabad Court March 1925 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.
Parmanand Pandit and ors. Vs. Mata DIn Rai and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-04-1925
Reported in: AIR1925All427; 87Ind.Cas.477
Sulaiman, J.1. This is a plaintiffs' appeal arising out of a suit for redemption of a mortgage, dated the 18th of February, 1878, executed by the predecessors-in-title of the plaintiffs in favour of the ancestors of the defendants. The mortgage was for a sum of Rs. 160 and was usufructuary. Among other conditions, it is provided that the mortgagees would be entitled to appropriate the profits in lieu of interest and that at the time of redemption, there would be no accounting between the parties. There was a further provision that if in Jeth of any year the principal sum was paid, then the property would be redeemed. There was a clause that even after redemption the mortgagees would not be ejected but they would hold on the land as lessees on payment of annas 8 per bigha annually. There was a further provision that the mortgagees would be entitled either to cultivate the land or to plant a grove on it. The mortgagees, some time after the mortgage, it is not quite clear when but at leas...
Ramzan Vs. the Municipal Board of Benares
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-04-1925
Reported in: AIR1926All204
ORDERStuart, J.1. This is an application for revision of an order of the Joint Magistrate, Benares, convicting the applicant under Sections 185 and 307, Municipalities Act. From the record it appears that in April 1923 Ramzan, applicant, built a wall without first obtaining permission from the Municipal Board. This which is an offence under Section 185 of the Act, has not been seriously disputed.2. It is further alleged that on 15th April 1923 he was served with a notice to demolish the wall within three days. On 18th April an officer of the Municipal Board, finding that this had not been complied with went to the spot to demolish the wall but was not allowed to do so by the applicant. The lower Court has found this offence under Section 307 of the Act proved. For the first offence the applicant has been convicted and I think rightly. The fine of Rs. 50 is not severe having regard to the narrowness of the gali where the wall was constructed. The second charge has also resulted in a con...
Musammat Munno Devi Vs. the Municipal Board
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-04-1925
Reported in: 88Ind.Cas.191
Sulaiman, J.1. This is a Reference by the Sessions Judge of Agra recommending that the convictions of Musammat Muimo Devi, a school teacher, under Sections 185 and 307 of the Municipalities Act (Local Act II of 1916 as amended by Act II of 1919) and the sentences of fine of Rs. 10 on each count be set aside.2. The facts are not in dispute. The lady applied to the Municipal Board on the 29th of July 1924 for permission to re-build certain parts of her house, but in her application she did not clearly specify the extent, of the proposed building. On the 30th of July the Municipal draftsman prepared a map showing the western side of the building only. Acting probably on the approval of the Ward Member she began to build in anticipation of sanction. On the 25th of August she applied for the preparation of a new plan including both the western and eastern sides. The Board ordered a new plan to be prepared and the applicant to deposit the necessary fees. On the 2nd of September before any fi...
Srilal Goaika Vs. Kesho Das and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-03-1925
Reported in: AIR1926All83; 87Ind.Cas.368
1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit for recovery of a sum of money claimed as haq chacharam payable on the sale of a house situated in Patti Kasho Das, mahal Pirthipal Singh, in the village of Kashipur within the municipal limits of the city of Benaras. The plaintiff alleged that there was a custom in existence under which all houses situated on parjaut lands were liable to the payment of such dues. The defendant vendee denied the existence of any such custom and also denied that the land on which the house was situated was parjaut land. The Court of first instance came to the conclusion that the site was not parjaut land at all and that no parjaut had over been paid in respect of it. It also came to the conclusion that the evidence produced by the plaintiff was totally insufficient to prove the existence of any such custom in this particular mahal. On appeal the learned District Judge has reversed both the findings of the Court of first instance and come to the concl...
Firm Jhandu Lal-mithu Lal Vs. Mt. Wilayati Begum and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-02-1925
Reported in: AIR1925All442
Lindsay, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of a suit which was brought on a hundi. The document in suit is printed at page 27 of our record and it appears that it was drawn on the 25th September, 1918, by a person named Muniruddin. Muniruddin drew on himself and also accepted the hundi on the date just mentioned. He afterwards delivered it to a person named Muhammnd Husain who negotiated it with the plaintiff firm and obtained cash therefor. The amount of the hundi was Rs. 8,500.2. The suit out of which this appeal has arisen was brought by the plaintiff firm against the legal representative of Muhammad Hussain who is dead and against the drawer and acceptor Muniruddin.3. In the Court below the suit has been decreed against Muniruddin but it has been dismissed as against the representatives of Muhammad Husain. The basis of the judgment is this, namely, that there was no proper presentment of the bill for payment so as to render Muhammad Husain liable as an endorser.4. The p...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›