Allahabad Court October 1926 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.
Mohammad Mustafa HusaIn Khan Vs. Sri Ram and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-20-1926
Reported in: AIR1927All202
1. This is a second appeal The plaintiffs were the purchasers of the equity of redemption in respect of certain usufructuary mortgage, and the right was pre-empted in 1918. Certain mortgagees had to pay a certain sum of money annually to the mortgagor under a mortgage prior to the purchase by the plaintiff. The plaintiffs brought the present suit for recovery of this amount from the date of the purchase to the date of their dispossession by the pre-emptor. We are of opinion that the plaintiffs have no right to recover any sum by way of profits out of the property for the time between their purchase and the pre-emption. The lower appellate Court has not, expressed itself quite clearly but this is what it means when it says 'Pre-emption' after all is only a substitution of one vendee for another. The definition of the 'right of pre-emption' given in the Agra Preemption Act, 1922, conveys the meaning attached to such a right even prior to the passing of the Act. The definition says:Right ...
Bindeshari Bux Singh Vs. Chandika Prasad and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-20-1926
Reported in: AIR1927All242
Pullan, J.1. The two lower Courts have concurred in finding that the whole amount contained in a mortgage bond, dated the 19th of September 1914, is due to the plaintiff from Bindeshri Bux Singh, who is the appellant before us. We are only concerned with the lower Court's decision on this point. It a admitted that the consideration for that bond included an item of Rs. 510 due on a bond of the 7th of February 1914, and that on that date the executant Bindeshri Bux Singh was a minor. It is contended that a minor is not competent on attaining majority to execute a fresh bond ratifying as it were a bond executed by him during his minority. The lower Courts held otherwise relying on a ruling of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Mt. Kundan Bibi v. Sree Narayan [1906] 11 C.W.N. 135, but we are asked to consider that ruling is not good law. All transactions entered into by a minor are void. Consequently the bond entered into on the 7th of February 1914 must be held to have been without a...
Mt. Ahmadi Begum Vs. Girraj Kishore
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-19-1926
Reported in: AIR1927All194
Iqbal Ahmad, J.1. This is a reference by the Small Cause Court of Manipuri under Order 46, Rule 6 of the Civil P.C. The point for determination is whether a suit for the recovery of rent for the occupation of a shop is a suit for the recovery of house rent within the meaning of Article 8 of the Second Schedule to the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, and as such exempted from the cognizance of a Court of Small Causes. The learned Judge is inclined to the view that the words 'house rent' in Article 8 mean rent of a building used as a dwelling house only and does not include the rent of a shop. I am of a contrary opinion.2. If the Legislature wanted to use the word 'house' in the said article in the restricted sense in which the learned Judge making the reference thinks it was used, then the Legislature could easily have indicated its intention qualifying the expression 'house' by the word 'dwelling.' The absence of any such qualifying word leads one to the conclusion that the word 'hou...
Punjab National Bank Vs. Tajammul HusaIn Bisheshar Nath and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-19-1926
Reported in: AIR1927All236
Dalal, J.1. The Punjab National Bank has appealed from the dismissal of its suit for money on foot of two hundis, dated the 2nd of November 1921. The hundis were drawn by the firm of Tajammul Husain Bisheshar Nath, and the drawee was the firm of Moti Lal Bisheshar Nath at Calcutta. These hundis were duly accepted by the firm of Moti Lal Bisheshar Nath. The question of acceptance has already been dealt with by us in our judgment in First Appeal No. 524 of 1923 delivered to-day. We hold acceptance to have been made by a person duly authorized by the firm as required by Section 27 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, These hundis were renewed on the 4th of February, 1922 by the same drawer, but were not accepted by the firm of Moti Lal Bisheshar Nath on presentation. The learned Judge of the lower Court held that the renewal of the 4th of February 1922 was a full discharge of the two prior hundis and that therefore the firm of Moti Lal Bisheshar Nath was not liable to make payment either on...
Tirloki Nath Vs. King-emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-08-1926
Reported in: AIR1927All742
Banerji, J.1. One Banwari Lal complained against Tirloki Nath, under Section 352 I.P.C. The case was tried summarily by the District Magistrate of Meerut, but the proceedings adopted by him are curious. What he says in his judgment is:Accused's father says that if complainant swears on Ganges water that he has not abused his father the case is finished.2. Neither the accused's father nor the complainant's son were parties to the case and I fail to see how any Magistrate could have acted in the way that this learned Magistrate did. There is no provision of any law, and it seems to me against common-sense, to decide a case in the way that this Magistrate did. I accept the reference. As the case is a trivial one I direct the record to be returned. No further action need be taken in the matter....
Tirloki Nath Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-08-1926
Reported in: 100Ind.Cas.381
Banerji, J.1. One Banwari Lai complained against Tirloki Nath, under Section 352 of the Indian Penal Code. The case was tried summarily by the District Magistrate of Meerut, but the proceedings adopted by him are curious. What he says in his judgment is:Accused's father says that if complainant swears on Ganges water that he has not abused his father the case is finished.2. Neither the accused's father nor the complainant's son were parties to the case and I fail to see how any Magistrate could have acted in the way that this learned Magistrate did. There is no provision of any law, and it seems to me against common sense, to decide a case in the way that this Magistrate did. I accept the Reference. As the case is a trivial one I direct the record to be returned. No further action need be taken in the matter....
Atma Ram and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-07-1926
Reported in: AIR1927All157
ORDERBanerji, J.1. This is an application for revision of an order of Mr. Piarey Lal, Barrister-at-law, First Class Special Magistrate of Meerut, convicting the applicants under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code, and sentencing them to a fine of Rs. 25 each and also ordering them to execute a bond in Rs. 100 each to keep the peace for one year. Only two points are urged in revision. The first is that the Magistrate tried the case summarily, but he did not record any notes of evidence or at any rate did not preserve any notes of evidence on the record. The second is that the order passed under Section 106 of the Criminal P. C. is illegal.2. Now with regard to the first point the Magistrate himself says that he did make some notes of the evidence of the witnesses for his own information, but he did not preserve these notes and keep them on the record. He says he was not required to do so. Now there can be no doubt that a certain number of witnesses were examined in this case, but it d...
Ram Chand Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-05-1926
Reported in: AIR1927All147
Benerji, J.1. This is an application in revision under the following circumstances:Ram Chand and two others were charged with having on the 11th of February 1926, cheated Ghurey and certain others of Rs. 8. This amount is said to have been paid because Ram Chand, vaccinator, found rubbish in front of houses of certain men and asked Ghurey to pay up Rs. 8. The learned Magistrate convicted all the three persons, but the Sessions Judge in appeal has acquitted the two patwaris and altered the conviction of Ram Chand from one Under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code to one under Section 161. I am of opinion, that this conviction cannot stand. It is alleged that the occurrence took place on the 11th of February 1926. Some time in March the present petitioner reported that a number of people in the village in question had collected rubbish in front of their houses. Thereafter certain anonymous letters were sent to the Sub-divisional Officer and a Tahsildar and a Naib Tahsildar made secret e...
Ram Dayal Gupta Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-04-1926
Reported in: AIR1927All730
Banerji, J.1. Two points have been taken in this revision. One is that the certificate of the Government Public Analyst does not bring the article, which was taken possession by the Medical Officer of Health of Allahabad, within the Prevention of Adulteration Act (U.P. Act 6 of 1912), and the second point is that the petitioner keeps ghee of two qualities and he had supplied the second quality to the Medical Officer of Health.2. The facts are that the petitioner is a dealer in ghee in the town of Allahabad. The Medical Officer of Health took two samples of ghee which this man sells, and one of these samples was duly seized and sent to the Public Analyst to Government to test. The Analyst says:The sample of ghee contained a large portion of an ingredient foreign to pure ghee and the sample was grossly adulterated.3. It is argued by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the article supplied to the Medical Officer of Health cannot be said to contain any substance not exclusively der...
Panchanan Banerji Vs. Upendra Nath Bhattacharji
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-02-1926
Reported in: AIR1927All193
Sulaiman, J.1. This is an application praying that the acquittal of the accused by the Sessions Judge should be set aside and that certain passages in the judgment, which are against the complainant's character, should be expunged.2. Although the High Court has undoubtedly jurisdiction to set aside an order of acquittal, that power is exercised in rare and exceptional cases. In this case the learned Sessions Judge has come to the conclusion that the case was a very troublesome and difficult one, and that there was the evidence of one of the prosecution witnesses of a partnership between the accused and the complainant, and as no report was made to the police, the Judge was not satisfied that the accused was bound by any contract to dispose of the articles entrusted to him as declared by the complaisant. He is of opinion that the dispute is really a fit one for the civil Courts. The inference drawn by the Judge from a number of letters and the oral evidence is an inference of fact and i...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›