Allahabad Court May 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.
AmIn Chand Vs. Yad Ram and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-14-1926
Reported in: AIR1926All537a
Sulaiman, J.1. The plaintiff's suit for pre-emption has been dismissed by both the Courts below on a finding that he is a mere petty proprietor and not a co-sharer. He claims the rights of a co-sharer by virtue of a sale-deed of the year 1891 under which he purchased five specific plots. The sale-deed itself contains a clause that the plots were being sold to him without concern with anything else. The learned Judge has found that the plaintiff is not entitled to any interest in the joint lands in the mahal and is not entitled to take part in the administration of its affairs. When the plaintiff failed to prove that he was so entitled, he cannot call himself anything more than a mere petty proprietor as defined in Section 4(7) of the Pre-emption Act. The suit must stand dismissed and this appeal is dismissed with costs....
Moti Shah Vs. Ghandharp Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-14-1926
Reported in: AIR1926All715
1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit for recovery of possession of 3 biswas 15 biswanis shara in village Pitipur and 2 biswas 8 kachwansis share in village Mulupura, which had been recorded in the name of Mt. Durga Kunwar, and for possession of 10 kachwansis share in village Pitipur which had been purchased at auction by the defendant against Mt. Tikam Kunwar, deceased. The allegations in the plaint were that the property belonged to Suraj Narayan, the last male owner, and on his death his widow, Mt. Tikam Kunwar, inherited it, but that Mt. Durga Kunwar's name was recorded over a half-share for maintenance and consolation.2. On the death of Mt. Durga Kunwar, Mt. Tikam Kunwar, as well as the plaintiff, Gandharp Singh, and the defendant Moti Shah, put forward a claim to her share in the revenue Court and filed separate applications for mutation of names; that during the pendency of the mutation case, Mt. Tikam Kunwar executed a registered agreement dated the 21st of June...
Kasumari Das Vs. Makku and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-14-1926
Reported in: AIR1927All227
1. This is a second appeal in a suit for redemption brought by the legal representative of the deceased mortgagor, which suit has been dismissed by both the Courts below on the ground that up to the time when the decree was passed the plaintiff failed to obtain a succession certificate. The suit was brought without any succession certificate having been even applied for. Objection was taken and an issue framed Whether the plaintiff could maintain the suit without obtaining the certificate. The trial Court granted the plaintiff a fortnight within which to obtain the necessary certificate. He filed an application for a certificate in respect of half the debt, and this application was rejected. The order rejecting the application for a certificate was taken in appeal to this Court and was held to have been properly passed. The learned Judges who decided the appeal allowed the plaintiff to apply for a fresh certificate on a proper application in respect of the whole debt. He did so apply a...
Sheobaran Singh Vs. Nirotam Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-14-1926
Reported in: 96Ind.Cas.317
1. This second appeal arises out of a suit for partition. The land in suit is in khata No. 2 of Mahal Baqimanda in a certain village and both the Courts below dismissed the suit on the finding that the suit was not cognizable by the Civil Court. It is urged that the khata in suit has not been assessed to revenue and, I therefore, the Civil Court can partition it. In our opinion this argument has no force. Although the land in this khata, which consists of the abadi of the village, is not assessed to revenue, nevertheless it forma part of a mahal and, therefore, the jurisdiction of the Civil Court is barred by Section 233(k) of the Land Revenue Act, 1901.2. The case is governed by the rulings in Mahmud Jahan Began v. Govind Ram 59 Ind. Cas. 4 : 43 A. 45 : 18 A.L.J. 783 and Shiam Sunder v. Surta Singh : AIR1926All360 Following these rulings we dismiss the appeal with costs including in this Court fees on the higher scale....
Lalta Prasad and anr. Vs. Rohilkhand and Kamaun Railway
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-13-1926
Reported in: AIR1926All552
Daniels, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit claiming the value of a parcel of thirty seers of silver which was consigned by the plaintiffs-appellants from Delhi to Pilibhit. The parcel never reached its destination and the plaintiffs claimed its value. Among other defences taken by the railway one is based on Section 75 of the Railways Act. That section lays down that the railway shall not be liable for the loss of a package containing any articles mentioned in the second schedule which include the precious metals, unless the consignor has declared its value and contents at the time of delivering the parcel to the railway. In this case the contents were declared, but the value was admittedly not declared. All that the plaintiffs said was that the parcel weighed thirty seers. This is not a declaration of value as required by Section 75.2. In this Court the appellants' learned Counsel finding it very difficult to argue that a declaration of weight was the same thing as a declaration o...
Mahtab Singh Vs. Hub Lal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-13-1926
Reported in: AIR1926All610
Kanhaiya Lal, J.1. The question for consideration in this case is whether the appeal filed by Chaudhri Mahtab Singh in a suit brought by him for damages for malicious prosecution, which was dismissed by the Court below, has abated by reason of his death. The suit arose out of a charge brought by the defendants Hub Lal and Gur Narain, against Chaudhri Mahtab Singh and certain other persons for having attacked them with lathis and caused them certain injuries. A trial followed, resulting in the acquittal of Chaudhri Mahtab Singh and the conviction of certain other persons for offences under Sections 141 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code. Hub Lal filed a revision against the order of acquittal of Chaudhri Mahtab Singh in the Court of the Sessions Judge of Mainpuri, but the learned Sessions Judge upheld the order of the trying Magistrate and held that Mahtab Singh was not present at the time of the riot and had been falsely dragged in.2. In the present suit Mahtab Singh claimed Rs. 6,500 da...
(Syed) Sibt Mohammad Vs. Mohammad Hameed and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-12-1926
Reported in: AIR1926All589
1. The question for determination in this second appeal is whether Mt. Hasina Khatun is the legitimate daughter of her father Sibt Ali.2. The finding of the Court of first instance and of the first appellate Court is that Hasina Khatun was born during the continuance of a valid marriage between her mother Mt. Sakina Khatun and her father Sibt Ali, but her birth was within six months of the date of her parent's marriage.3. If the question of Mt. Hasina's legitimacy is to be determined in accordance with Muhammadan Law it must be held that she was illegitimate. The rule of Muhammadan Law is stated in Wilson's Anglo-Muhammadan Law, fifth edition, at page 159, as follows:It is conclusively presumed that a child born within less than six months after the marriage of the mother cannot have been begotten by her husband in lawful wedlock.4. If, on the other hand, the daughter's legitimacy is to be determined in accordance with Section 112 of the Evidence Act, she must be held to be legitimate....
Deo Raj and anr. Vs. Munshi Ram and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-12-1926
Reported in: AIR1926All679
1. The facts of the case are that the defendants who are commission agents purchased for the plaintiffs 25 tons of Java sugar in Calcutta. The defendants despatched 12 tons of sugar to the plaintiffs, according to their subsequent instructions, to Dehra Dun. The defendants had not been paid the full price of the sugar, therefore they sent the railway receipt to their own agents in Dehra Dun with instructions to make it over to the plaintiffs on payment of Rs. 5,000, which was the balance of the price due. The plaintiffs obtained the railway receipt from the defendants' agent on payment of Rs. 5,000, and took delivery of the consignment. It was found that there was a shortage of 55 maunds and 33 seers in this consignment. The whole question which we have to consider in second appeal is whether plaintiffs, or the defendants, are to be held responsible for this loss of 55 maunds and 33 seers which occurred during transit. The first Court found that the defendants were not liable for the s...
Partab Singh and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-12-1926
Reported in: AIR1926All705
1. In substance this appeal succeeds upon a well-known rule of law, or perhaps it would be more accurate to say a rule of practice, from which we find ourselves unable to depart. We shall probably be doing no injustice to any of the appellants if we say with regard to those, who as the result of our judgment, will step out of the Court as free citizens, that they have had a narrow escape, and that probably some, if not all of them, were in the undoubted combination of the biradari which wreaked their vangeance upon this woman, her lover and his son. In one sense the result may be regarded as a miscarriage of justice. In another sense it may be said to be the result of an immemorial tradition or custom, law-less but not unintelligible, in a village community where a husband and a son are disgraced by the conduct of a faithless and reckless woman, and it is possibly one of the fundamental difficulties in all such cases in India, and that is why there is not some independent evidence fort...
Deo Nandan Singh and anr. Vs. Har Shanker Prasad Shukul and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-12-1926
Reported in: 96Ind.Cas.172
1. The question in; this case is whether the appeal in an ejectment suit, lies, to the Civil Court, or to the Revenue Court. This question depends in the present suit on whether a question of jurisdiction has been decided within the, meaning of Section 177(f) of the Tenancy Act. In construing the provisions of that section, we are bound by the ruling of the Full Bench in Gokaran Singh v. Ganga Singh 52 Ind. Cas. 779 : 42 A. 79 A.L.J. 1072 : 1 U.P.L.R. (A.) 136 which approved a previous Letters Patent decision in Umrai Singh v. Ewaz Singh 49 Ind. Cas. 732 : 41 A. 270 : 17 A.L.J. 189. The rule laid down by the Full Bench is that a plea of jurisdiction, to come within the provisions of Section 177(f), must be a plea to the effect that, assuming the allegations made in the plaint to be true, the Revenue Court has no jurisdiction. If the defendant alleges that the true facts are different from those stated in the plaint, and that on the facts alleged by himself, the case is not cognizable b...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »