Allahabad Court February 1927 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.
Sahib Rai and ors. Vs. Bahari Rai and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-04-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All494; 101Ind.Cas.765
Sulaiman, J.1. This is a defendants appeal arising out of a suit for declaration of title. The facts of the case are very complicated. They may be briefly stated as follows In 1834 a certain share in the village was purchased in the names of three persons, Raghubar, Shankar and Sheo Baran. Sheo Baran's son sued for partition and separation of his share and his claim was contested not only by Raghubar's son Chit Bahal, the present plaintiffs' ancestor, but also by another claimant, Padarath. Padarath put forward the claim that although his name was not entered in the sale-deed he was entitled to an equal share and that, therefore, the plaintiffs were only entitled to one-fourth and not one-third. In spite of this defence Sheo Baran's son got his one-third share separated. Subsequently Padarath and Bharosa actually brought a suit to recover one-fourth out of the entire share sold by the sale-deed against Chit Bahal. Chit, Bahal admitted the claimants right but the other defendants did no...
Ram Lal Vs. Mushtaq Ali
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-04-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All758; 101Ind.Cas.777
Iqbal Ahmad, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal and arises out of a suit for ejectment filed in the revenue Court under Section 58(a), Agra Tenancy Act, on the allegation that the defendant was holding the land in dispute as a tenant from year to year, The defence to the suit was that the relation of landholder and tenant did not subsist between the parties, and that the defendant was in possession of the plots in dispute as a mortgagee.2. The learned Assistant Collector held that the relation of landholder and tenant did not exist between the parties, and that the land in dispute was held by the defendant as his khudkasht, and on these findings dismissed the plaintiff 's suit on the 15th June 1922.3. The plaintiff filed an appeal against the decree of the Assistant Collector in the Court of the Commissioner on the 12th August 1922. The learned Commissioner held that, as a question of proprietary title was in issue in the Court of first instance and was in issue in the appeal, the appea...
Farhatullah Vs. Mohammad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-03-1927
Reported in: AIR1930All89
Boys, J.1. This and the connected S.A. No. 1091 of 1924 relate to certain construction in the nature of houses and to the digging of a well on plot 82 inside a village abadi. The zamindar sued for the demolition of the houses and the filling up of the well. The facts of these cases very rarely appear with precision. But as I appreciate the facts in this case it has been found that there is plot 72 in the village; that on a portion of that plot there is the house of the defendant tenant; that the whole of the plot has been recorded as in his exclusive possession ever since 1903: that no portion whatever of the plot is 'uftada.' The tenant has now added to his house and has dug a well somewhere on this plot 72.2. The various circumstances under which these constructions are made and in which land or houses come into the possession of individuals are very often very obscure, unless the matter has already at some time been the subject of litigation. This frequently results in the pleadings...
In Re: Dina Nath Hem Raj
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-03-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All299
1. This is a case stated under Section 66 of the Income Tax Act of 1922. The case has been stated by the Commissioner and printed, a matter of great convenience to the Court. The questions upon which the case was stated are set out on page 4 of the case, and are as follows:6. The High Court has directed me to state a case with reference to the following points of law:(1) Whether in view of the facts and circumstances as stated in this special case of the petitioner's business in connexion with the purchase, sale, receipt and distribution of profit, of castor seeds delivered to the East Indian Railway at Manauri, the business was during the material period, carried on in Cawnpore within the meaning of Section 64.(2) Whether if it is eventually found that the petitioner's business was carried on in Cawnpore, the Income-Tax authorities acted in accordance with the Act in assessing them by way of summary assessment while a bona fide dispute was going on as to whether they were liable to be...
Secretary of State and anr. Vs. Dwarka Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-03-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All349
Mukerji, J.1. This is an application to revise a judgment of the Court of Small Causes at Aligarh by which the respondent's suit for damages was decreed against the Secretary of State as represented by the Agent of the East Indian Railway.2. The respondent's case is that his dhobi lived near the railway line. On the morning of the 27th of May 1925, two trains were running a race on the railway lines that ran by the dhobi's house. One of the trains was going to Delhi and the other to Bareilly and for a short distance the two trains ran parallel to each other. A spark from one of the engines burnt the thatched hut of the dhobi and along with the hut the plaintiff's clothes that had been given to the dhobi for being washed.3. The Court below found that the two drivers were driving the two trains at a furious speed and the spark which caused the fire came out of one of the engines. It also found that no precaution had been taken to protect the flying of sparks from the engine.4. In this Co...
Abdul Sattar Vs. Mt. Aqida Bibi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-01-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All319
Ashworth, J.1. This second appeal arises out of a suit brought by Sheikh Abdul Sattar plaintiff as heir of one Muhammad Ishaq against Mt. Aqiba Bibi, the widow, for a declaration that he was entitled to a 3/4 the share of the property and that the widow had no right to resist his claim. An alternative prayer was that if he should be found to be out of possession, he should be given a decree for possession. The first Court found that Muhammad Ishaq died five years ago and that the widow had been in possession of his property in lieu of her dower-debt of Rs. 5,000 ever since his death. The lower appellate Court upheld this finding.2. In this second appeal the only point taken is that the finding of the Courts below that the widow had been in possession of Sheikh Abdul Sattar's property in lieu of her dower was a finding not of fact but of law and was a wrong finding. If that finding be set aside, then under Article 104 of the Limitation Act the widow's claim to dower would be time-barred...
Jwala Prasad and anr. Vs. Sher Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-01-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All488; 101Ind.Cas.775
1. We are informed that the respondent Hira Singh died on 7th November 1925. The appeal against him abates and is, therefore, dismissed.2. The plaintiffs sued for sale and the defendants to the suit were Sher Singh and Puttu Singh. Hira Singh, a subsequent mortgagee, was made a party to the suit 12 years after the date of the mortgage, and so after the period of limitation for the enforcement of that mortgage had passed. The, lower Court was, therefore, correct in dismissing the suit against Hira Singh. In our opinion he was mistaken in dismissing the suit entirely.3. Order 34, Rule 1, lays down that all persons having an interest either in the mortgage security or in the right of redemption shall be joined as parties to any suit relating to the mortgage, but there is a proviso that this shall be subject to the provisions of the Code. There is another provision of the Code, O.1, Rule 9, that no suit shall be defeated by reason of the misjoinder or nonjoinder of parties, and a Court may...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›