Allahabad Court April 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.
Lodai or Lodi Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-27-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All646; 103Ind.Cas.104
ORDERLindsay, J.1. The applicant was tried Summarily by the Magistrate and was fined Rs. 10 under Section 122, Indian Railways Act 9, of 1890.2. Two things are necessary to bring a man under that section: (1) that the place of entry must be 'railway' as defined in Section 3(4) of the Act; and (2) the entry should have been unlawful in the inception. If the entry was not unlawful in the beginning neither part of Section 122 of the Act would apply.3. From the judgment of the learned Magistrate it is clear that the place where the accused was found is occupied as quarters by the railway employees. In Margam Aiyar v. Mercer [1914] M.W.N. 124 it was found by a Division Bench of the Madras High Court thatStaff quarters or any building of a residential character cannot be deemed to be part of a Railway.within the meaning of Section 3(4) of the Act, and so a conviction under Section 122 of the Act was set aside against the accused in that case. The fact that the place happens to be between two...
Thakur Jaikaran Singh and ors. Vs. Sheo Kumar Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-27-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All747; 103Ind.Cas.370
Sulaiman, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit for redemption. The plaintiff's predecessor, Ram Kumar, made three usufructuary mortgages of his fixed rate tenancy in succession. In April 1888, he mortgaged about 6 bighas and odd to Hakim Singh for Rs. 272 which was redeemable in 1302 Fasli. In November 1888, he mortgaged another 8 bighas and odd of his fixed rate tenancy to Sheo Mangal for Rs. 550, which was redeemable in 1306 Fasli. About two bighas and odd of the holding still remained in the possession of the mortgagor. In 1894 he mortgaged the entire holding for a sum of Rs. 1,352 to Nand Kumar. He left out of the mortgage money Rs. 272 for payment of the first mortgage in 1302 Fasli, and Rs. 550 for payment of the second mortgage in 1306 Fasli. It was agreed between the mortgagor and the mortgagee. Nand Kumar, that the latter should redeem the prior mortgages and after paying the rent due to the zamindar should appropriate the profits in lieu of interest. It is ...
Banwari Lal and anr. Vs. Nand Ram and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-26-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All611
1. This is a defendants' appeal arising out of a suit brought by a mortgagee who has purchased the property in execution of a mortgage-decree against certain persons who had acquired the property in execution of a simple money-decree and had not been impleaded in the mortgage suit. It appears that there was a simple money decree for profits against defendant 3 in execution of which a certain share was sold at auction and purchased by defendant 2 in 1918. Subsequently on the 3rd January 1921, defendant 2 sold a part of that share to defendant 1. In 1920, the present plaintiff instituted a suit for sale on the basis of a mortgage deed in his favour, dated 19th February l908. In this suit he impleaded neither defendant 2 nor defendant 1. A decree for sale was obtained and in execution of it, the mortgaged property was put up for sale and purchased by the plaintiff decree-holder himself. When he went to the revenue Court to get mutation of names effected, he was resisted by the defendants ...
Gharib Rai and anr. Vs. Mukh Lal Rai and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-26-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All616
Boys, J.1. This appeal raises the hitherto much debated question as to the effect of the non-registration of a document presented to a mutation Court asking for the names of the applicants to be entered in a particular way, and at the same time setting forth, in one form or another, that the parties have come to an agreement between themselves. The document in question says that the parties have consented amongst themselves (musalehat hui) to the effect that certain areas of land shall remain in the possession of the several applicants respectively that they will be liable for their own shares of the rent and shall have no concern with each other's shares and they will be bound by this solenamah. After setting forth these facts they pray that entry may be made in the revenue records in accordance therewith.2. Entry in the revenue records was made accordingly, and for some nine or ten years the parties have acted on this arrangement, We have been referred to some 12 or 15 decisions of t...
Pratap NaraIn Vs. Jute Mills
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-26-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All653
Walsh, J.1. This appeal must succeed. On the findings of the Court below the case is unarguable. The plaintiff and defendant had dealings together and the defendant was in the habit of paying the plaintiff's servants. The plaintiff's servant Ram Nath presented forged bill on which the defendant paid. The learned Judge in the Court below has found that if it had been a genuine bill the payment would have been a good payment. A man who does a thing through an agent does it himself in the eyes of the lay and therefore the presentation of the forged bill was just as much the act of the principal as the genuine bill, as was said in the leading case of Barwick v. English Joint, Stock Bank [1867] 2 Ex. 259:It is true that the principal has not authorised the particular act, but he has put the against in his place to do that class of acts and he must be answerable for the manner in which the agent has conducted himself in doing the business which it was the act of his master to place him in.As...
Bajai Vs. Ram Sarup and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-26-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All757
ORDERLindsay, J.1. This is an application for the revision of an order passed by the District Magistrate directing that the opposite party should be retried for an offence of which they had been convicted. The learned District Magistrate passed his order upon an application for revision made by the opposite party. The ground for revision was that the depositions had not been read over to the witnesses as required by the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code. The learned District Magistrate relied upon the fact that I had passed similar orders on the same ground. My orders were based on the rulings reported as Hira Lal Ghosh v. Emperor Dargahi v. Emperor . I felt that I was bound in law to follow these rulings, because they appeared in the Indian Law Reports and were not contradicted by any rulings of the High Court at Allahabad. If there had been no authority I should have held that an irregularity of procedure such as this could be cured by the provisions of Section 537, Criminal ...
Nizam UddIn Vs. Ahmad Bhai and Co.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-26-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All799; 103Ind.Cas.365
Kendall, J.1. This appeal arises from a suit in which the parties are found to have carried on a mutual and common account; each of them purchased boots and shoes from the other. The defendant-respondent brought a suit against the present plaintiff-appellant in the Small Causes Court Agra, in 1923, which was based on the mutual account from the 6th July 1921, to the 7th November 1921, and he obtained a decree ex parte against the present plaintiff. The plaintiff attempted to have the ex-parte decree set aside but without success. He has now brought the present suit. In the plaint, which is dated the 10th April 1924, he claims a sum of Rs. 867 on the basis of an account due from the defendant from the 9th June 1921, to the 3rd October 1921. Both the Courts below dismissed the plaintiff's suit on the ground of res judicata but they have also expressed the opinion that the plaintiff's account in the present suit is not a genuine account.2. It has been urged in this Court on behalf of the ...
Girdhari Lal Vs. Gobind Rai
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-26-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All810; 103Ind.Cas.346
Sulaiman, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of a suit for profits under Section 164, old Agra Tenancy Act, against a lambardar. The plaintiff's name is recorded as proprietor of a specific area of land with a specific share of the profits. The defendant is admittedly a lambardar of the village. The parties are brothers. The Courts below have dismissed the suit on a finding that the family is joint, and that a member of a joint Hindu family has no right to claim profits from the karta of the family.2. In our opinion, it was not open to the Courts below to go into the question of the jointness or the separation of the parties. The plaintiff repudiated the suggestion that he was a member of a joint Hindu family. His name was recorded as a proprietor in the revenue papers for the years for which the profits were claimed. Under Section 201, Sub-clause (3), if the plaintiff is recorded as having the proprietary right entitling him to institute a suit under the provisions of. Chap...
Daya Ram and anr. Vs. Murli Dhar and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-26-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All823
1. This is a plaintiff's appeal and arises out of a suit brought by them for recovery of Rs. 3,346-6-0 alleged to be due to them from the defendant-respondents on account of certain khatti transactions.2. The plaintiff's case was that they carry on the business of commission agents for the purchase and sale of khattis and that, on instructions received from the defendant-respondents by means of a telegram dated 12th March 1916, they, on 13th March 1916, sold on the defendants behalf, to certain persons 11 khattis and agreed to deliver the same to the purchasers in Jeth. They alleged that the defendants did not deliver the khattis in the month of Jeth inasmuch as the rate of grain had risen in the interval, and in order to carry out their business with the vendees of the khattis, they (the plaintiffs) had to pay the difference to the purchasers of the kattis between the market rate prevailing on 13th March 1916 and on Jeth badi 15th. The plaintiffs alleged that they had to pay to the pu...
Partap NaraIn Vs. the Jute Mills
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-26-1927
Reported in: 103Ind.Cas.382
Walsh, J.1. This appeal must succeed. On the findings of the Court below the case is unarguable. The plaintiff and defendant had dealings together and the defendant was in the habit of paying the plaintiff's servants. The plaintiff's servant Ram Nath presented a forged bill on which the defendant paid. The learned Judge in the Court below has found that if it had been a genuine bill, the payment would have been a good payment. A man who does a thing through an agent does it himself in the eyes of the law and, therefore, the presentation of the forged bill was just as much the act of the principal as the genuine bill, as was said in the leading case of Barwick v. English Joint Stock Bank (1867) 2 Ex. 259 at p. 266 : 36 L.J. Ex. 147 : 16 L.T. 461 : 15 W.R. 877: 'It is true, that the principal has not authorised the particular act, but he has put the agent in his place to do that class of acts and he must be answerable for the manner in which the agent has conducted himself in doing the b...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »