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.
Manohar Lal Vs. Baldeo Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-25-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All505; 103Ind.Cas.379
Walsh, J.1. This is a suit brought in the revenue Court by one Pandit Manohar Lal on his own behalf and as Mutwalli for a certain idol, and according to the judgment of the Assistant Collector, it is a suit brought for the whole rent. The District Judge disagreeing with the Assistant Collector, who had decreed the suit, has dismissed it. The facts are that the plaintiff, according to the finding of the District Judge, is one of seven co-sharers and that the other co-sharers or some of them are Mutwallis and that there is a dispute going on between them with regard to the right to collect rent and that dispute has been the subject of some legal proceedings in a civil Court and that this unfortunate defendant has already paid the rent to one of the other Mutwallis and is apparently the corpus vile over which these two quarrelsome Mutwallis are endeavouring to decide their controversy, Prima facie the suit was bad under Section 194 of the Tenancy Act, which provides that general rule of p...
Babu Ram and ors. Vs. King-emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-25-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All560; 103Ind.Cas.202
Sulaiman, J.1. The only point in this case is whether gambling took place in a public place within the meaning of Section 13 of the Public Gambling Act.2. The applicants were gambling outside the city of Mainpuri in a plot of land bearing No. 2574. The land is private property but is vacant land. It is surrounded on three sides by fields and on the fourth side is the Esan stream. There is not even a footpath going over the place where the gambling was going on. No doubt close to the place there is a peepal tree which is situated on the bank of the Esan river, but it is not suggested that this is a place of worship where the public have ordinarily access. A pucca road is 320 paces from the spot and another narrow kuchcha way is 150 paces from it. In fact this narrow kuchcha way is on the boundaries of the fields and passes close to the south of it. The learned Sessions Judge inspected the locality and his impression was that the place could never be a public place.3. On the authorities ...
Kishore Chand Shib Charan Lal Vs. B.B. and C.i. Ry. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-25-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All591; 103Ind.Cas.317
Lindsay, J.1. This is a plaintiff's application under Section 25 of the Small Cause Courts Act, The suit was a suit to recover damages from the railway system, for short delivery, the allegation being that one of a number of bales of cotton yarn had been out and some bundles extracted. The Judge of the Small Cause Court has found on a preliminary issue that the defendant railway companies were absolved from all liability by reason of the provisions of risk note,form H, which had been executed by the plaintiffs. In dismissing the claim he referred to a judgment of this Court in Secretary of State v. U. P. Glass Works, Chandausi : AIR1926All565 . In this case Mr. Justice Daniels gave a judicial interpretation of the contents of the new risk note form H, with which we are concerned in this case, and, relying upon that interpretation, the Judge of the Court below held that the plaintiffs could not recover. The case which was before Daniels, J, was a case of non-delivery which would be cove...
Debi Das Vs. Maharaj Rup Chand
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-25-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All593
Walsh, J.1. In my opinion this appeal must be allowed. I wish to make it clear that I am deciding this case and no other; but I find insuperable difficulty in getting over the terms of the order in this case of the 11th of August 1917 and the reasoning in the Madras case to which I am about to refer, and the subsequent Madras authority which took the view which I take, in another case which came before them. We have not the application actually before us which was made by this mortgagee, but the facts are really not in dispute.2. There was a mortgage. The mortgagee, therefore, had a right and interest in the property attached. There had been an attachment and if the attachment was continued and the execution took its ordinary course, there would necessarily be a sale. That is by practice, by common experience and by ordinary business considerations the proper time for the mortgagee to draw the attention of the Court to the existence of his right or claim. It may well be that he does no...
ishri and ors. Vs. Het Ram
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-25-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All619
1. This appeal and Appeal No. 420 of 1925, arise out of a suit brought by the plaintiff for recovery of possession of a one-third of mahal Shib Kuar of village Bithani and for redemption of the remaining two-thirds of that mahal.2. The facts that led to the suit giving rise to the present appeals ace shortly these: Four biswa share of village Bithani, was, along, with six other villages, mortgaged in the year 1880 to one Ram Prasad for a sum of Rs. 1,000. The same share was again mortgaged, along with three other villages, in the year 1885 to Man Kanwar.3. The four biswa share subsequently was converted into a 20-biswa mahal called mahal Shib Kuar.4.The heirs of the prior mortgagee put the mortgage of 1880 in suit, and obtained a decree for sale in 1894. The subsequent mortgagee of 1885 was not impleaded as a party in that suit. The entire mahal Shib Kuar was sold in execution of the decree obtained by the heirs of the prior mortgagee, and was purchased by one Chhiddu Singh in 1897.5. ...
Munni Lal Vs. Mt. Phula and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-25-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All679; 103Ind.Cas.322
1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit for recovery of possession of property by avoidance of at mortgage-deed executed by the plaintiff's sons and a decree passed thereon and the consequent purchase followed by mutation of names in favour of the mortgagee. The plaintiff's case as set forth in the plaint was that the original owner of this property was Paras Ram, who under an oral will had bequeathed a one third share in the estate to his wife, Mt. Phula; that her name has remained entered as heir; that subsequently there was a private partition between the sons in 1905 under which she got her property separated; that this has been followed by partition proceedings in the revenue Court under which a separate mahal was constituted; that in spite of all these facts the defendant 1 took a mortgage from her sons, Udai Ram and Ram Chander, of the plaintiff's share,which was in no way binding on her. The contesting defendant denied that there was any bequest in favour of the w...
Mt. Akhtar Jahan Begam and ors. Vs. Hazari Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-25-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All693; 103Ind.Cas.310
Walsh, J.1. The point raised in this case is very simple. The present defendants are the heirs of the vendor. They are not themselves the fraudulent vendors, but it is a fallacy to suppose that if the suit were based upon fraud, they would not be responsible for the loss caused by the fraud on the buyer (the plaintiff); but it is not based upon fraud. The deceased vendor sold the property to one Pearey Lal and then in 1912 sold it to the present plaintiff. If anybody says that is not fraudulent conduct, he does not know the meaning of the word. It is sufficient for us that the District Judge has believed that he cheated the purchaser. The purchaser now, having been deprived of the property for which he has paid, not unnaturally seeks to recover the loss which is the price and interest and costs. If he could not do so in this country, the law would be worthy of the description given in a well-known romance, but it is not the law in this country. He is entitled to recover the loss unless...
Rameshwar Lal Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-22-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All571a; 103Ind.Cas.204
Lindsay, J.1. This is an application in revision directed against an order purporting to be passed under Section 478, Code of Criminal Procedure by the Munsif of Saidpur in the Ghazipur district.2. I need not refer in any detail to the facts. It is sufficient to say that the applicant before me, Rai Saheb Rameshwar Lal, was the plaintiff in a civil suit in one of the Courts at Ghazipur. After that suit had been disposed of proceedings were started against Rameshwar Lal under the provisions of Section 476 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, it being considered apparently that there were reasons for supposing that Rameshwar Lal, in the course of the civil suit just referred to, had been guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 196, 467 and 471, I.P. C, It is admitted before me that the Munsif was competent to deal with this case when it started under Section 476. After the case had been thus initiated in the Munsif's Court a successful application was made to the District Judge to...
Ram Saroop and anr. Vs. Khaderan Kohar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-22-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All608; 102Ind.Cas.523
Mukerji, J.1. This is an application to revise an order of the Munsif of Benares exercising the powers of. Judge, Small Cause Court. It seems that there was an ex parte decree against the opposite party (who has not appeared before this Court). He made an application for setting aside the ex-parte decree on the 3rd of December 1926. and with that application he made a tender of the decretal amount. The decretal amount was actually put into the treasury on the 6th of December 1926. The learned Judge in the Court below accepted the payment as good. It is contended in this Court that this payment was delayed and the learned Judge was not justified in treating the payment as good.2. Under the rules framed by this Court, vide Rule 12, Chap. II of the General Rules and Form No. 43 the Treasury Officer is directed to receive a payment if made within three days of the tender. This is a very salutary rule and would be necessary for transaction of business. The office hours are not the same for ...
Birjbhukhan Dube and ors. Vs. Mt. Ram Dulari
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-22-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All695; 103Ind.Cas.393
Iqbal Ahmad, J.1. This appeal must be allowed. It is well settled that under the Hindu law a widow, on becoming unchaste, forfeits her rights to maintenance. The only question that arises for consideration in the present appeal is whether the fact of the maintenance being secured to the widow by an agreement executed by the relations of her deceased husband enlarges her ordinary rights, and entitles her, notwithstanding her unchastity, to claim the maintenance secured to her by the deed of agreement. The first Court answered this question in the negative. But the lower appellate Court has, on the authority of the decision of this Court reported as Bhup Singh v. Lachman Kunwar [1904] 26 All. 321, decided that the plaintiff-respondent, notwithstanding her unchastity, is entitled to a decree for the amount claimed by her, inasmuch as the defendants-appellants had agreed to pay her a certain amount as maintenance, and this agreement was reduced to writing.2. In the case of Bhup Singh's cas...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »