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.
Sukhrampuri Vs. Muhammad Ashfaq
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-22-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All779a; 103Ind.Cas.424
Lindsay, J.1. In my opinion the judgment of the lower appellate Court in this case is correct. The suit was a suit for resumption of a muafi under Sections 150 and 154. Tenancy Act 2 of 1901 The first Court held that the lands had not been granted for the performance of any specific service and was also of opinion that the grant was a charitable grant and, therefore, not resumable. The suit was dismissed. In appeal the learned Judge came to a contrary conclusion and was of opinion that the grant in this case was a grant for specific service and was resumable by the zemindar when the service was no longer required.2. There is no direct evidence of the terms on which the grant was made, but in the wajib-ul-arz of 1881, para. 11, it is stated that in the mahal in which this property is situated 33 bighas odd were in possession of Gayapuri Goshain Chela of Bhagwanpuri, for the purpose of performing worship. It is further stated that he could retain possession so long as he performed worshi...
Nanda and ors. Vs. King-emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-22-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All815
ORDERWalsh, J.1. This is an application by Chatra for a report to the High Court under Section 438, Criminal P.C., in revision of an order dated 6th January 1927, by Babu Sri Nivas, First Class Magistrate of Agra, issuing summons for the applicant and others on the complaint of one Chob Singh. The Magistrate is the Sub-Divisional Officer and on 15th July 1926, Chob Singh had made a complaint under the same Sections 392 and 457, I.P.C., against the same accused on the same charge. That complaint had been transferred on 2nd November 1926, to an Honorary Magistrate Syed Ibn Ali who had heard evidence of two witnesses against the accused in the presence of the accused on 6th December 1926, and on 10th December 1926, the Magistrate had discharged the accused. The application for revision is based on the ground that when one Magistrate has discharged an accused person another Magistrate of a different Court cannot entertain a fresh complaint on the same facts. The following ruling of the All...
Nanda and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-22-1927
Reported in: 102Ind.Cas.344
Walsh, J. 1. This is an application by Chatra for a report to the High Court under Section 438, Criminal P.C., in revision of an order dated 6th January 1927, by Babu Sri Nivas, First Class Magistrate of Agra, issuing summons for the applicant and others on the complaint of one Chob Singh. The Magistrate is the Sub-Divisional Officer and on 15th July 1926, Chob Singh had made a complaint under the same Sections 392 and 457, I.P.C., against the same accused on the same charge. That complaint had been transferred on 2nd November 1926, to an Honorary Magistrate Syed Ibn Ali who had heard evidence of two witnesses against the accused in the presence of the accused on 6th December 1926, and on 10th December 1926, the Magistrate had discharged the accused. The application for revision is based on the ground that when one Magistrate has discharged an accused person another Magistrate of a different Court cannot entertain a fresh complaint on the same facts. The following ruling of the Allahab...
Sher Mohammad Khan Vs. Bihari and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-21-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All755
Lindsay, J.1. I think this application in revision must be allowed. It appears that a number of persons were convicted in the Court of a First Class Magistrate of Aligarh and sentenced to various terms of imprisonment. In appeal to the Sessions Judge a legal point was taken, namely, that the conviction was contrary to law because the Magistrate did not observe the provisions of Section 360, Criminal P.C. The learned Judge accepted this argument and set aside the conviction and sentence and sent the case back for re-trial. In passing this order the Judge remarked that if the question raised were res integra he should have been disposed to hold that the omission to comply with the terms of Section 360, Criminal P.C., was a mere irregularity which could be cured by the provisions of Section 537. He felt himself bound, however, by the decision in Hiralal Ghose v. Emperor : AIR1924Cal889 and certain other authorities and so he held that the trial in the first Court was invalid. Since the le...
Secretary of State Vs. Bhagwan Das and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-20-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All371
Walsh, J.1. This case has been argued in revision or rather under Section 25 of the Small Cause Courts Act, and having regard to a decision of Mr. Justice Daniels, reported in Secy of State v. U.P. Glass works of Chandausi : AIR1926All565 . and relied upon to some extent by the railway, Mr. Justice Lindsay has referred the matter to two Judges, apparently feeling that unless he differed from the decision he ought to allow the revision, but that, on the other hand, he was not prepared to follow the decision.2. Under the circumstances we do not think it necessary to discuss in detail the decision of Mr, Justice Daniels beyond holding that it does not, in our opinion, apply to the facts of the case before us and that if the true interpretation of it is that in the case before us the Railway Company would be exempt from liability, unless the consignor proved actual misconduct, we should be unable to agree with it, leaving it to other tribunals in other cases which may arise to decide how f...
Ram Prasad Vs. Core Lal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-20-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All486; 101Ind.Cas.844
1. Both subordinate Courts have held that the respondents are Brahmo Bhats and included in the term 'Brahman,' who are privileged persons, whose agricultural land cannot be attached or sold in execution of a decree under the provisions of the Bundelkhand Land Alienation Act. It was argued here: (1) that Bhats are Brahmo Bhats and are not included in the term 'Brahman,' but are either Banias or Sudras, and (2) that the objection was raised by the judgment-debtors very late in the proceedings after attachment was made and the file was sent to the Collector to carry out the sale of the agricultural land.2. The finding is one of fact that Brahmo Bhats are included in the term 'Brahman.' The learned Judge of the lower appellate Court has given reasons for holding that the intention of the Government was to include Brahmo Bhats in the term 'Brahman.' In the Notification issued under the Act all Brahmans are granted this privilege except Marwari Brahmans. The exception of Marwari Brahmans ind...
Jagwanti Vs. Udit NaraIn and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-20-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All587
Kendall, J.1. This second appeal arises from a suit for possession of certain zemindari property and mesne profits. The property was the personal property of one Sita Ram, whose widow, Mt. Dilaro, in 1914, executed what is called a deed of gift in favour of three persons: namely Raghunandan, the husband of the present plaintiff Ram Tawakkul, the father of Defendant No. 2; and Udit Narain, Defendant No. 1. These three donees were all direct descendants of the cousin of Sita Ram, and it appears that they held possession of the property allotted to them until 1921, when M.t Dilaro died, and disputes broke out among the donees during mutation proceedings. Some sort of settlement was made between them in December 1922, by which the property was allotted among the three. According to the plaint in the present suit Udit Narain dispossessed the plaintiff who is the widow of Raghunandan one of the donees.2. She based her claim on the assertion that the deed of 1914 was a surrender by Mt. Dilaro...
Mohammad FariduddIn and ors. Vs. Nand Ram and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-20-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All626; 103Ind.Cas.84
Mukerji, J.1. The facts which have given rise to this second appeal are, so far as they are material, these. One Hamiduddin owned two properties, one in Jalilpur and another in milak Ghantawala. On the 7th of February 1885, he made a usufructuary mortgage of both the properties in favour of the respondents' father, one Baldeo Das. Later on, on the 7th April 1891, the same mortgagor made a simple mortgage of the same two properties in favour of Baldeo Das. Baldeo Das brought a suit for sale under the second mortgage and obtained a preliminary decree which was made final later on. While the final decree was yet under execution, Hamiduddin brought a suit for redemption of the earlier mortgage of 1885. He obtained a preliminary decree for redemption on the 15th of January 1914, which directed him to pay the mortgage money, viz. Rs. 1,300, on the 30th June 1914. In the execution of the decree for sale 3/4th share of the property mortgaged in village Jalilpur was sold by auction and was purc...
thep Singh Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-20-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All767
Iqbal Ahmad, J.1. This application must, in view of the decision of Umed Singh v. Emperor : AIR1927All121 , be allowed.2. The applicant, Thep Singh, was convicted under Section 32(c) of the Forest Act and was sentenced to a fine of Rs. 300 with three months' rigorous imprisonment in default. The case for the prosecution was that the applicant without obtaining permission cleared 4 acres of unmeasured land in a certain protected forest with a view to cultivation, and thus committed an offence punishable under Section 32(c), Forest Act (7 of 1878.) Both the Courts below have held that the applicant did clear 4 acres of land for purposes of cultivation without the permission of the authorities. There is no finding by either of the Courts below that the applicant broke ground in a protected forest. It has been held in the case noted above thatwhere 'breaking' of ground only is forbidden by a notification issued under the Forest Act, no offence is committed when there has been only 'clearin...
Firm Moolchand-ram Prasad Vs. G.i.P. Ry.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-20-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All774
1. This is the appeal of a firm Mool Chand-Ram Prasad from a decision of the District Judge of Cawnpore who, affirming the decision of the Subordinate Judge, rejected the appeal of the plaintiff. The plaintiff firm had consigned 41 bags of betel-nuts from a place Bhola to Banda. That was on the 7th May 1923. One bag went astray, and for that the lower Court gave compensation. That matter is final as between the parties. The remaining 40 were destroyed by fire. On the 7th June 19 3 the wagon with the 40 bags was at Manikpur Station. The wagon was examined and was despatched to Karwi arriving there on the next day the 8th June. At Karwi certain packages were taken out of the wagon and ten bags of rice and five bundles of gunny bags were put into the wagon which left at 12:30 at night on the 9th on route to Banda. The train ran through one station and stopped at Bharat Kup, and there a pointsman noticed the fire in wagon No. 25015 and gave the alarm. This was the wagon in which the plaint...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »