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.
Alam Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-20-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All804
Iqbal Ahmad, J.1. Criminal Revisions Nos. 127 and 182 of 1927 are connected with Criminal Revisions Nos. 179 and 206 of 1927 that have been disposed of by me to-day.2. The applications in Revisions Nos. 127 and 182 of 1927 are directed against an order of the learned Sessions Judge, by which he has set aside the order of discharge passed by a Magistrate of competent jurisdiction, and has ordered further enquiry into the case in which the applicants before me were charged with offences punishable under Sections 147 and 325, I.P.C.3. It appears that the relations between the tenants of village Gauhani and Thakur Bishwanath Singh, zamindar of that village, have been strained for a number of years with the result that there have been cases between them in the civil and revenue Courts. On the 13th January 1926, a riot took place in village Gauhani and a report of the incident was made in the police station of Majhgawan by some of the tenants and another report was made by the zamindar's men...
Firm Moolchand Ram Prasad Vs. the Great Indian Peninsula Railway
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-20-1927
Reported in: 102Ind.Cas.433
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 of June, 1923, 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 en route to Banda. The train ran through one station and stopped at Bharat Kup, and there a pointsman noticed the fire in wagon No. 25045 and gave the alarm. This was the wagon in which the ...
Nirban Singh Vs. Bari Bitta and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-19-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All484
Sulaiman, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of a suit for a declaration that the plaintiff was by right of survivorship and according to a mutual settlement, the exclusive and absolute owner in possession of certain zamindari properties consisting of six items set forth in the plaint, and that the principal defendant, Mt. Bari Bitta, had no right of ownership or partition thereto except to get Rs. 500 a year as maintenance allowance. The case put forward in the plaint was that the plaintiff was a member of a joint Hindu family with the principal defendant's, deceased husband, Gobardhan Singh, and that when he died Mt. Bari Bitta did not succeed to his estate as a Hindu widow. It was mentioned that she applied to the revenue Court for partition of some villages and the plaintiff objected, with the result that the revenue Court referred the plaintiff to the civil Court for a declaration of his ownership. The plaintiff, however, alleged that before he could file a suit there w...
Said Ahmad and anr. Vs. King-emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-19-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All536
Ashworth, J.1. These two cases are connected and are based on two separate applications to this Court to exercise its power of revision under Section 439. It is not understood why the office should have entitled one a miscellaneous case and one a revision case. The facts which are necessary to explain these applications before me are these. On the 26th September, 1926. at 9 a.m. the Kotwal of Ghazipur, by name Ram Karan Singh, and Suraj Nath Singh, the Excise Inspector, having obtained a warrant to search the house of one Mohit Khan for illicit opium, proceeded to the block of building in which that house is situated and in which are said to be situated also the houses of Farrukhsher Khan and Mt. Amina Bibi. The Kotwal directed some constables to scale a wall. There is disagreement as to what wall it was or as to whose property was invaded thereby. A dispute arose in the house inside the block of building and Farrukhsher Khan was injured. The police instituted a case against Farrukhshe...
Muhammad Hasan and anr. Vs. King-emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-19-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All610
Iqbal Ahmad, J.1. The applicants Mohommad Hasan and Mujai were convicted by a Magistrate of the 1st Class under Section 426, I.P.C., and Mohammad Hasan was ordered to pay a fine of Rs. 51, and in default of payment of fine to undergo six months' simple imprisonment, and Mujai was, sentenced to a fine of Rs. 315, and in default of payment of fine to undergo three months' simple imprisonment. The conviction and the sentences have, on appeal, been upheld by the learned Judge. 2. I am far from holding that the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge is satisfactory in every respect, and it appeared to me at one stage of the argument of the learned Counsel for the applicants that the judgment is not in accordance with the requirements of Section 367(1), Criminal P.C., and that in view of the decision reported as Sunhri v. Emperor [1921] 19 A.L.J. 921, I must safe aside the decision of the learned Sessions Judge, and remand the case back to him with a direction to record a proper judgment in ...
Har Lal Singh and anr. Vs. Rudra Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-19-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All787
1. This is a plaintiffs' appeal arising out of a suit for pre-emption of property sold to three vendees under a sale-deed, dated the 23rd January 1922. On the 12th January 1922, the present suit for pre-emption was instituted in which all the three vendees were impleaded. Later on it was discovered that one of the vendees was a minor and on an application made by the plaintiff's a guardian and litem was duly appointed by the Court. This appointment, however, was after the expiry of one year from the date of the registration of the document. The plaintiff relied on the wajib-ul-arz of 1870 and alleged that it recorded a custom of pre-emption. He also disputed the genuineness of the amount of consideration mentioned in the sale-deed. The defendants, on the other hand, pleaded that the claim as against one, and, therefore, as against all, was barred by limitation, and also that there was no custom, of pre-emption in the village. They further pleaded that the consideration set forth in the...
K. Nirban Singh Vs. Musammat Bari Bitta and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-19-1927
Reported in: 103Ind.Cas.87
1. This is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of a suit for a declaration that the plaintiff was by right of survivorship and according to a mutual settlement, the exclusive and absolute owner in possession of certain zemindari properties consisting of 6 items set forth in the plaint, and that the principal defendant, Musammat Bari Bitta, had no right of ownership or partition thereto, except to get Rs. 500 a year as maintenance allowance. The case put forward in the plaint was that the plaintiff was a member of a joint Hindu family with the principal defendant's deceased husband, Gobardhan Singh, when he died and that Musammat Bari Bitta did not succeed to his estate as a Hindu widow. It was mentioned that she applied to the Revenue Court for partition of some villages and the plaint iff objected, with the result that the Revenue Court referred the plaintiff to the Civil Court for a declaration of his ownership. The plaintiff, however, alleged that before he could file a suit, there was...
Mirza Said Ahmad and anr. Vs. Emperor Through Ram Karan Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-19-1927
Reported in: 102Ind.Cas.490
Ashworth, J.1. These two cases are connected and are based on two separate applications to this Court to exercise its power of revision under Section 439. It is not understood why the office should have entitled one a miscellaneous case and one a revision case. The facts which are necessary to explain these applications before me are these. On the 26th September, 1926, at 9 A.M. the Kotwal of Ghazipur, by name Ram Karan Singh and Suraj Nath Singh, the Excise Inspector having obtained a warrant to search the house of one Mohit Khan for illicit opium proceeded to the block of building in which that house is situated and in which are said to be situated also the houses of Farrukhsher Khan and Musammat Amina Bibi. The Kotwal directed some constables to scale a wall. There is disagreement as to what wall it was or as to whose property was invaded thereby. A dispute arose in the house inside the block of building and Farrukhsher Khan was injured. The Police instituted a case against Farrukhs...
Parsotam Saran Vs. Barhma Nand and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-17-1927
Reported in: 102Ind.Cas.665
Mukerji, J.1. This appeal has been referred to a Bench of three Judges at the instance of the learned Judges who first heard it. The reason for the reference was that they felt doubtful about the soundness of the case of Sahu Nand Kishore v. Shadi Ram : AIR1926All457 .2. The question for decision is, whether, in the circumstances of the case, the stay order passed by the High Court should have the effect of nullifying a sale that was held before the order of this Court could be communicated either to the Court below or to the officer conducting the sale.3. The facts of the case are given in the Referring Order and I will mention them very briefly only in order to indicate the precise point I have to decide. The judgment-debtor, who is the appellant before this Court, filed certain objections to the execution of a decree held against him by the decree-holders-respondents. His objection was dismissed by the execution Court on the 12th of. January, 1924. The date fixed for sale in executi...
Balwant Singh and anr. Vs. Hardeen and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-14-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All546; 101Ind.Cas.804
Iqbal Ahmad, J.1. This is an appeal by two plaintiffs, and arises out of a suit brought by them for a declaration that the surrender of certain ex-proprietary holdings belonging to them effected by their certificated guardian Badlu Singh, was not binding on them, and was ineffectual to terminate their rights as tenants in those holdings.2. There is no controversy about the facts and they are shortly these: Badlu Singh was appointed guardian of the minor plaintiffs by the District Judge. With the permission of the District Judge Badlu Singh transferred certain zemindari properties belonging to the plaintiffs to the defendant-respondents in February and March 1920. On the sale being effected, the minors acquired ex-proprietary rights in the sir lands that appertained to the share sold. On the 9th of July 1920, an application for surrender of the ex-proprietary holdings, that came into existence on the sale of a zemindari share, was filed by Badlu Singh, the guardian of the plaintiffs in ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »