Allahabad Court July 1927 Judgments
Umrao Singh Vs. Mt. Mohan Kunwar and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-28-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All699
Sulaiman, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit for preemption. A number of grounds are taken in appeal which I proceed to consider seriatim. The first point is that the Court below has erred in applying the provisions of the Agra Pre-emption Act. This contention is well-founded. The sale-deed was executed on the 23rd June 1922, long before the new Act came into force. As held in the case of Sarju Prasad v. Bhagwati Prasad : AIR1925All542 the Agra Pre-emption Act came into force on the 17th February 1923. Section 12, C1s. 1, 2 and 3, relied upon by the Court below in its finding on issue 1, have therefore, no application. The second ground of appeal challenges the finding as to the existence of custom and is intended to deny the preferential right of the present plaintiff, Mt. Mohan Kunwar. The third ground asserts that the entry in the wajib-ul-arz of 1872 was a record of contract which has ceased to have any binding effect after the expiry of that settlement.2. The ...
Tag this Judgment!Sur Nath Bhaduri Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-28-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All721
Lindsay, Ag. C.J.1. The appellant, Sur Nath Bhaduri has been convicted in the Court of Sessions at Benares on a charge under Section 191, I.P.C. and has been sentenced to five years' rigorous imprisonment. The trial was with a jury, and, according to what is stated, the, jury returned a unanimous verdict of 'guilty' of an offence tinder the section just named.2. An appeal from a conviction after trial by a jury is only admissible on points of law. The petition of appeal, which is before me, enumerates eight points. They may, however, be reduced to a smaller number. 3. To put the case briefly, this man Sur Nath Bhaduri was charged with the offence known as the fabrication of false evidence. According to the charge as framed by the Magistrate who committed the accused for trial, there was only one charge, namely that this accused had produced a man named Nil Ratan Banerji before the District Magistrate of Benares, to make a false deposition concerning a case of murder. The charge, howeve...
Tag this Judgment!Emperor Vs. Brahmadin
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-28-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All727a
Sulaiman, J.1. This is a criminal reference made by the District Magistrate and forwarded by the Sessions Judge. Brahmadin was prosecuted under Section 110, Criminal P.C. Quite a volume of evidence was produced by the prosecution and the defence. The learned Magistrate who tried the case came to the conclusion that though the prosecution evidence excelled the defence evidence in quantity it was not of a convincing nature to warrant the accused being bound over. He accordingly discharged him on the 23rd May 1927.2. On the 5th June 1927, the prosecuting inspector submitted to the District Magistrate a representation through the Superintendent of Police discussing the evidence at great length and trying to meet the various points mentioned by the trying Magistrate in his judgment. He expressed his own view that a re-trial was necessary and then enumerated four grounds of appeal. On this representation the District Magistrate examined the record and made a note on record on the l0th June 1...
Tag this Judgment!Gaya Prasad and anr. Vs. Durga Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-28-1927
Reported in: AIR1928All112; 108Ind.Cas.136
Sen, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendants arising out of a suit for possession of the zamindari property in mauza Masgawan, district Hamirpur, and also for mesne profits on the following allegations. The plaintiffs and their deceased father Piare were members of a joint family. Piare had contracted a debt and the family was in involved circumstances. Piare applied, to the Commissioner under Section 6, Bundelkhand Encumbered Estates Act (Act 1 of 1903, Local), that the provisions of this Act be applied to him. The provisions of the Act were applied, and the Commissioner directed an enquiry to be made by the Special Judge, and the latter duly published a notice to all claimants in accordance with the provisions of Section 9 of the Act.2. On the 2nd September 1911 Piare entered into an agreement with Durga, father of defendants 1 and 2, to sell the property in suit to him for a sum of Rs. 1,300. After this Piare appears to have changed his mind, and he sold the property to defendant 3...
Tag this Judgment!Chhotey Lal Vs. Brijraj Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-28-1927
Reported in: AIR1928All142; 108Ind.Cas.155
1. This appeal arises out of a suit for cancellation of a deed of gift made by one Baldeo Singh, father of Brijraj Singh, the plaintiff, in favour of Pt. Chhotey Lal, the present appellant. The main contention for the defendant was that the plaintiff could not sue as the property of the joint family, which consisted of himself, his father and his brother Yuraj Singh had been taken under the Court of Wards. Both the lower Courts have held that the plaintiff had a right to sue on the ground, as they hold, that the plaintiff was not a ward. If the plaintiff was not a ward and his property had not been taken under the Court of Wards, there is of course an end of the matter and the two lower Courts were right. We do not consider, however, that they sufficiently examined all the circumstances.2. It is admitted on both sides that Thakur Baldeo Singh was nothing but the managing member of a joint Hindu family consisting of himself and his two sons Brijraj Singh and Yuraj Singh. There can be no...
Tag this Judgment!Daya Ram Vs. Secretary of State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-26-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All672
1. The suit giving rise to the present application for revision was instituted by the applicant, Daya Ram, for recovery of Rs. 200 as compensation from the Secretary of State. The facts which led to the suit are these: A certain sum of money was advanced by the Government to two persons, Ram Nazar and Jagannath, under Section 4, Agriculturists Loans Act (Act 12 of 1884). This kind of loan is popularly known as a takavi advance, and its character has been described in the Act as a loan granted to owners and occupiers of arable land for the relief of distress, the purchase of seed or cattle, or for any other purpose connected with agricultural objects.2. The loan was not repaid either by Ramnazar or Jagannath. Ramnazar having died, the revenue authorities, in pursuance of the provision of Section 5 of the Act attached a she-buffalo in the possession of Daya Ram on the ground that the latter was the heir of Ramnazar and the she-buffalo was the property of the deceased. Dayaram objected to...
Tag this Judgment!Nathu Ram Vs. Mt. Chand Kuar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-26-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All684
Ashworth, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the widow of a deceased man against the defendant, a zamindar who caused his death by shooting him. The suit is for damages under the Fatal Accidents Act (13 of 1855). The zamindar was convicted of an offence under Section 304 and sentenced to imprisonment and to a fine of Rs. 1000. The fine was realised and was paid over to the present plaintiff. Not being satisfied with the amount she has brought this suit and has obtained a decree for the further sum of Rs. 1500. The defendant appeals. The respondent is not represented. The lower Court awarded the further sum of Rs. 1500, taking into consideration the fact that Rs. 1000 had already been awarded.2. The first question that arises in this appeal is whether the Rs. 1000 fine paid over to the plaintiff should be taken into account in the present suit. No authority, one way or the other, has been cited but the Act empowers the civil Courtto give such damages as it may think propor...
Tag this Judgment!Khub Chand Vs. King-emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-26-1927
Reported in: AIR1927All791
Dalal, J.1. The point of law urged in this application for revision is that the Magistrate who tried the case had not jurisdiction to do so. The offence was not committed, within the circle of the jurisdiction of the Magistrate. He was however, competent, according to his powers, to try a charge under Section 182, I.P.C. The learned Sessions Judge has pointed out that this irregularity is excused by the provisions of Section 529(e), Criminal P.C. On behalf of the applicant my attention was drawn to a judgment of this Court in the case of Kunj Bihari Lal v. Lanua A.I.R. 1921. All. 123, in which it was held that under Section 12, Criminal P.C., only the Magistrate to whom the District Magistrate has allotted a particular area could take cognizance of offences committed in that area. There, however, the question did not arise as to what was to happen when a Magistrate, not having jurisdiction, tried a charge. In my opinion the section quoted by the learned Sessions Judge applies. I do not...
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Khan Vs. Shakira Bibi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-26-1927
Reported in: AIR1928All124; 108Ind.Cas.573
Sulaiman, J.1. This is defendant's appeal arising out of a suit for pre-emption. The property sold by the vendor consisted of a zamindari share as well as a one-third share in a house and a sugarcane pressing mill. The plaintiff sued to pre-empt the zamindari under the provisions of the Agra Pre-emption Act, and the share in the house and the mill on the basis of the Mahomedan law. On the date fixed for hearing her witnesses were not present, but an application, unaccompanied by an affidavit, was filed asking for an adjournment. That application was disallowed and the plaintiff's claim as regards the last two items was dismissed on the ground that she had not performed the necessary demands required by the Mahomedan law; but her claim for pre-emption of the zamindari was decreed on payment of a proportionate price. That judgment has been affirmed by the lower appellate Court.2. The contention before the Courts below was that it was the duty of the plaintiff to pre-empt the entire prope...
Tag this Judgment!Shiam Lal Vs. Jagdamba Prasad and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-25-1927
Reported in: AIR1928All131; 108Ind.Cas.561
Iqbal Ahmad, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal and arises out of a suit for redemption of a mortgage, dated the 4th February 1922, executed by Udai Singh, in favour of the defendant-respondents, Jagdamba Prasad and Debi Charan, for a sum of Rs. 1,500. The plaintiff purchased the equity of redemption on 8th July 1922 and deposited the mortgage money in Court, on 16th November 1923, under the provisions of Section 83, T.P. Act, and as the mortgagees did not withdraw the money and consent to the redemption of the mortgage, the plaintiff-appellant filed the suit giving rise to the present appeal. The defence to the suit was that the usufructuary mortgage sought to be redeemed by the plaintiff was for a term of 15 years certain, and the suit having been filed before the expiry of that term was premature. The trial Court held that though the mortgage was for a term of 15 years, the mortgagor was given a right to redeem the mortgage before the expiry of that period, provided he paid the mortg...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »