Allahabad Court December 1928 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.
Musammat Gomti Vs. Kanhaiya Lal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-14-1928
Reported in: 116Ind.Cas.794
Mukerji, J.1. This is an application by one Musammat Gomti for stay of execution of a certain decree under the following circumstances:2. Kanhaiya Lal and another hold a decree against Musammat Gomti's husband Maoon. In execution of the simple money decree a building was attached and Musammat Gomti laid claim to that building as her own property. Her objection in the execution department having succeeded the decree-holders, Kanhaiya Lal and another, instituted a suit against Musammat Gomti to obtain a declaration that the property was attachable in execution of the decree against Musammat Gomti's husband. The litigation thus started by Kanhaiya Lal and another against Musammat Gomti has come up to this stage that Kanhaiya Lal has been successful in the Court below and Musammat Gomti has filed a second appeal. Musammat Gomti's second appeal has been admitted by two learned Judges of this Court. This signifies that she has at least an arguable case. Musammat Gomti now wants that the prop...
Bhajan Singh Vs. Nokhe
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-1928
Reported in: AIR1929All168
Boys, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of a suit for possession of three quarters of a share in a zamindari. The plaintiff mortgaged the whole of the share to the present defendant's predecessor-in-title. The defendant by purchase at an auction-sale in pursuance of the decree of another person became the owner of three quarters of the share. He subsequently brought a suit for the sale of the remaining quarter for a proportionate amount of the mortgage-debt.2. In 1917 there was a preliminary decree for sale of the quarter which was followed by negotiations between the plaintiff and the defendant for a settlement. These negotiations resulted in an agreement, according to the terms of which the mortgagor was to pay to the mortgagee the whole amount of the mortgage money plus the price which the mortgagee had paid at his auction purchase of three quarters of the share, and in return the plaintiff-mortgagor was to get back the whole of the share as soon as he bad paid the first...
Mohammad Noor Khan and ors. Vs. Bande Ali Khan and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-1928
Reported in: 114Ind.Cas.752
Mukerji, J.1. The respondents are unfortunately unrepresented in this Court. The learned Counsel who appears for the appellant, has however, put before me the only case which might be cited on behalf of the respondents, and I do not think that the respondents' absence really prejudices them.2. The plaintiffs are co-sharers of 14 out of 72 sihams and the respondent Zahur Ahmad Khan is the lambardar and owner of the remaining sihams. Zahur Ahmad Khan granted a lease for seven years of a joint grove land in favour of respondent No. 1, BandeAli Khan. The plaintiffs thereupon at once came to the Court challenging the validity of the lease. The suit succeeded in the Court of first instance but failed in the lower Appellate Court. The learned Subordinate Judge who heard the first appeal found that the rent fixed was an adequate one and on that ground alone dismissed the suit.3. In this Court it is contended that it was not the adequacy of the rent which alone was of importance and I agree wit...
Rahim Bakhsh Vs. Bachcha Lall
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-12-1928
Reported in: AIR1929All214
1. This is an appeal by the defendant from the judgment and decree of the Subordinate Judge of Banda in a suit for damages founded upon slander.2. Plaintiff Bachcha Lal is a partner in the firm of Mulchand Ram Prasad, which carries on extensive business at Banda, and as commission agents and in the purchase of sale and grain.3. In 1924, one Chhedi Brahmen had agreed to purchase from the plaintiff's firm through Bachcha Lal 200 bags of gram of a particular kind and quality and had paid Bachcha Lal Rs. 200 by way of earnest money. This transaction led to a criminal complaint, which was filed by Chhedi against Bachcha Lal under Section 420, I.P.C. The trial of the case was in progress and while the cross-examination of Chhedi was proceeding, Babu Kesho Chandra Singh, a vakil for Bachcha Lal, asked Chhedi, the complainant whether the plaintiff's firm was the biggest arhatia firm for grain in the city or not. Chhedi answered that question in the affirmative. Rahim Bakhsh, who was a mukhtar ...
Mohammad Ishaq Vs. Jafri Begam
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-10-1928
Reported in: AIR1929All155; 114Ind.Cas.870
Niamatullah, J.1. Plaintiff-respondent brought the two suits out of which these consolidated appeals Nos. 1207 and 1208 of 1926 have arisen for recovery of profits from the defendant-appellant for the years 1329-1332 F. She claimed to be a recorded cosharer of khatas 1 to 4, mahals Umri and Ghair Khwastgaran in village Pikhlauni, district Aligarh. The defendant-appellant who is the lambardar admittedly collected the rent of these mahals during the years in suit.2. The defendant contested the claim on the ground that the plaintiff has no proprietary right left in the aforesaid mahals as by a civil Court decree passed in a suit for partition between her and other cosharers including the defendant a share in village Basti Kazi (not in dispute) was allotted to her in lieu of her share in the mahals in dispute and other properties. That suit related to revenue paying properties and other immovable properties.3. The Courts below have decreed the suits awarding Rs. 131-11-0 as the plaintiff's...
Ram Raj Singh and ors. Vs. Lachmi Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-10-1928
Reported in: AIR1929All167
1. This is a plaintiff's appeal in a suit for possession of a holding of an occupancy tenant, one Raghunandan, who had died. In this case it was at first in dispute as to whether the plaintiffs or the defendants had taken possession of the holding, but this issue has been found as a fact in favour of the defendants. The history of the circumstances in which the parties find themselves is very simple. Plaintiffs and defendants are both cosharers in the mahal. Prior to Raghunandan's death the defendants had mortgaged their zamindari share to the plaintiffs and they had also-it is not clear whether 'before or after their mortgage to the plaintiffs-obtained a mortgage of his occupancy rights from Raghunandan. With the legality of this latter transaction we are not concerned but only with the fact that it has been found that prior to Raghunandan's death the defendants were in possession of the holding as mortgagees from Raghunandan. On Raghunandan's death they remained in possession of the ...
Radhey Shiyam Vs. Mewa Lal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-10-1928
Reported in: AIR1928All210
1. This is a defendant's appeal in a suit for accounts instituted by Mewa Lal and Radhey Lal, the two sons of Lala Bharathji against Babu Radhey Shiam. The defendant held a liquor contract from the Government for a period from 1st April 1922 to 31st March 1923. The license was issued solely and exclusively to Radhey Shiam. The plaintiff came into Court with the allegation that Radhey Shiam, the defendant, had taken Bharathji into partnership with him, in the matter of profits and losses relating to the liquor shop, that a profit of about Rs. 2,000 had been made in the said business in which the share of Bharathji came to half, and that Bharathji had received only Rs. 850 on account of his share. The suit was for the recovery of the amount due to Bharathji during the continuance of the contract.2. A variety of pleas were taken in defence; but we are concerned only with one of them. It was pleaded that the contract entered into between Radhey Shiam and the plaintiff's father contravened ...
Rajai and anr. Vs. Lala Behari Lal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-10-1928
Reported in: 115Ind.Cas.141
Niamatullah, J.1. This is a defendants' appeal arising out of a suit brought by the plaintiff respondents for a declaration that the defendants are not entitled to occupy a small house consisting of three rooms situate in Mirzapur. It is common ground that the house in dispute belonged to one Shanker Bin, now represented by the plaintiff-respondents, who purchased it from the former's successor-in-interest, Rajender Bin, by a sale-deed, dated the 2nd August, 1920.2. The defence was that by an agreement, dated the 25th July, 1891, Shanker Bin granted the house to the defendant No. 1's uncle Khaderu. The agreement provides that the grantee and his heirs would be entitled to occupy the house on condition of their keeping the house in proper repairs, that the grantee and his heirs are not entitled to transfer the house, and that in case they do so, the grantor reserved to himself the right to resume possession of the house. This agreement was not registered. But the defendant No. 1 claims ...
Jagannath Sahu Vs. Chedi Sahu
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-07-1928
Reported in: AIR1929All144
1. This is an application for revision arising out of a suit brought by the applicant before the Subordinate Judge of Gorakhpur for a declaration of his right to certain property impugning a sale-deed executed by him in favour of the defendant. On 5th May 1928, parties agreed to refer their dispute to the arbitration of Babu Bhagwati Prasad, vakil. They moved the Court for an order of reference which was accordingly made. Babu Bhagwati Prasad, however, refused to act as arbitrator and by an application, dated 29th May 1928, the defendant nominated no less than nine persons, any one of whom, he desired to be appointed as an arbitrator in place of Babu Bhagwati Prasad. The plaintiff was not willing to have the case decided by an arbitrator. He, therefore, prayed that the arbitration be superseded and the case tried before the Court. The learned Subordinate Judge passed what appears to be a most extraordinary order, He appointed, Babu Ganesh Prasad, vakil, to act as arbitrator in place of...
Gobardhan Pande and ors. Vs. Debi Bux Kurmi and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-06-1928
Reported in: AIR1929All146; 114Ind.Cas.750
Boys, J.1. This is one of those cases of village disputes, superficially petty but which arise with great frequency and the principles governing them are therefore of some importance. I am afraid that no principle laid down by this Court will ever penetrate to the ordinary villager or petty zamindar, and he will still proceed to litigation in each case according to his lights. The plaintiff appellant as zamindar sued for a declaration of his right to two trees planted on parti land with damages for some wood sold from the trees. The defendants claimed to be the owners of the trees and that they had been planted by them. It is admitted that the trees are growing on parti land. Though the defendants did not plead that they had planted the trees by permission some evidence was apparently led without objection, and the case was decided in the lower Courts on the basis that the trees were planted by the defendants with the permission of the zamindar on parti land, and I have to determine in...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »