Allahabad Court February 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.
Mamraj and ors. Vs. Murki
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-24-1928
Reported in: 114Ind.Cas.904
1. This appeal must prevail. The suit giving rise to the present appeal was occasioned by a suit for profits having been filed in the Revenue Court by the defendants of the present suit against the plaintiff-respondent. That suit was for a share of the profits of khewat No. 62 in village Tatiri in Meerut District. The defendants appellants before us were recorded co-sharers in that khewat and they brought the suit for their shares of the profits. The plaintiff-respondent resisted that suit on the ground that the names of the defendants appellants were fictitiously entered in the khewat, and as such, they were not entitled to their shares of the profits of khewat No. 62. This plea of the plaintiff was, in view of the provisions of Section 201(3) of the Agra Tenancy Act (II) of 1901), overruled by the Revenue Court and the suit for profits filed by the defendants appellants was decreed. This led to the institution of the suit giving rise to the present appeal by the plaintiff-respondent....
In Re: Govind Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-23-1928
Reported in: AIR1928All709
Boys, J.1. This application is not in form and does not comply with the rules of the Court in that it does not in the heading quote the law giving the right to apply and should have been returned to the applicant on that ground alone, Counsel for the applicant stated that he made the application on the authority of certain decisions of the Bombay High Court and eventually relied upon Clause 12, Letters Patent of this Court read with Section 3, Guardians and Wards Act 8 of 1890 and it is with reference to these that we deal with the application. We may note at once that it is not contested that in view of the rulings of this Court,-of. Jhhabbu Singh v. Ganga Bishan [1895] 17 All. 529 neither this Court nor the District Court will contemplate the appointment of a guardian of property, whether that guardian be the manager or no, in the case of a joint Hindu family by virtue of any powers suggested to be conferred under the Guardians and Wards Act, (Act 8 of 1890).2. It is unnecessary for ...
Dhanpat Rai Vs. Pooran and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-21-1928
Reported in: AIR1928All352
Boys, J.1. This was a case in which a landlord zamindar distrained for rent on the basis that the rent was Rs. 114. The tenant has brought this suit in 1923 under Section 142, Tenancy Act 2, 1901 for a declaration that distraint on the basis of a rent of Rs. 114 was illegal, and that the real rent was Rs. 70; that the rent had all along been Rs. 70 and it had never been legally enhanced. The defendant's answer accepted that the rent was originally Rs. 70, but alleged that the defendant had been compelled to sue to eject the tenant, the present plaintiff, and that suit had resulted in a compromise by the terms of which the plaintiff agreed to pay Rs. 114 rents, provided that the zamindar accepted that he had a right of occupancy. The trial Court held that the real rent was Rs. 114 and dismissed the suit. The lower appellate Court allowed the appeal and decreed the suit, holding that the alleged enhancement to Rs. 114 was not in accordance with law. The zamindar defendant has appealed to...
Chhedi Ram Vs. Gokul Chand and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-17-1928
Reported in: AIR1928All717; 114Ind.Cas.732
Sulaiman, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit for the closing of three windows opened by the defendant in his second storey on the ground that they infringed the plaintiffs' right of privacy as regards their room in the second storey. The houses of the parties are situate opposite to each other and are separated by a lane which is described as a private lane in the plaint. In the Courts below the defendant did not take up the position that there was any public lane intervening between the houses or that the existence of such a lane destroyed the right of privacy. Both the Courts below have decreed the claim.2. As pointed out by Sir John Edge in the leading case of Gokul Prasad v. Radho [1888] 10 All. 358.:every case must depend on its own facts and there are the primary questions which arise in all such cases: (1) Does the privacy in fact and substantially exist and has it been and is it in fact enjoyed? and (2) was the privacy substantially or materially interfered...
Suraj Prasad and anr. Vs. Bachhraj and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-17-1928
Reported in: 110Ind.Cas.25
This is a plaintiffs' appeal arising out of a suit for declaration of title, and in the alternative for possession. The plaintiffs are the grandsons of one Fakire, who was the first cousin of Sardar Singh deceased, whose grandsons are the contesting defendants. On the death of Sardar Singh, which took place in 1907 it is an admitted fact that the name of his widow, Musammat Mathura Kunwar, was recorded over the semindari property and the sir plots standing in his name. The plaintiff, however, alleged that he and his brother Fakire and the third brother Dunyapat, who had died previously, were all members of a joint Hindu family, and that the name of Musammat Mathura Kunwar was recorded fictitiously for her conflation that, as a matter of fact, the plaintiffs have remained in actual possession of the property all along. Musammat Mathura Kunwar died in 1923 and on her death, her daughter's sons succeeded in getting their names entered in the revenue papers in spite of the opposition of th...
Jang Bahadur Singh Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-16-1928
Reported in: AIR1928All342; 114Ind.Cas.189
Boys, J.1. This case has been referred to a Division Bench under the following circumstances:The applicant made a report to the police in which he expressed his suspicion that two other persons had stolen his watch. The police reported the allegation to be false, and the prosecution of the applicant was instituted by the Superintendent of Police under Section 182, I.P.C. So far it is manifest that the proceedings were absolutely in order.2. The applicant then went to the criminal Courts and filed a complaint to the same effect as the report which had already been found to be false. That complaint was dismissed, the Magistrate remarking that it was not advisable to commence a proceeding under Section 211, I.P.C. against the applicant 'on the present proof,' and, in view of the fact that the police had already started proceedings which we understand to mean that he was satisfied, for the time being at any rate, that justice was likely to be done by allowing the proceedings under Section ...
Mt. Deoki Vs. Jwala Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-14-1928
Reported in: AIR1928All216; 108Ind.Cas.564
Sulaiman, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit for a declaration that the plaintiff was the next male heir of the deceased Hoti Lal and a will set up by his widow, Mt. Deoki, in her favour alleged to have been dated 28th October 1922 was a false and spurious document. The deceased Hoti Lal had left a daughter Mt. Prembati who would succeed to the estate if her mother were to die, but the plaintiff has not impleaded her. She is in fact an unmarried minor girl of tender years and is under the protection of her mother. The claim was mainly contested by the widow Mt. Deoki, who pleaded that the deceased had, one day before his death, executed an unregistered will in her favour conferring upon her an absolute estate. The property in dispute consists of a one-sixth share in two markets and a one-third share in two residential houses. The defendant further pleaded that the plaintiff was not the next immediate reversioner and was not entitled to maintain the suit for declara...
Kunj Behari Lal Vs. Kunwar Jai Mal Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-14-1928
Reported in: AIR1928All399
Mears, C.J.1. This is an appeal from the judgment of Babu Gauri Prasad, Subordinate Judge, Pilibhit, who decided that the proved or admitted custom of dhar dhura did not apply in the particular circumstances of the case and consequently decreed the claim of the plaintiff.2. There is in the northern part of the province a river called Deoha, and on the western bank lies the village of Ujhainia, and immediately opposite it the village of Mittersenpur. Nobody can predict at the end of any monsoon where that river will finally settle, and an examination of the map shows how extremely unstable has been its course from 1306 Fasli to 1329 Fasli. Mr. O'Conor has handed up a map marked in yellow, blue, green and red, so as to impress upon us the astonishing character of the changes which have taken place in the site of the river during the last 22 years. It may be taken as completely certain that there does exist between the zamindars of Ujhainia and Mittersenpur the custom of accepting the dee...
Abdul Rauf and anr. Vs. Masih-ud-dIn and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-14-1928
Reported in: AIR1928All409; 114Ind.Cas.901
Walsh, J.1. In this case, which is connected with several others which are said to turn upon it, the plaintiff sued the defendant Abdul Rahman in the revenue Court alleging that he, the plaintiff, was an ex-proprietary tenant and that Abdul Rahman was his subtenant. This happened in the year 1921, the cause of action being said to arise on 1st July 1921, so that it has only been going on for 6 years. As the main argument addressed to me today is that the lower appellate Court had no jurisdiction to hear the appeal and that the order made by it ought to be set aside and the appeal heard by the Commissioner, which would, I presume, prolong the final decision of the case for another period of years. It is interesting So note that the value of the appeal is Rs. 7 and the Court-fee is 12-annas so that it has already taken nearly as many years to decide as there are rupees involved. The main dispute as will appear from a perusal of the not inconsiderable judgments which have been delivered i...
Alfred William Domingo Vs. L.C. De'Souza
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-14-1928
Reported in: AIR1928All481
Sulaiman, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of a suit for rendition of accounts brought against the defendant. The plaintiff's case was that on 16th February 1920, the parties entered into a definite contract under which it was agreed that the defendant was to advance to the plaintiff money necessary for the purchase of 100,000 French francs, the amount being provisionally estimated to be Rs. 60,000 at 9 per cent per mensem interest payable in two years; it was agreed that these francs would be kept in fixed deposit in some French bank, and on the expiry of the period of deposit would be converted into pounds sterling and remitted to India, and that the defendant, after deducting the amount of his principal and interest, was to pay to the plaintiff the balance of the profit, if any, and if there was loss the plaintiff would be liable for it. The plaint as originally filed, was too lengthy and verbose. The Court ordered that it should be cut down and abridged. Even after ame...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »