Allahabad Court March 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.
Gaya Prasad and ors. Vs. Babu Ram and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-28-1928
Reported in: AIR1928All387; 110Ind.Cas.561
Sulaiman, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit for sale on the basis of a mortgage-deed dated 8th March 1897 executed by one Kashi Prasad in favour of three persons Babu Ram, Har Prasad and Dwarka Prasad for a sum of Rs. 8,500. The suit was instituted by Babu Ram alone for his one-third share in the mortgage money. It is an admitted fact that by a subsequent purchase Har Prasad's sons who are the present appellants, acquired the interest of Dwarka Prasad in the mortgage-debt, and they have also acquired the whole of the equity of redemption. In order to bring the claim within limitation the plaintiff relied on certain acknowledgments and alleged payments of interest. The main defence to the suit was that the plaintiff's claim was barred by limitation and that in any case the whole amount had been paid off and nothing was outstanding. The learned Subordinate Judge has decreed the claim; hence the appeal.2. It appears that on 12th October 1898 the mortgagor Kashi Prasa...
Mt. Mukhtari Vs. Harbans Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-28-1928
Reported in: AIR1928All614; 118Ind.Cas.172
Mukerji, J.1. This is a case of a nature of cases which have frequently occurred, and some sort of decision has been arrived at in this Court. It cannot be said that the decision has been satisfactory, but in the absence of a better method the decisions have to be accepted as laying down the right law.2. Shorn of all surplusages the case of the plaintiff-appellant was this. She for certain service rendered by the defendant to her, agreed to grant in his favour a lease of a certain property for two years. The defendants taking advantage of the fact that the appellant was a pardanashin lady of immature intellect and a minor, obtained from her a document which she subsequently discovered was a perpetual lease for a very inadequate rent. She accordingly brought this suit out of which this appeal has arisen for obtaining a declaration that the lease was not binding on her. After the parties had adduced evidence the defendant took up the plea that the suit was not cognizable by the civil Cou...
Ram Charan Banwari Lal Vs. Kishori Lal Ram Sarup
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-27-1928
Reported in: AIR1929All50
Lindsay, J.1. This is an application for revision under Section 115, Civil P.C., and the ground taken is that the judgment and decree of the lower appellate Court are nullities because no appeal lay to the Additional Subordinate Judge.2. The facts of the case are as follows: The firm of Ram Charan, Banwari Lal, who are the applicants here brought a suit against another firm carried on in the name of Kishori Lal, Ram Sarup. The suit was for the recovery of Rs. 386 odd And was filed in the Court of Mr. Zia-ul-Hasan, who was the Subordinate Judge of Farrukhabad with Small Cause Court powers to try suits of a value not exceeding Rs. 500.3. Before the suit could be decided Mr. Zia-ul-Hasan was transferred from Farrukhabad to Cawnpore. He was succeeded in office by Mr. Shankar Lal, a Subordinate Judge, but it so happened that Mr. Shankar Lal was not invested with the powers of a Small Cause Court Judge. It became necessary, therefore, for some arrangements to be made to effect the disposal o...
Ram Charan-banwari Lal Vs. Kishori Lal-ram Sarup
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-27-1928
Reported in: 115Ind.Cas.127
Lindsay, J.1. This is an application for revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure and the ground taken is that the judgment and decree of the lower Appellate Court are nullities because no appeal lay to the Additional Subordinate Judge.2. The facts of the case are as follows: The firm of Ram Charan-Banwari Lal, who are the applicants here, brought a suit against another firm carried on in the name of Kishori Lal-Ram Sarup. The suit was for the recovery of Rs. 386 odd and was filed in the Court of Mr. Zia-ul- Hasan, who was the Subordinate Judge of Farrukhabad with Small Cause Court powers to try suits of a value not exceeding Rs. 500.3. Before the suit could be decided Mr. Zia-ul-Hasan was transferred from Farrukhabad to Cawnpore. He was succeeded in office by Mr. Shankar Lal, a Subordinate Judge, but it so happened that Mr. Shankar Lal was not invested with the powers of a Small Cause Court Judge. It became necessary, therefore, for some arrangements to be made to eff...
Manak Chand Singh Vs. Khubi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-26-1928
Reported in: AIR1928All555
Mukerji, J.1. This appeal must be allowed and the case sent back to the Court below for disposal according to law.2. It appears that the plaintiff, who is the zamindar, brought the suit, out of which this appeal has arisen for recovery of a certain amount of money as a fair rent on the allegation that the three defendants, who were brothers and who were tenants of the plaintiff in respect of other plots of land, had in collusion with the patwari, taken possession of land which had never been leased out to them.3. The suit succeeded in part in the Court of first instance. During pendency of the suit in the Court of first instance one of the defendants, Khan Chand, died. To start with, his widow was brought on the record as his representative. Subsequently the widow gave birth to a posthumous son, who was named Padam Singh and later on he was brought on the record. Although Padam Singh had been made party in the Court of first instance the decree omitted to describe Padam Singh as one of...
Nanak Chand Singh Vs. Khubi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-26-1928
Reported in: 116Ind.Cas.96
Mukerji Thakur, J.1. This appeal must be allowed and the case sent back to the Court below for disposal according to law.2. It appears that the plaintiff, who is the zemindar, brought the suit, out of which this appeal has arisen, for recovery of a certain amount of money as a fair rent on the allegation that the three defendants, who were brothers and who were tenants of the plaintiff in respect of other plots of land had in collusion with the patwari, taken possession of land which had never been leased out to them.3. The suit succeeded in part in the Court of first instance. During pendency of the suit in the Court of first instance one of the defendants Khan Chand died. To start with his widow was brought on the record as his representative, Subsequently the widow gave birth to a posthumous son, who was named Padam Singh and later on, he was brought on the record. Although Padam Singh had been made party in the Court of first instance the decree omitted to describe Padam Singh as o...
Churamani Chaturvedi Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-22-1928
Reported in: AIR1928All402; 110Ind.Cas.215
Sulaiman, Ag. C.J.1. This is a reference by the Sessions Judge of Mainpuri from an order refusing to grant a copy under Sub-section 5 of Section 165 of the new Criminal P. C, The house of Churamani Chaturvedi was searched by a Sub-Inspector of Police in connexion with some theft cases and the final report of the police was submitted to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate who accepted it. Next day Chaturvedi made an application to the Magistrate for being supplied with copies of any record made by the Sub-Inspector under Sub-sections (1) or (3) of that section. The Magistrate did not grant the application but ordered it to be filed. The revision to the Sessions Judge was from this order which amounted to a refusal to grant the application. The Magistrate in his explanation admits that there seems to have been some mistake on his part or that of his reader, which he regretted. Possibly the application was misunderstood as the Magistrate suggests2. The right to apply for copies is now embodied ...
Kishori Lal and anr. Vs. King-emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-22-1928
Reported in: AIR1928All546
Dalal, J.1. The provisions of Section 528(2), Criminal P.C., appear to provide that the District Magistrate and the Sub-Divisional Magistrate shall have equal authority in withdrawing cases from a Subordinate Magistrate and that the District Magistrate shall not exercise powers of an appellate Court as regards orders passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate. It is laid down there that any District Magistrate or Sub-Divisional Magistrate, may withdraw any case from or recall any case which he has made over to any Magistrate subordinate to him and make inquiry into, or try, such case himself or refer it for inquiry or trial to any other such. Magistrate competent to inquire into or try the same. In the present case the Sub-Divisional Magistrate transferred the hearing of a case from the Court of the Tahsildar of Kasganj to the Court of Pandit Manna Lal, Deputy Magistrate. Lalman thereupon applied to the District Magistrate, who, without issuing notice to the accused, cancelled the order o...
Harjan Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-22-1928
Reported in: AIR1928All551
Sulaiman, J.1. The accused was charged with the offence under Section 457, I.P.C., read with Section 23, Criminal Tribes Act. There can be no doubt as to the facts. They are proved by the direct evidence of no less than four witnesses. The complainant, while sleeping inside his house at night heard a noise and woke up. He noticed a thief lifting paddy tied in a cloth on his head, which had been kept in the house. The complainant at once got up and captured the thief and shouted for help. On this, three of his neighbours came in and secured the thief. It was the accused himself who was recognized by the villagers. A report to the police was duly made and the accused with the bundle of paddy was handed over to the Sub-Inspector who immediately took him under arrest. All the four assessors who heard the evidence unanimously agreed that the case was fully proved. There can be no manner of doubt as to the propriety of the conviction.2. The accused is admittedly a registered member of crimin...
Mt. Raj Rani Vs. Gulab and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-21-1928
Reported in: AIR1928All552; 117Ind.Cas.831
Kendall, J.1. This is a second appeal from a decision of the learned District Judge of Jhansi, reversing the decision of the trial Court which had given the plaintiff mortgagor a decree for possession of an occupancy holding on payment of a sum of Rs. 219. The parties to the suit had executed a deed which purported to be a mortgage by conditional sale of an occupancy holding in 1897, that the present suit was framed as one to redeem the mortgage. The mortgage was clearly an invalid one and both the Courts below have held it to he so. The only question raised in second appeal is whether the plaintiff mortgagor is entitled to recover possession.2. The lower appellate Court has held that in case of an illegal mortgage the transaction should not be recognized in any way by the Courts. The trial Court relied on the decision in the case of Ramzan v. Bhukhal Rai [1918] 16 A.L.J. 747, in which the facts appear to have been precisely similar to those in the present case and it was decided that ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »