Allahabad Court May 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.
Naurang Singh and ors. Vs. Pheku Bhagat and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-10-1928
Reported in: AIR1928All590
Dalal, J.1. Pheku sued to redeem a mortgage of sir plots. The mortgage was made on 1st July 1895 by the father of the defendant Sahdeo Singh. Subsequent events with relation to the property have rendered the matter of redemption difficult. Between 1901 and 1906, at any rate after the passing of the Tenancy Act, 1901, Pheku purchased the entire zamindari property of Sahdeo. This event turned the mortgage of 1st July 1895 into a mortgage of ex-proprietary tenancy, and the possession of Sahdeo was maintained through his mortgagee Naurang. Subsequent to the purchase by Pheku, Naurang purchased half the property at auction sale which was held on foot of a mortgage which was prior in date to the mortgage on foot of which Pheku purchased the entire zamindari property. In 1907, therefore, the position was this. In the joint property Pheku was owner of one-half, Naurang of the other half and in addition Naurang was in possession as mortgagee of the ex-proprietary plots 55 under the mortgage of ...
Emperor Vs. Bihari Bhar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-10-1928
Reported in: AIR1928All719; 113Ind.Cas.730
1. This is an appeal by the Local Government against the acquittal of one Bihari Bhar, son of Chauthi Bhar, of an offence under Section 22, Clause (2), Sub-clause (a), Criminal Tribes Act, being Act No. 6 of 1924.2. The opposite party, Bihari, was convicted by the learned Magistrate of the First Class on the 13th December 1927. He appealed from, jail, and the learned Sessions Judge acquitted him on the sole ground that the offence could not be tried summarily, and in summarily trying him the learned Magistrate made an error of law. In the result the learned Judge acquitted Bihari, and having regard to the circumstance that Bihari had already been in jail for over a month he did not order a re-trial. The learned Government Advocate has argued that the offence with which Bihari was charged was an offence punishable with the maximum amount of six months' rigorous imprisonment and that, therefore, under Section 260, Criminal P.C., the case was triable summarily. We find that the learned Ma...
Gaya Prasad Vs. Ram Sarup
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-10-1928
Reported in: AIR1929All101
Dalal, J.1. The learned Judge of the lower appellate Court ought to have detailed reasons for which he refused to admit an appeal under Section 5, Limitation Act, and not put this Court to the trouble of finding out the facts and adjudicating upon them. The word 'rejected' does not by any indulgence amount to a judgment. An appealable decree follows such a judgment. The facts are these. There was a suit for accounts against the defendant (appellant here), and a preliminary decree was passed for taking accounts against him. This decree was passed ex parte and the defendant went on taking proceedings to get the ex-parte decree set aside by reason of its being ex-parte. He did not appeal at the time on the merits under Section 96, Civil P.C. The proceedings taken by him came to an end on 19th May 1926. He submitted to the ex-parte preliminary decree, prosecuted the matter before the Subordinate Judge up to the preparation of a final decree and then appealed against the final decree to the...
Batuk Prasad Vs. Bhagwan Das and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-09-1928
Reported in: AIR1928All659; 110Ind.Cas.465
Dalal, J.1. In my opinion both the subordinate Courts have gone wrong. As usually happens in villages, a mendicant (Sadhu) had his kuti (hut) inside a grove. The zamindar permitted this because of religious associations connected with the Sadhu. Subsequently the Sadhu's disciple another Sadhu disappeared from the village and the plaintiff sued the defendants for ejectment from the land. The defendants are Kalwars, who alleged that they had purchased the kuti for Rs 50 by an oral sale from Dangir and claimed to be the owners of the land in consequence. There is a finding of fact in favour of the sale, though there is no deed and the evidence in support is not of any value. That finding is binding on this Court. It must, therefore, be taken as proved that Dangir sold the kuti to the defendants for Rs. 50. Dangir had no right to do so.2. It was argued that Dangir was owner of a grove and a grove can be transferred. It is true that a grove can be transferred but not the land of the grove. ...
inayat HusaIn Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-04-1928
Reported in: AIR1928All684
King, J.1. These are we applications for the revision of certain orders passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Patehpur, on 3rd December 1927. The facts are that a zamindar, Khan Bahadur Inayat Husain, is said to have sent certain servants of his to fetch labourers from the complainant. The servants are said to have gone and fetched the labourers forcibly. This led to a certain amount of violence and fighting.2. The police investigated the case and challaned the servants (who are the applicants in this Court) under S-147/452, I.P.C., but they did not challan the zamindar Khan Bahadur Inayat Husain, nor did they challan anyone for dacoity under Section 395, I.P.C. The complainants also made a complaint to the Magistrate charging the applicants with dacoity in addition to the offence mentioned, and since it was alleged that in the course of the fight one of the accused seized a golden chain from the neck of one of the complainants, they also charged Inayat Husain with abetment of causing ...
Gopi Lal and ors. Vs. Abdul Hamid and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-02-1928
Reported in: AIR1928All381
1. This second appeal arises out of a suit for redemption and is on behalf of the principal defendants, the mortgagees. There were many defendants, out of whom defendants 1 to 9 are parties as the legal representatives of the mortgagees. They have acquired the rights of the mortgagors in a fractional share in the mortgaged property. The plaintiffs represent the mortgagors' interest in a fractional share and the remaining defendants represent the mortgagors' interest in the balance of the property. The plaintiffs' share in the mortgaged property has been found to be, roughly, seven-sixteenths.2. The mortgage was made in 1859 and was in respect of a piece of land with a katcha house over it. The amount of the mortgage money was Rs. 400. The principal amount was to be paid within two-and-half years and in default of payment the mortgagees were to be treated as the owners of the property. In other words, the mortgage was one by conditional sale.3. The suit was instituted almost at the end ...
Sukha and anr. Vs. Lachmi NaraIn and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-02-1928
Reported in: AIR1928All621; 113Ind.Cas.829
Bennet, J.1. This is a second appeal by two minors under the guardianship of their mother who sued for the following reliefs:1. That a declaration should be granted that decree No. 400 of 1923, dated 9th October 1923, passed by the Assistant Collector, 1st Class, decreeing arrears of rent for an occupancy holding, of which Bena and others were tenants, has been obtained by defendants 1, a zamindar, by fraud, deception and misrepresentation, and that no lawful guardian for the appellants was appointed in that suit on account of fraud and deception practised by defendant 1, and that the said decree is void and ineffectual against the appellants, and that all proceedings as to ejectment in that decree are not binding on the appellants.2. That the appellants should be put in actual possession of the occupancy holding and defendants 1 to 3 should be dispossessed therefrom.3. That the appellants should receive Rs. 100 as damages.2. The appellants also sued against the two defendants to whom ...
Chiranji Lal Vs. King-emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-01-1928
Reported in: AIR1928All344
ORDERDalal, J.1. In my opinion Chiranji Lal was wrongly proceeded against under Section 108, Criminal P.C., when he ought to have been prosecuted tinder Section 153A, I.P.C. The facts found by the Subordinate Courts are that on one and only one occasion Chiranji Lal, who is assistant secretary of the Arya Samaj at Bareilly, gave out to a peon of the Society certain notices to be affixed publicly in the city of Bareilly, the contents of those notices being such as to promote feelings of enmity or hatred between Mahomedans and Arya Samajists. Part 4, Criminal P.C., is headed 'Prevention of Offences.' It does not provide for punishment of offences already committed. That part of the Criminal Procedure Code deals with steps to be taken to prevent offences in future. The judgment of neither Subordinate Court gives any indication of Chiranji Lal having ever before disseminated such literature, or of any fear that he would do so in future unless bound over and prevented. It is obvious to me t...
Mt. Saliman Vs. Hakim Mukhdum Bux and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-01-1928
Reported in: AIR1928All394
1. This is a second appeal by the representative of the original plaintiff who sued for a declaration that the wakf deed of 20th June 1921, alleged to be executed by Mt. Sakina, mother of the original plaintiff Baqridi, was inoperative against the plaintiff. The property in suit consists of two shops and one house and originally belonged to Qadir, the father of Baqridi, the original plaintiff, and of Mt. Saliman, the present appellant. It is alleged that Qadir was displeased with his children and that he executed a deed of gift on 15th December 1909 leaving the property entirely to his wife Mt. Sakina. Both the lower Courts have held that deed of gift is proved. On second appeal it was argued that the production of a certified copy of the registered deed, of gift was not sufficient proof. We consider that the gift is sufficiently proved because from the nature of the circumstances the original of that deed of gift would have been in the possession of Baqridi or Mt. Saliman and they did...
Chiranji Lal Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-01-1928
Reported in: 114Ind.Cas.48
ORDERDalal, J.1. In my opinion Chiranji Lal was wrongly proceeded against under Section 108, Criminal Procedure Code, when he ought to have been prosecuted under Section 153 A, Indian Penal Code. The facts found by the subordinate Courts are that on one and only one occasion Chiranji Lal, who is Assistant Secretary of the Arya Samaj at Bareilly, gave out to a peon of the Society certain notices to be affixed publicly in the city of Bareilly, the contents of those notices being such as to promote feelings of enmity or hatred between Muhammadans and Arya Samajists. Part IV, Criminal Procedure Code, is headed 'Prevention of Offences.' It does not provide for punishment of offences already committed. That part of the Criminal Procedure Code deals with steps to be taken to prevent offences in future. The judgment of neither subordinate Court gives any indication of Chiranji Lal having ever before disseminated such literature, or of any fear that he would do so in future unless bound over an...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›