Allahabad Court October 1929 Judgments
Sohan Lal Vs. Raghubir Sahai and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-29-1929
Reported in: AIR1930All118; 122Ind.Cas.763
Mukerji, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal and arises out of a suit for recovery of arrears of rent instituted by the appellant against the respondents.2. The claim was that the defendants were liable to pay rent at the rate of Rs. 171-8-0 per year. The defence was that this rate could not be charged, and the annual rent payable was Rs. 90.3. To prove the defendants' liability to pay the sum of Rs. 171-8-0 per annum, the plaintiff put into evidence a decree passed on compromise dated 9th October 1918. It appears that a few years ago the plaintiff brought a suit against the defendants for their ejectment, as non-occupancy tenants. The parties agreed that the defendants should pay, in future, an enhanced rent at the rate of Rs. 171-8-0 per annum instead of Rs. 90, which they had been paying up till this suit, provided the plaintiff agreed to confer on the defendants the status of occupancy tenants. The terms were recorded in the decree that was passed, though the decree resulted in the d...
Tag this Judgment!Mohammad HusaIn Vs. Mt. Nanhi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-29-1929
Reported in: AIR1930All257
Young, J.1. This is an application in revision from an order in revision of the District Magistrate of Bijnor. A complainant brought a charge under Section 406, I.P.C., against the applicant. The matter came before a Special Magistrate and he discharged the applicant. The complainant went in revision to the District Magistrate who purporting to act under Section 436, Criminal P.C., ordered a retrial. The applicant comes in revision to the High Court against the order of the District Magistrate.2. Mr. Khawja, on behalf of the complainant, raises a preliminary objection to the case being entertained by the High Court. He contends that the applicant should not be heard by the High Court, until he has first made an application in revision to the Sessions Judge, and he prays in aid the authority of Sharif Ahmad v. Qabul Singh A.I.R. 1921 All. 30. In that case a Bench of this Court decided that:as far as the practice of this Court is concerned, an application to the lower Court should be con...
Tag this Judgment!(Sahu) Radha Krishna Vs. Tej Saroop and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-28-1929
Reported in: AIR1930All69
Sulaiman, Ag. C.J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of a suit for sale on the basis of a mortgage deed, dated 25th February 1921. The suit was instituted on 12th February 1927, i.e., more than three years after the mortgage but within six years of it. In the plaint the plaintiff claimed a further relief that in case the mortgaged property be insufficient and any amount remains due to the plaintiff the plaintiff may be authorised to apply for the preparation of a decree against the person and other properties of the principal defendants. The first Court held that the personal remedy was barred, as the suit had been brought more than three years after the bond and relied on certain remarks in Ganesh Lal v. Khetra Mohan Mahapatra A.I.R. 1926 P.C. 56. The plaintiff preferred an appeal challenging the finding that a personal decree was barred. He also urged that the lower Court should not have decided that question at that stage. The learned District Judge has repelled both these ...
Tag this Judgment!Banwari Lal Vs. Maksudan Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-28-1929
Reported in: AIR1930All99
1. This is an appeal by one Lala Banwari Lal who applied before the District Judge of Allahabad to obtain a succession certificate. It appears that a certain gentleman Lala Kishori Lal died possessed of certain shares of the United Provinces Electric Supply Co. Ltd. The applicant states in his application that he and other persons whose names are shown in the column of relatives (sons and grandsons) of the deceased, were members of a joint Hindu family with the deceased and that to receive the dividends of the shares it was necessary to obtain a succession certificate.2. Notices were issued to the members of the family other than the applicant and nobody took exception to the application. The petition was heard ex parte but the learned District Judge dismissed it on the ground that no succession certificate could be granted to a member of a joint Hindu family who gets the property by right of survivorship and not as an heir.3. Lala Banwari Lal has appealed and the question is whether h...
Tag this Judgment!Eshaq Lal and anr. Vs. Dulla
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-28-1929
Reported in: AIR1930All115
1. This appeal arises out of a suit for sale brought by one of the appellants Eshaq Lal, and one Ramji Lal who is now represented by the other appellants, for recovery of money on foot of a mortgage bond dated 6th March 1919, executed by the respondent Dulla. The suit has been dismissed on the ground that Dulla had no right to the property when he made the mortgage. Dulla did not appear in the case, but the respondent Harphul (who has since died and whose legal representatives have been brought on the record) alone contested the suit. The facts are briefly these:One Bhure had two daughters Bhagwanti and Naoli. Bhagwanti's son is Dulla and Naoli's son is Harphul. Mt. Bhagwanti died sometime about 1907 and on her share of her father's property Dulla's name was recorded. Naoli died shortly before the institution of the suit and Harphul's name was recorded in her place. Dulla has made a gift of his half share in the property in favour of Harphul. It is also a fact that after the execution ...
Tag this Judgment!Jhangtoo Barai and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-28-1929
Reported in: AIR1930All409
Young, J.1. This is an application in revision from an order of the Sessions Judge of Ghazipur refusing to convert an order of discharge into an order of acquittal. The facts are these: One Jagardeo brought a complaint against the two applicants under Section 498, I.P.C. On 28th January 1929, the day appointed for the hearing of the case, the Magistrate was informed that the complainant and the applicants wished to compound the offence, and at the same time a written petition signed by all the parties was filed, praying the Court to pass the appropriate order. On that document itself appeared in the handwriting of the complainant the words 'the compromise which is written here is correct.' The Magistrate passed an order that the composition was to be verified and appointed 13th February for the first hearing. The applicants take objection to this order. They contend that when the composition was filed and the offence compounded the Magistrate's duty was, under Section 345, sub-S. (6), ...
Tag this Judgment!Sahu Radha Krishna Vs. Tej Saroop and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-28-1929
Reported in: 123Ind.Cas.321
Shah Muhammad Sulaiman, A.C.J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of a suit for sale on the basis of a mortgage-deed, dated the 25th of February, 1921. The suit was instituted on the 12th of February, 1927, i. e., more than three years after the mortgage but within six years of it. In the plaint the plaintiff claimed a further relief that in case the mortgaged property be insufficient and any amount remains due to the plaintiff, the plaintiff may be authorised to apply for the preparation of a decree against the person and other properties of the principal defendants. The first Court held that the personal remedy was barred, as the suit had been brought more than three years after the bond and relied on certain remarks in Ganesh Lal Pandit v. Khetramohan Mohapatra 95 Ind. Cas. 839 : 53 I.A. 134 : 24 A.L.J. 615 : A.I.R. 1926 P.C. 56 : 43 C.L.J. 545 : 28 Bom. L.R. 931 : 24 L.W. 50 : 51 M.L.J. 82 : 7 P.L.T. 501 : (1926) M.W.N. 535 : 3 C.W.N. 591 : 5 Pat. 585 : 31 C.W.N. 25 (P.C.),...
Tag this Judgment!Eshaq Lal and anr. Vs. Dulla Alias Dalla
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-28-1929
Reported in: 122Ind.Cas.177
1. This appeal arises oat of a suit for sale brought by one of the appellants Eshaq Lal, and one Ramji Lal who is now represented by the other appellants, for recovery of money on foot of a mortgage-bond, dated the 6th of March, 1919, executed by the respondent, Dulla. The suit has been dismissed on the ground that Dulla had no right. to the property when he made the mortgage. Dulla did not appear in the case, but the respondent Harphul(who has since died and whose legal representatives have been brought on the record) alone contested the suit. The facts are briefly these.2. One Bhuro had two daughters Bhag-wanti and Naoli. Bhagwanti's son is Dulla and Naoli's son is Harphul. Musammat Bhagwanti died sometime about 1907 and on her share of her father's property Dulla's name was recorded. Naoli died shortly before the institution of the suit and Harphul's name was recorded in her place. Dulla has made a gift of his half share in the property in favour of Harphul. It is also a fact that a...
Tag this Judgment!Lala Banwari Lal Vs. Lala Maksudan Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-28-1929
Reported in: 122Ind.Cas.183
1. This is an appeal by one Lala Banwari Lal who applied before the District Judge of Allahabad to obtain a succession certificate. It appears that a certain gentleman Lala Kishori Lal died possessed of certain shares of the United Provinces Electric Supply Co, Ltd. The applicant states in his application that he and other parsons whose names are shown in the column of relatives (sons and grandsons) of the deceased, were members of a joint Hindu family with the deceased and that to receive the dividends of the shares it was necessary to obtain a succession certificate.2. Notices were issued to the members of the family other than the applicant and nobody took exception to the application. The petition was heard ex parte but the learned District Judge dismissed it on the ground that no succession certificate could : be granted to a member of a joint Hindu family who gets the property by right of survivorship and not as an heir.3. Lala Banwari Lal has appealed and the question is whether...
Tag this Judgment!Nannhun Vs. Halka
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-25-1929
Reported in: AIR1930All175
Young, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal from the judgment dated 25th June 1927 of Mr. Sarup Narain, Subordinate Judge of Jhansi. The plaintiff brought a suit for the redemption of two houses, five trees, 24 plots of occupancy land and mesne profits, but the only matter for consideration now is the redemption of the 24 plots.2. The facts as alleged by the plaintiff were that the plaintiff's father, one Har Gobind, in the month of December 1899 executed a mortgage for Rs. 199 in favour of the ancestors of defendants 1 to 4. It was a term of the mortgage that if the mortgage was not paid off in the course of one year then the mortgagees were to take possession as if it were usufructuary mortgage. The plaintiff's case was that the mortgagees did take possession on the failure of the mortgagor to pay off the mortgage and enjoyed the usufruct for many years, and that the amount of money thus recovered by the mortgagees greatly exceeded the principal and interest of the mortgage. He, therefo...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »