Allahabad Court February 1929 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.
Chauharja Singh and ors. Vs. Bachcha Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-15-1929
Reported in: AIR1929All413
1. This is a defendants' appeal arising out of a suit for pre-emption of property transferred under a sale-deed dated 19th June 1923 Subsequently the vendee obtained a deed of gift from one Babu Lal of a share in this mahal. Two successive suits were instituted to pre-empt this transaction. The suit to pre-empt the gift on the ground that it was really a sale has failed on the finding that the transaction was a gift and not a sale; but the suit to pre-empt the sale transaction has been decreed by both the Courts. The plaintiff at the outset had alleged that the donor Babu Lal had no title to the property and had no right to make the gift. In the course of the trial when Babu Lal was examined it transpired that the property did not really belong to him but belonged to his wife who died ten years ago. Although Babu Lal's name had been entered in the revenue papers as a cosharer he has sons and grandsons who are heirs to his wife. One of the sons was examined as a witness and stated that ...
Ramdeo Ram Vs. Frank Combs and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-15-1929
Reported in: AIR1929All437; 117Ind.Cas.614
Ashworth, J.1. This second appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiff-appellant for a declaration that he is the owner of certain property, or in the alternative for possession of property. The plaintiff's case was as follows: One Zalim Singh took a first mortgage on the property. The property was again mortgaged by the mortgagor to Mr. Frank Combs, defendant-respondent. Zalim Singh sued on his mortgage, making Mr. Combs a party and got a decree for whole of the property. It appears that decree was not framed in the proper form. The proper form is given as No. 7 of Appendix D of the schedule to the Civil Procedure Code and provides for the proceeds of the sale of the property being paid first to the first mortgagee and any balance to the second mortgagee. The decree as framed used the words of Order 34, Rule 4, directing the proceeds to be applied in payment of what was due to the first mortgagee and the balance to be paid to the defendant or other persons entitled to receive...
Collector of Meerut Vs. Sagar Mal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-15-1929
Reported in: AIR1929All454; 117Ind.Cas.99
Mears, C.J.1. On 16th December 1922 Sagar Mal executed a bond for Rs. 800 in favour of Kunwar Mahandrajit Singh, who was then under age. The mother of Mahandrajit Singh was his legal guardian and was acting on his behalf. At some time in June 1923 Kunwar Mahandrajit Singh was married, and on the occasion of his marriage the mother of Kunwar Mahandrajit Singh purported to discharge the indebtedness of Sagar Mal to her son by giving him a receipt which in terms wiped out the indebtedness created under the bond. The consideration was expressed to be a gift at the time of the marriage and also as a recognition of his services as mukaddam.2. Later in 1925 the estate of Kunwar Mahandrajit Singh came into the hands of the Court of wards and they considered the legal position arising from the act of the Rani Saheba, and they were of opinion that she being the legal guardian had imposed upon her as of necessity a right to defray all legal obligations but could not dissipate the estate by acts o...
Ram Kumar Mohan Lal of Agra Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-15-1929
Reported in: 119Ind.Cas.569
1. This is a reference by the learned Commissioner of Income-Tax for an answer on the question, 'whether in the circumstances of the case, the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from making a return of his income within the meaning of Section 27 of the Income-tax Act?'2. The facts of the case are given in the 'statement of the case'. The case is a very simple one. There was an assessment of income-tax to the best of the judgment, on 25th January, 1928. The assessees applied for concellation of the assessment under Section 27 of the Income-tax Act. The assessment could be cancelled provided the assessees could prove that they were prevented by sufficient cause from making the return required by Section 22 of the Income-tax Act. In this particular case it is said that there was a criminal case pending and the books of account had been produced in that case. The criminal case was disposed of in October 1927 and the best judgment assessment was made on 25th January, 1928. The repre...
Musammat Tayyab Un-nissa Vs. Khan Bahadur Sheikh Nasrullh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-15-1929
Reported in: 119Ind.Cas.433
Dalal, J.1. The decision of the lower Appellate Court, is somewhat summary. He referred to a deed of gift, when really the gift alleged by the defendants is an oral one. The plaintiff Musammat's name is entered in the village records and on the basis of that entry she sued certain persons for recovery of her share of the profits. The defence was that under a Civil Court decision the plaintiff had been held not to be the owner of the property in suit. This is not accurate. There has been no civil litigation with respect to this property. The civil litigation related to a suit for possession brought by the plaintiff female in the Civil Court against the same defendants in which it was held that a gift of her property had been made by the plaintiff's mother Musammat Mariam in favour of the plaintiff's brother Saif Ullah, That suit, however, related to property in another village, and not to property in the village in the present Revenue Court suit. It is urged that that fin-ding will act ...
Shah Ali Hammad Vs. Mohammad Nazir Ali and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-13-1929
Reported in: AIR1929All329
1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit for possession of a house with a court-yard and a pucca well. The plaintiff came into Court on the allegation that he was the owner of this house by right of purchase. The defendants denied the plaintiff's title and insisted that the property was waqf property and that the defendants' were in adverse proprietary possession for a period of more than 12 years before suit. The trial Court decreed the suit. It held that the plaintiff's title to the property was established, that the defendants had failed to prove that the property was dedicated and that the defendants were not in adverse possession of this property for a period of more than 12 years before the institution of the suit. The lower appellate Court has affirmed the findings of the trial Court on all the aforesaid points and has dismissed the appeal.2. It is contended that the lower appellate Court has misdirected itself in holding that the property was not dedicated property...
Asghari Began, and ors. Vs. Maula Baksh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-13-1929
Reported in: AIR1929All381
1. This second appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiff-respondent for sale of a certain property on the basis of a mortgage. The mortgage was in respect of two kinds of property; one was land and the other was a certain money charge created on other property. It is with the latter only that we have to deal in this second appeal.2. The question is solely one of interpretation of a certain deed. This deed was executed by one Kishori Lal, a zemindar, in favour of two minor children in consideration of the mother of these children having given up her rights to claim an exproprietary tenancy.3. The important portions of the deed are as follows:Therefore, in consideration of the relinquishment of their exproprietary rights Rs. 150 a year for maintenance in favour of Mohammad Abdul Hafiz Khan and Mohammed Abdul Aziz Khan minor sons of Mt. Ali-un-nissa, daughter of Ch. Mohammed Hidayat Ali Khan deceased resident of qasba Balram have been fixed for ever and after them to their desc...
Madan Mohan Singh Vs. NaraIn Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-13-1929
Reported in: AIR1929All521; 117Ind.Cas.361
1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit for recovery of possession of immovable property by avoidance of a decree passed in terms of an award in 1922. The grounds on which the decree is sought to be avoided are set forth in para. 16 of the plaint, the first four being to the effect that the award itself was contrary to an earlier waqfnama and was invalid in law, and the last one that the decree was fraudulently obtained. The plaintiff and the defendant are both grandsons of Sukha Singh from his sons Bija Singh and Bhajja Singh respectively. It was the plaintiff's case that Sukha Singh had made a valid waqf in 1887 under which the management of the entire dedicated property would come to the plaintiff and the defendant was wrongfully in possession of half of that property. The defendant denied that Sukha Singh had any power to make a valid waqf and pleaded that the arbitration award and the decree were binding on the plaintiff and that no fraud had ever been practised.2. T...
Sohan Lal Vs. Peare Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-13-1929
Reported in: AIR1929All865; 117Ind.Cas.826
Dalal, J.1. A question of law not considered by the lower appellate Court as it was not placed before it is the only point for decision in this case. As to the rest relating to ground 3 of appeal, I have not the slightest hesitation in agreeing with the excellent judgment of the appellate Court.2. One Hem Singh who was father in a joint Hindu family consisting of himself and his son at the time executed a deed of gift of 17 bighas of land in favour of the plaintiff Sohan Lal, a legal practitioner and a Brahman, on 3rd March 1920. Fifteen months later on 2nd June 1921 he sold his entire property of 136 bighas to the defendant Piare Lal. Piare Lal took possession of the entire property, and Sohan Lal brought the present suit for recovery of the area gifted to him in 1920. The suit was decreed by the trial Court. Various issues were raised there. The learned Judge of the lower appellate Court did not consider the different issues, but decided the appeal, set aside the decree of the trial ...
Srimati Musammat Premavati Alias Premdevio Vs. Pandit Jainti Prasad Al ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-13-1929
Reported in: 119Ind.Cas.446
1. This is an appeal by a lady who was the defendant No. 2 in the original suit. The pedigree at page 1 of the record would show that there were three brothers Umrao Singh, Babu Lal and Piare Lal. Umrao Singh died last of all the three brother. On his death, there was a dispute as to succession between Shib Devi the widow of Piare Lal and Umrao Singh's widow Bhu Deri. It appears that Piare Lal and Umrao Singh died within a few months of each other. The result of a compromise was that the property was divided equally between the two widows. There upon Devi Singh who was the plaintiff No. 1 in the suit out of which this appeal has arisen instituted a suit in 1916 to obtain a declaration that Umrao Singh and his brothers formed a joint Hindu family and that on the death of Bhu Devi the property would be inherited by Umrao Singh's next reversioner. The necessary corollary was that Musammat Shib Devi if the suit succeeded was to have no interest in the property beyond the lifetime of Bhu De...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »