Allahabad Court March 1929 Judgments
Muhammad Abdul Karim Khan and ors. Vs. Bishan Sahai and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-22-1929
Reported in: AIR1930All9; 121Ind.Cas.387
1. First Appeals Nos. 256, 257 and 258 of 1924 are all connected and arise out of suits brought by reversioners and their transferees for possession of property to which the former succeeded on the death of a Hindu widow.2. Bhawani Sahai was admittedly possessed of considerable property and owned about 26 or 27 villages. He died on 8th August 1870 leaving two widows known as Mt. Rani Chunno Kunwar and Rani Maharani. He left no issue. During their lifetime these widows made various transfers in consequence of which the bulk of the estate has come into the possession of the numerous transferees who are impleaded as defendants in the suit. Rani Chunno Kunwar died about 1903 or 1904 and Rani Maharani died on 16th February 1915.3. Salig Ram and Dwarka Prasad claimed to be the immediate reversioners to whom the succession opened on the death of Rani Maharani. They have transferred part of their property to the other plaintiffs and a joint suit has been instituted on behalf of them all. The d...
Tag this Judgment!Har Chand and anr. Vs. Dewan Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-22-1929
Reported in: AIR1929All550; 117Ind.Cas.832
1. The learned advocate for the appellants has submitted that the documentary evidence in the case was not admissible in evidence and therefore the finding arrived at on the oral evidence was influenced by inadmissible documents. He claimed that the finding arrived at by the lower appellate Court contrary to that arrived at by the Court of first instance was not a finding of fact which is binding on us.2. The two documents which the learned Subordinate Judge relied on are: (1) the application filed in 1910 by Munshi, brother of Dewan, the mortgagor. In that application, which was a verified application, he gave the date of the birth of Dewan as 1st June 1894. The second document is a certificate of guardianship, and according to that certificate, on the date of the mortgage, the minority of Dewan continued at least a year more. The learned advocate has referred to a case reported in Gunjra Koer V. Ablakh Pande [1896] 18 All. 478 to prove that the statement of age in the certificate was...
Tag this Judgment!Genda Mal Vs. Narsingh Das
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-22-1929
Reported in: AIR1929All553
1. A preliminary objection has been taken to the hearing of this appeal. Certain property was advertised for sale and being non-ancestral the civil Court accepted the estimate of the value of the property made by the decree-holder at Rs. 500. Being a revenue-paying property the sale was conducted by an officer of the revenue Court. The judgment-debtor by some process unknown to law got the revenue Court to re-value the property and the Tahsildar estimated the value to be Rupees 1,887-13-0. It is said that the decree-holder purchased the property. The offer made to him was that he should buy the property at the estimated price of Rs. 1,887-13-0. It is also alleged that he accepted this offer. But curiously enough the amin entered in the report about the sale a remark to the effect that the decree-holder had purchased the property for Rs. 1,358. In due course the decree-holder objected to the sale which was said to have been held and by which he is said to have purchased the property. Hi...
Tag this Judgment!Tahir HusaIn and ors. Vs. Ikram Khan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-21-1929
Reported in: AIR1931All26
Boys, J.1. This is a reference made by the Commissioner of Benares under the Municipalities Act asking us for a decision as to whether Muhammad Ekram, who has been returned as a member of the Benares Municipal Board election, was qualified as voter. It is not the practice of this or any other Court to give a decree or pass an order or express an opinion on a reference when such decree, order or opinion must of necessity be infructuous. It is possible that there are other facts or considerations which have not been drawn to our attention which were present to the mind of the Commissioner and which led him to make this reference, but, as we are at present advised, we are unable to appreciate how any expression of our opinion on the question that has been referred would be otherwise than infructuous. Section 19 (2), Municipalities Act, says thatthe election of any person as a member of Board shall not be questioned, (a) on the ground that the name of any person qualified to vote has been ...
Tag this Judgment!Nadir Shah Vs. the Municipal Board
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-21-1929
Reported in: 121Ind.Cas.394
1. This is a plaintiffs appeal in a suit for damages against the Municipal Board of Cawnpore for breach of a contract to construct filter beds in three chambers at Banajhabar.2. The Municipal Board of Oawnpore called for tenders for construction of the work and the plaintiff's tender for Rs. 23,437 was accepted, and a contract for the construction of two pre filters and one final filter was placed with him.3. The course of business regarding con-tracts by the Municipal Board appears to be that they call for tenders and the contractors offer rates for the work to be done, and on the 19th of April, 1923, the plaintiff presented the tender Ex. N. He also duly deposited the necessary amount of money which had to be deposited under the terms of the tender which he had offered. At a resolution of the Municipal Water Works Committee, dated the 24th of May, 1923, and confirmed by the, Municipal Board, the tender of the plaintiff wa9 accepted. He got a work order and he was directed to arrange ...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Stamp Reference (Jangilal)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-20-1929
Reported in: AIR1931All189
ORDER1. This is a reference made to the High Court by the Board of Revenue under Section 57, Stamp Act 1899, asking for a decision as to the duty chargeable on a security bond given under Order 41, Rule 5, Civil P.C.2. It appears that proceedings for the execution of a decree for the recovery of possession of immovable property were pending in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Muttra. The judgment-debtor applied for stay of execution pending decision of an appeal to the High Court. The Subordinate Judge ordered the execution to be stayed under Order 41, Rule 5, Sub-rule 2, upon the condition that the judgment-debtor should furnish security for the due performance of such decree or order as might ultimately be binding upon him. The judgment-debtor accordingly produced a surety who executed the instrument in question, hypothecating his property in favour of the Subordinate Judge of Muttra, for the benefit of the decree holder, as security for any loss that the latter might sustain, u...
Tag this Judgment!Partap Singh Vs. Hemraj and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-20-1929
Reported in: AIR1929All497; 118Ind.Cas.521
Pullan, J.1. This is a second appeal in which the plaintiffs challenge the decision of the Subordinate Judge of Saharanpur reversing the finding of the Munsif of Saharanpur on a question of easement. The plaintiffs claim that they have for many years irrigated certain numbers from a well situate in the abadi plot No. 402. The channel leading from the well to the fields passes through plot No. 138 which belongs to the defendants, and the water is distributed from there to the fields of the plaintiffs. The view taken by the first Court was that the plaintiffs had proved their case. It is pointed out that the defendant Hemraj himself admitted that there was an old irrigation channel passing through his field and although he said that the plaintiffs made it six or seven years ago and had only used it once, this statement is an admission that the well was used for the irrigation of their fields and that the channel passed through his land. The first Court has also pointed out that the khasr...
Tag this Judgment!Bhoopal Rai and anr. Vs. Shiam Sunder Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-20-1929
Reported in: AIR1929All781
Sen, J.1. This is an appeal by two plaintiffs arising out of a suit for recovery of Rs. 296-14-6 on account of the arrears of revenue of mauza Lakhanpur, pargana Budaun for the years 1330 and 1331 F. at the rate of Rs. 118-7-3 per annum under Section 161, Act 2 of 1901. The plaintiffs also claimed interest.2. The suit was directed against Hakim Shiam Sunder Lal and his brother Lala Babu, who were the sons of Hakim Jawahir Lal. The defendants contended that the revenue of mauza Lakhanpur had been assigned to their ancestors from the time of the Moghal Emperors, that ten biswas of muafi land of mauza Lakhanpur had bean resumed by the Government in the year 1906 and re-granted to the defendants about the year 19i2, that the plaintiffs had no interest or concern with the right to the Government revenue, that the provisions of the Pensions Act (Act 23 of 1871) were applicable to the case and that a single suit for arrears of revenue situate in three mahals was not maintainable.3. There has ...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Jangilal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-20-1929
Reported in: 131Ind.Cas.675
1. This is a reference made to the High Court by the Board of Revenue under Section 57 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, asking for a decision as to the duty chargeable on a security bond given under Order XLI, Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure.2. It appears that proceedings for the execution of a decree for the recovery of possession of immoveable property were pending in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Muttra. The judgment-debtor applied for stay of execution pending decision of an appeal to the High Court. The Subordinate Judge ordered the execution to be stayed under Order XLI, Rule 5, Sub-rule 2 upon the condition that the judgment-debtor should furnish security for the due performance of such decree or order as might ultimately be binding upon him. The judgment-debtor accordingly produced a surety who executed the instrument in question, hypothecating his property in favour of the Subordinate Judge of Muttra, for the benefit of the decree-holder, as security for any loss t...
Tag this Judgment!Mohammad Sher Khan Vs. Amjad HusaIn and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-19-1929
Reported in: AIR1929All494; 117Ind.Cas.365
Niamatullah, J.1. This second appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiff-respondents for ejectment of the defendant-appellant from a house situate in mohalla Balapir in the city of Kanauj, within the municipal limits, on the allegation that it had been built over 25 years ago by one Murtaza Khan with the leave and license of the plaintiff-respondents who own all lands lying within the ambit of the aforesaid mohalla Murtaza Khan sold the house in question to the defendant-appellant by a deed, dated 30th September 1923. The plaintiff-respondents thereupon intimated to the defendant-appellant that the license had been revoked and that they (the plaintiffs) desired to take actual possession of the site in suit, which was eventually instituted against the appellant as the sole defendant and out of which the present appeal arises. The plaintiff-respondents claimed the relief of actual possession subject to the defendant's right to remove the materials of the house if they so desire...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »