Allahabad Court July 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.
Ganga Sagar Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-25-1929
Reported in: AIR1929All919
Mukerji, J.1. This is an application to revise the order of the District Magistrate convicting the applicant under Section 177, Penal Code read with Section 52, Income-tax Act, and sentencing him to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000 and the order of the Sessions Judge, in appeal, confirming the said conviction and sentence. On behalf of the Crown a revision has been filed, being revision No. 311 of 1929, praying that the sentence passed on Rai Bahadur Seth Ganga Sagar may be enhanced on the ground that it is inadequate. As the result of the revision filed on behalf of the Crown, the question whether the applicant's conviction is good on facts, has been reopened. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties at length. The facts which led to the conviction of Mr. Ganga Sagar, briefly are these:Mr. Ganga Sagar is a wealthy trader of Khurja in the district of Bulandshahr. He holds a large amount of shares in different companies including many jute mills in Bengal which pay very handsome dividen...
Madusudan Lal Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-25-1929
Reported in: AIR1929All931
Dalal, J.1. Madusudan Lal has applied in revision to this Court from an order passed by the District Magistrate of Agra. There can be little doubt that the order is not legal, and the District Magistrate had authority to hear the appeal under 8. 195(5), Criminal P.C. The complaint under Section 182, I.P.C., has been made against Madusudan Lal by Mr. Nur-ul-Hasan Sahib, returning officer of Etmadpur in the district of Agra. Under Rule 16 of the rules made by Government in the Local Self-Government Department on 27th May 1925, Part 1, the returning officer is empowered to hear all claims and objections which are made to the Electoral Roll. Under Rule 17, the District Magistrate is given authority to review an order of the returning officer and make any consequent correction in the Electoral Roll, By reference to these two rules it may be taken as certain that the returning officer is a public servant subordinate to the District Magistrate under the rules. Direction was given by the retur...
Nirman Bahadur Vs. Fateh Bahadur Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-25-1929
Reported in: AIR1992All963; 118Ind.Cas.710
Mukerji, J.1. This is the plaintiff's appeal. The following pedigree will explain the history of the case and the relationship among themselves, of the actors in this history:(For pedigree see p. 964)2. The ancestor, Naurang Singh, owned both ancestral and self-acquired property held jointly by himself and his five sons. In the year 1893, on 7th January, he executed a document entitled 'Deed of partition' which will be found at p 57 of the paper book. One of the important points that we have to decide in this appeal will be the effect of this document on the status of the family. One of the immediate results of the deed was that Jai Karan Singh the eldest son, began to live separately. Naurang Singh died on 5th May 1895. Within a few months of his death (according to one party six months and according to the other, some 15 months) Dirgbijai Singh died. Mt. Manraj Kunwari's name was recorded in the place of her husband in the khewat. In 1914, Fateh Bahadur Singh and Raghuraj Singh alias...
Nasrullah Khan Vs. Wajid Ali and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-24-1929
Reported in: AIR1930All81; 118Ind.Cas.717
1. This is a civil revision from an order dated 19th April 1928, passed by the District Judge of Moradabad. After the passing of Act 42 of 1928, the appellant mutwali filed accounts of certain waqf property in his possession. In this way he fulfilled the requirement of Section 2 of the Act; but on14July 1925, he filed a fresh application praying that he be exempted from the filing of the accounts. This application was rejected on 4th September 1925: Subsequently an application was filed Under Section 3, Charitable or Religious Trust Act (Act 14 of 1920) and on 19th June 1926, another District Judge rejected the application. It is unnecessary to say in this ease whether the rejection of the subsequent application under the Act of 1920 had the effect of superseding the previous order under the Act of 1923. After this the mutwali omitted to file the statement of accounts as required by Section 5. The present application was filed against him with a view to compel him to file the account. ...
In Re: Kalka Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-24-1929
Reported in: AIR1929All707; 118Ind.Cas.719
1. This is a reference from the District Magistrate of Benares who has been appointed Commissioner under the Workmen's Compensation Act (Act 8 of 1923). It appears that one Kalka Prasad who was employed by the Benares Electric Light and Power Company was unfortunately injured in the course of his employment and died in consequence. The company have deposited a sum equal to thirty month's wages as compensation. It is an admitted fact that the deceased has left no one who was his dependent. A dependent is defined in Section 2(d) as meaning any of the near relations mentioned therein. It is not disputed that the deceased has left no such near relation. He was, however, being supported by Mr. Hanuman Prasad Varma, the present District Judge of Ghazipur and was related to him as a first cousin, but the deceased of course was not in any way supporting Mr. Varma. The learned District Magistrate considers that the money should be paid to him. We do not agree with his view.2. Section 8 makes it...
Gauri Shankar and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-24-1929
Reported in: AIR1929All905
Dalal, J.1. The complaint is made by the learned Judge in a very haphazard manner. The actual statements in vernacular of the applicants which are supposed to be contradictory, are not quoted. The possibility is not considered that a man may be a debtor or a tenant of a zemindar in 1924 and may cease to be such in 1928. It is much to be desired that civil or criminal Courts, when they make a complaint, would devote some thought to the matter, frame a proper charge and state in detail the names of the witnesses who were likely to prove the charge. For want of such information the complaint more often than not results in an acquittal, reflecting discredit on Courts of law. This is just such a case and it is not desirable that such a complaint should be permitted. I set aside the order of the Sessions Judge, dated 18th April 1929, and withdraw the complaint made by him....
Sheo Ram Vs. Sone Lal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-24-1929
Reported in: AIR1929All912
1. This is an appeal from an order of remand arising out of a suit brought by the plaintiff for a permanent injunction against the defendant-appellant restraining him from interfering with the plaintiff's rights in a certain chabutra constructed by him. The plaintiff applied to the Municipal Board for sanction to construct his chabutra. His application was referred to the Public Works Committee to which power to deal with such applications had been given under Section 112, Municipalities Act. The Committee refused permission, but the order was revised by the Municipal Board which granted the sanction. The plaintiff proceeded to start the construction and then the defendant-appellant Sheo Ram, who apparently had not been aware of the application for sanction and who certainly had not filed any objection protesting against the grant of the sanction, preferred an appeal to the District Magistrate under Section 318 on the ground that the construction would narrow the street and would inter...
Govind Singh Vs. Bijay Bahadur
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-24-1929
Reported in: AIR1929All980
Niamatullah, J.1. The plaintiff-applicant brought the suit, out of which this revision has arisen, for recovery of Rs. 506-6-0, alleged to be due under a pro-note, dated 6th January 1925, executed by the defendant. The plaint recites that, in consequence of the defendant's fraudulent conduct, a stamp of only one anna was affixed on the pro-note which, on that account, is inadmissible in evidence, and that the plaintiff claims to recover on foot of the loan transaction independently of the pro-note which he relies on for a collateral purpose. The plaint, as drawn up, is more capable of the interpretation that, according to the plaintiff, the loan had been advanced on 6th January 1925, though, it is not altogether inconsistent with the case that the pro-note was executed in lieu of an old debt. The plaintiff started to establish the case of cash consideration having been paid on the execution of the pro-note referred to; but his own witnesses, under the circumstances which it is not nece...
Govind Singh Vs. Bijay Bahadur Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-24-1929
Reported in: 121Ind.Cas.108
Niamatullah, J.1. The plaintiff-applicant brought the suit, out of which this revision has arisen, for recovery of Rs. 506-60 alleged to be due under a pro-note, dated the 6th of January, 1925, executed by the defendant. The plaint recites that, in consequence of the defendant's fraudulent conduct, a stamp of only one anna was affixed on the pro note which, on that account, is inadmissible in evidence, and that the plaintiff claims to recover on foot of the loan transaction independently of the pro-note which he relies on for a collateral purpose. The plaint, as drawn up, is more capable of the interpretation that, according to the plaintiff, the loan had been advanced on the 6th of January, 1925, though it is not altogether inconsistent with the case that the pro-note was executed in lieu of an old debt. The plaintiff started to establish the case of cash consideration having been paid on the execution of the pro-note referred to but his own witnesses, under the circumstances which it...
Mangat Lal Vs. Ghasi Khan and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-23-1929
Reported in: AIR1929All800; 118Ind.Cas.718
1. This is an appeal by defendant 1 Mangat against a decree of the lower appellate Court in favour of the plaintiffs and defendants 7 and 8, for recovery of joint possession of two third share in kat khewat No. 13, mouza Basaon with the remaining defendants. Several grounds of appeal were entered, but the only grounds urged before us by the counsel for the appellant were grounds 2 and 3 in which he claimed that the appellant, an auction-purchaser, was entitled to the benefit of Section 41, T.P. Act. The lower appellate Court has considered this plea at considerable length and held that the appellant was not entitled to the benefit of that section, because he had not made sufficient enquiry. It appears to us that the appellant being an auction-purchaser, was not entitled to the benefit of Section 41, T.P. Act at all. That section begins:Where, with the consent, express or implied, of the parsons interested in immovable property, a person is the ostensible owner of such property and tran...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »