Allahabad Court November 1930 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.
Mukat Lal and ors. Vs. Gulab Singh-pran Mal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-25-1930
Reported in: AIR1931All229
Sulaiman, J.1. This is a defendants appeal arising out of a suit for recovery of a principal sum and interest pendente lite and future. The pleadings in this case were so badly drafted that we had to spend a considerable time in trying to understand them. It was after a great deal of difficulty that even the counsel for the parties agreed as to the respective cases of the parties put forward by their clients. It would be convenient to summarize the cases as follows:2. According to the plaintiffs the defendants purchased 20 grain pits from the plaintiffs, which are ready for delivery, paying Rs. 500 per pit as margin money, and promising to pay the balance with interest at Rs. 0-12-6 per cent per mensem. Only 18 out of the 20 grain pits were filled up and were actually ready for delivery. They however remained with the plaintiffs. When the price of grain fell the plaintiffs made a demand to the defendants to deposit more money which they failed to. do and consequently the plaintiffs sol...
Emperor Vs. Sat Narain
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-24-1930
Reported in: AIR1931All265
Mears, C.J.1. This is an appeal by the Local Government from an order passed by the learned Officiating Sessions Judge of Allahabad, dated 30th June 1930 oversetting an order of a Magistrate of the First Class who had convicted one Sat Narain under Section 380, I.P.C.2. The prosecution in this case was initiated on a police-report made by one Venayak on 11th March 1930, in which he ha stated that certain gold and silver articles of jewellery and a silver lota of the total value of Rs. 283 had bean stolen from inside a box in his house the key of which used to be with his wife, Mt. Ram Kali, and that he suspected that the respondent Sat Narain and one Girja Brahman of Rampur, who used to come to his house, had removed these articles in collusion with his wife. A detailed description , of the alleged ' stolen ' property was given at the foot of the police-report.3. With the exception of a ring, a necklace and a mohar the other articles alleged to be stolen were recovered from the possess...
Chandi Prasad Misir Vs. Balaji Misir and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-21-1930
Reported in: AIR1931All136; 129Ind.Cas.560
Sulaiman, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit for a declaration that a pre-emption decree obtained by the respondents is not binding on the plaintiff because he was a minor at the time when the decree was passed. One of the pleas raised in defence was that in the previous suit the plaintiff's uncle Maharaj Pat who was the karta of the joint family had been impleaded and was in a position to take all the possible pleas which could have been raised by the plaintiff because their interests were identical. The Courts below have held that the decree is not binding on the minor although Maharaj Pat had been impleaded in the previous suit.2. It is contended before us that when the manager of a joint Hindu family was sued, and it was not necessary to describe him as such, the decree was binding upon the whole family even though a minor member was not represented by a duly appointed guardian and that the plaintiff could not get the declaration without showing that he had bee...
Balmakund and anr. Vs. Seth Piyare Lal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-21-1930
Reported in: AIR1931All318; 129Ind.Cas.732
Dalal, J.1. The trial Court has brought the proceedings into a knot by passing orders without understanding their effect. On 28th March 1930 he passed a decree by which he ordered possession in favour of the plaintiff with this proviso : that if the deficient court-fee was not paid within two days of 28th March 1930 the suit shall stand dismissed. The decree was a complete decree and on 30th March 1930 on nonpayment of the court-fee, the result of the decree was that the suit stood dismissed with costs. Subsequently on 1st April 1930 the plaintiff applied for extention of time for the filing of deficient court-fee and on 25th October 1930 the Court allowed the application and accepted the court-fee stamp. The defendant has come here in revision and argued that the order of 25th April was passed by the Munsif without jurisdiction. I have looked through the record. There has been no subsequent amendment of the decree and the decree as it stands at present directs dismissal of the suit ev...
B. Bandhu Singh Vs. K.T. Bank Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-20-1930
Reported in: AIR1931All134; 129Ind.Cas.716
Sulaiman, J.1. This is a judgment-debtor's appeal arising out of an execution proceeding. Notice was served on the respondent, but no one appears on his behalf. A simple money decree was obtained on 9th March 1916 and it was put in execution. Proceedings continued off and on for a considerably long time, and on 21st November 1925 an application for review was granted and the execution proceedings were restored and declared to start from the stage at which they had arrived on 23rd May 1925.2. Twelve years from the date of the decree expired on 9th March 1928, On 8th May 1928 the decree-holder filed an application for the attachment and sale of shares in two new villages which had never been mentioned in any of the previous applications. So far as the attachment of these villages was concerned, the application was undoubtedly a fresh one.3. The learned Subordinate Judge has conceded that in the case of Ram Ratan v. Datar Kuar, A.I.R. 1928 Lah. 808 and Khairat Ali v. Wahed Ali, : AIR1928C...
In Re: the Estate of Indrani
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-20-1930
Reported in: AIR1931All212
Mukerji, J.1. The principal appeal is Appeal No. 155 of 1930 and is on behalf of an association formed for the purpose of imparting education to a community of Sarjuparin Barhmans and known as Sarjuparin Pathashala Samiti. Strictly speaking the appeal should have been on behalf of Pandit Manni Lal Pandey, the administrator to the estate of a certain lady, Mt. Indrani, but we overlook this defect in the form of the appeal as Pandit Manni Lal's name is also shown among the appellants.2. It appears that a lady charitably disposed, Mt. Indrani,. executed a document on 2nd September 1916, which was treated as her last will and testament. By this document she bequeathed her entire property to the society described above. The Secretary of the Society, Pandit Manni Lal, applied for and obtained letters of administration with a copy of the will annexed by the order dated 23rd August 1921, The estate was without any encumbrances. No debts had to be paid. There was no other legatee either to be p...
Hikmatullah Khan Vs. Mt. Sakina Begum and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-20-1930
Reported in: AIR1931All305
Bennet, J.1. This purports to be a first appeal from order made by one Hikmatnllah Khan against an order of the learned District Judge of Meerut, dated 3rd February 1930, directing, under Section 476 (B), Criminal P. C, that a formal complaint under Section 210, I. P.C., be made against the appellant Hikmatullah Khan. A preliminary objection was taken that no appeal lies to this Court.2. The facts are that the opposite party, Mt. Sakina Begum and others, applied to the Munsif for a complaint under Section 476, Criminal P. C, and the Munsif refused to make a complaint. Mt. Sakina Begum and others then appealed, under Section 476-(B), Criminal P. C, to the District Judge and he has made a complaint. The question is whether any appeal lies to this Court from that order of the District Judge making a complaint on an appeal to him under Section 476 (B).3. The learned Counsel for the appellant relied on a ruling of the Patna High Court reported in Ranjit Narain Singh v. Ram Bahadur Singh [19...
Mt. Ram Sri Vs. Thakur NaraIn Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-20-1930
Reported in: AIR1931All368; 129Ind.Cas.374
Sulaiman, J.1. This is a judgment-debtor's appeal arising out of an execution proceeding. A mortgage had been executed by the deceased husband of the appellant Mt. Ram Sri. A final decree for sale on the basis of this mortgage deed was obtained in February 1920. The mortgaged property was sold and proved insufficient to discharge the whole decretal amount. In 1926 the mortgagee obtained a decree under Order 34 Rule 6 which was against the widow Mt. Ram Sri and the next reversioner Sahab Singh, to whom she had surrendered the estate, as legal representatives of the deceased. The decree was for realization of the money out of the assets of the deceased in their hands. In 1928, in pursuance of an agreement between the widow and the next reversioner, she obtained a decree for maintenance allowance against him with a, charge on the property in his possession.2. The mortgagee has sought to attach, not only the corpus of the property in the hands of Sahab Singh, but also the decree for mainte...
Hikmat Ullah Khan Vs. Musammat Sakina Begam and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-20-1930
Reported in: 129Ind.Cas.264
1. This purports to be a first appeal from order made by one Hikmat Ullah Khan against an order of the learned District Judge of Meerut, dated 3rd February, 1930, directing, under Section 476-B, Criminal Procedure Code, that a formal complaint under Section 210, Indian Penal Code, be made against the appellant Hikmat Ullah Khan. A preliminary objection was taken that no appeal lies to this Court.2. The facts are that the opposite party, Musammat Sakina Begam and others, applied to the Munsif for a complaint under Section 476, Criminal Procedure Cede, and the Munsif refused to make a complaint. Musammat Sakina Begum and others then appealed under Section 476-B, Criminal Procedure Code, to the District Judge and he has made a complaint. The question is whether any appeal lies to this Court from that order of the District Judge making a complaint on an appeal to him under Section 476-B.3. The learned Counsel for the appellant relied on a ruling of the Patna High Court reported in Ranjit N...
Kannu Lal Vs. Bhagwan Das and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-19-1930
Reported in: AIR1931All124; 129Ind.Cas.554
Dalal, J.1. The trial Court had to interpret a decree of this Court. The mortgagor has appealed here from a decree for sale and the decree of this Court was:the decree of the Additional Subordinate Judge of Budaun be confirmed and that this appeal be and here by is dismissed, and it is further ordered that the appellants aforesaid do pay to respondent 1 aforesaid the sum of Rs. 578-5-0 the amount of costs incurred by the latter in this Court, and it is further ordered that the costs incurred in the lower Court be paid with interest thereon as awarded by the said Court.2. The decree-holder put into execution as a simple money decree against the mortgagor a decree for a sum of Rs. 578-5-0 the costs of this Court. The trial Court held that this Court had not granted a personal decree but that the amount should be included in the total amount for which the property was to be sold under Order 31, Rule 5, Civil P. C, in a final decree for sale and that only on the property not being found su...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »