Allahabad Court April 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.
Chhotay and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-14-1930
Reported in: AIR1930All596
Boys, J.1. Six men appeal from a conviction under Section 304, I.P. 0., and a sentence thereunder of three years' rigorous imprisonment. The facts briefly are that an amin assisted by a karinda, the karinda's master and accompanied by the police and some servants who were probably employed as lathials of the zamindar went to attach a crop. The party went in some force because they had information that the attachment would be resisted with violence. The circumstances are of course peculiar to this particular case, and it is, there-fora, unnecessary to detail them in view of the fact that while I have been asked to read the whole judgment carefully I have not had any of the evidence laid before me. The findings are quite clear. The party intending to effect the attachment was resisted with violence. The zamindar was struck to the ground and received several injuries. Thereupon, and I have no doubt practically instantly, the zamindar's men rushed on his assailants and severely beat two, w...
Niranjan Singh Vs. Mahabir Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-14-1930
Reported in: AIR1930All845
Bennet, J.1. This is a Letters Patent appeal by Niranjan Singh, the plaintiff, against a judgment of the learned single Judge of this Court by which the suit of the plaintiff for a declaration that he was in proprietary possession of certain plots was dismissed in its entirety. The lower appellate Court decreed the suit of the plaintiff for plots 308-10 and 308-11 and dismissed it for plot 324-14. The plaintiff filed an appeal in regard to the latter number which was dismissed by the learned single Judge, and the cross-objection of the defendants in regard to 308-10 and 308-11 was allowed. Hence the present appeal of the plaintiffs. The facts as found by the lower appellate Court are as follows:In the village of Deoraspur, mahal Madhoram, there are four principal pattis of which the plaintiff Niranjan is a cosharer in the patti which bears his name and the other three pattis are known as Patti Bhola, Patti Sheo Govind and Patti Ram Bharos, and in these three pattis the plaintiff Niranj...
Co-operative Company, Ltd. Vs. Bhagwan Das and Co.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-11-1930
Reported in: AIR1930All615
Sen, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendants from the judgment and decree of the learned Additional Subordinate Judge of Saharanpur affirming the decree of the City Munsif in a suit for recovery of dividends on certain shares with interest. The plaintiff claimed a decree for Rs. 1050 principal and Rs. 34 interest against the defendant company. Messrs. Bhagwan Das & Co., owned seven shares in the Cooperative Company Ltd. Lala Nemidas is the banking and managing proprietor of the plaintiff firm. Dr. Brijbehari Lal is the Managing Director of the defendant company. The financial year of the defendant company begins with 1st April and ends with 31st March of the following year.2. On or about 13th April 1925, Lala Nemidas intimated to the defendant company that he was desirous of selling his seven shares. He constituted the defendant company as his agent for selling the same. The company could have refused to take up this business and could well have asked the plaintiff to sell the shares ...
Anmol Singh and ors. Vs. Hari Shankar Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-11-1930
Reported in: AIR1930All779
1. This is an appeal by the plaintiffs from an order of the Court below actually dismissing the suit, which has been treated as an order refusing to set aside an abatement against the contesting defendants only, from which an appeal lies under Order 43, Rule 1(k).2. While a mortgage suit was pending against the numerous defendants Mahadeo, defendant 4, died on 3rd July 1922, but an application to bring his son and heir, Chandar Deo, was filed on 30th January 1923, without informing the Court of the lapse of time which had intervened. Notice was issued to the proposed heir and there was substituted service by means of affixation of notice and publication in a newspaper. On 27th March 1924 a preliminary decree in the mortgage suit was passed ex parte. After this decree two of the other defendants, namely, Gobardhan Das, defendant 2 and Shyam Sunder Das, defendant 3, also died on 9th February 1926, and 23rd March 1926, respectively. An application was filed by Chandar Deo, the heir of Mah...
(Maharaja) Deo Das and ors. Vs. Mahesh Ram Gond and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-11-1930
Reported in: AIR1931All25
Bennet, J.1. This is a Letters Patent Appeal by the plaintiffs whose suit was decreed by both the lower Courts, but the judgment of the learned single Judge of this Court is against the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs are certain idols who own the site of house No. 51/8 in Benares and the tenants of this house were the predecessors of defendants 2 to 5. On 16th July 1920 defendant 1 who had a decree against defendants 2 to 5 had this house auctioned by a sale of Court and purchased it himself for the sum of Rs. 1,050. This sale was confirmed on 18th August 1920. The present suit was brought on 17th August 1926 that is within six years from the date of confirmation, but more than six years from the date of auction sale. The suit is for one-fourth of the purchase price, that is Us. 262-8-0 and interest, on the ground of a custom by which in the case of a public sale the decree-holder, the judgment-debtor and the purchaser are jointly and severally liable for the payment of this ' zarichaharum...
Jangi Vs. Mewa Lal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-11-1930
Reported in: AIR1931All215
1. These are five Letters Patent appeals by various Mahomedan Julahas, defendants, residing in the village of Sheopur alias Saidraja in the district of Benares against the judgment of a learned single Judge of this Court in favour of the claim of the plaintiff zamindars of that village to enforce against the defendants certain payments alleged to be customary. The plaint sets forth that from of old it has been a custom in the said village that zamindari dues at Marwana, Holi, Dasehra, etc. have all along been paid by the inhabitants of particular castes on whom the dues were imposed according to their means; and that for example the defendant Jangi is liable to pay to the zamindars Re. 1 at Holi and one-fourth of a seer of supari nuts of the value of four annas at Dasehra. and other dues on marriages. The suit was brought to enforce the dues at Holi and Dasehra. The written statement pleaded that there was no such custom in the village in question and that the claim of the plaintiffs w...
Zahurul Hasan and ors. Vs. Badri NaraIn and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-10-1930
Reported in: AIR1930All597
Niamatullah, J.1. This is an execution second appeal arising out of an objection made by the appellants to the rights of the decree-holders to have certain property sold in execution of their decree. The objection has been dismissed by both the Courts below; hence the present appeal by the objectors. One Nurul Hasan executed a mortgage deed on 15th October 1914 in favour of Ghasi Ram, Badri Narain and others, the decree-holder-respondents, for a certain sum of money, hypothecating a house. By a deed of even date his mother Muradbee executed a bond hypothecating another house belonging to herself as collateral security for due payment of the money secured by the deed executed by her son. The mortgagees obtained a preliminary decree on 9th November 1917 on foot of the mortgage deed and the security bond. Nurul Hasan and Muradbee were parties to the suit. On 24th June 1918 a final decree was passed against the aforesaid two persons. The decree-holders applied on 9th August 1918 for execut...
Natwar Vs. Mt. Loi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-10-1930
Reported in: AIR1930All652; 129Ind.Cas.433
Niamatullah, J.1. The property in suit except hundis for Rs. 3,600 as to which there is dispute, admittedly belonged to one Dangal who had no male issue. He had, however, three daughters one of whom, Mt. Laltia, was married to the plaintiff-appellant. All the three daughters survived Dangal.2. On 19th March 1903 Dangal executed a will bequeathing his entire property to Mt. Kalawati, the widow of his predeceased son, for life, with remainder to his three daughters, Mt. Loi, defendant 1, Mt. Lukyan, defendant 2, and Mt. Laltia, the plaintiff's wife, since deceased, in equal shares. The will also provides that in case on the death of Mt. Kalawati, any of his daughters be found to have predeceased leaving a son, such son would take the share of his mother, otherwise her share would devolve on her surviving sisters.3. Subsequently on 30th April 1906 there was a partition between Dangal and some members of his family by which certain properties were assigned to Dangal, who added a testamenta...
Mt. Mumtaz Begam Vs. Mt. Lachhmi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-10-1930
Reported in: AIR1931All196
Mukerji, J.1. The only question in this Letters Patent Appeal is whether the document in question dated 14th February 1910, evidences an out and out sale or whether a mortgage by conditional sale.2. It appears that the appellant Mt. Mumtaz Begam borrowed a sum of rupees 400 on 2nd October 1905 from two persons Narwar Mal and Kishan Lal. The mortgage was a simple one and carried interest. Five years later the appellant executed the document in question and purported to sell the property in consideration of the loan that was owing by her. It was agreed that if Mumtaz Begam paid the 'money within three years the property would be 'released' (wa guzasht kara lengen). The plaintiff's suit has been dismissed by the Courts below and a learned single Judge of this Court. The first two Courts came to the conclusion that on the true interpretation of the document it was an out and out sale and the condition as to the 'release' of the property on payment within three years did not bring the trans...
inamullah Khan Vs. Lala Shambhu Dayal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-10-1930
Reported in: AIR1931All159
Sulaiman, J.1. This is really a first appeal from an order refusing to set aside a sale which has taken place in execution of a mortgage decree. The preliminary decree was passed on 19th April 1927, and the final decree on 2nd December 1927. The mortgagor became an insolvent in September 1927, but the case proceeded against him without impleading the Official Receiver. The auction sale took place on 27th April 1928. In the application which was originally filed the only ground that was taken was as to the gross inadequacy of the price. No specific irregularity of fraud in publishing or conducting the sale was set forth. By a subsequent application the judgment-debtor took the plea that the sale had been put down as No. 23 in the list, but the property was sold first and that in consequence a number of bidders could not be present as they had gone away for Friday prayers. It was also objected that the receiver was a necessary party and should have been impleaded. It was further pleaded ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »