Allahabad Court June 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.
Ram Iqbal Rai Vs. Telessari Kuari and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-27-1930
Reported in: AIR1930All713
Niamatullah, J.1. This revision arises in the following circumstances: The plaintiff filed a suit in the Court of the Munsif of Ballia for a declaration of her title to 17 bighas odd of tenancy including two groves, and in the alternative for recovery of possession against the defendants. She of course did not implead the landholder. In paras. 6,7 and 8 it was admitted that defendant 1, although he had no right to the property had got his name entered in the column of remarks as being in possession of a portion of the plot, that the name of defendant 2 was recorded in the revenue papers though merely for her consolation that the zamindar applied for the expungement of the name of the defendant (defendant 1), from the record on which defendant 1 took objections; later on the zamindar in collusion with defendant 1 had his application struck off and although the plaintiff has been in possession of the lands in dispute defendant 1 on the strength of the said order was interfering with the ...
In Re: Dehra Dun Mussoorie Electric Tramway Co. Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-27-1930
Reported in: AIR1930All884
Young, J.1. In this liquidation the official liquidators filed a list of creditors for the approval of the Court. Item 11 was a claim by the Telegraph Department of the Government for Rs. 1,527-9-10 for the costs of moving telephone lines, rent of telephone lines, telephone bill, etc. The Telegraph Department claimed that this amount should be paid in priority to the other debts of the company in liquidation. Notices were issued to the Telegraph Department and to the Government Advocate to show cause why this claim or any part of it should be paid in priority. The learned Government Advocate has appeared for the Telegraph Department and Mr. Bhagwati Shankar for the company in liquidation. This matter is governed by Section 230, Companies Act, which reads as follows:In a winding up there shall be paid in priority to all other debts: (a) all revenue, taxes, ceases and rates, whether payable to the Crown or to a local authority, due from the company at the date hereinafter mentioned and h...
Ram Kinkar Rai and anr. Vs. Tufani Ahir and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-27-1930
Reported in: AIR1931All35
1. This is a Full Bench appointed to consider the question whether, to use the language of Young, J.:a point of law which has never been taken in either the trial Court or the lower appellate Court can be raised in second appeal.2. The plaintiffs sued eight defendants in ejectment and for damages The defence of the first group of defendants was that they were tenants, holding by virtue of an agreement with defendant 3. a widow by name Mt. Batasi, her husband being by name Baldeo. The second group of defendants were cosharers, who did not join in the action. In the year 1926 the defendants had been actually ejected from the land in dispute but they subsequently regained possession; and the principal point that was discussed before the Munsif and the lower appellate Court was, whether the defendants were trespassers, a matter which involved the right of Mt Batasi to grant a lease to defendant 1. The Munsif on the issue of joint-ness or separation held that Baldeo the husband of Mt. Batas...
Sital Prasad Vs. Ranjit Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-25-1930
Reported in: AIR1931All583; 136Ind.Cas.158
Sen, J. 1. This and the connected appeal arise out of a suit for damages, consequent upon a breach of contract relating to the purchase of two grain pits, situate in Mauzas Sambhalka and Bhuniyori respectively. The plaintiffs claimed Rs. 948-12-3 for principal and interest up to the date of suit as also pendente lite and future interest.2. Plaintiffs alleged and the defendants did not dispute that the latter had agreed to purchase the two grain pits at certain rates detailed in the plaint, and that earnest money had been duly paid but that the defendants had failed to pay the balance of the price and take delivery. The balance was payable up to Chait Badi 15th and delivery ought to have been taken up to Chait Sudi 2nd corresponding to 17th March 1923.3. Plaintiffs averred that there was a trade usage in the grain market of Shamli, that where the buyer failed in his obligation as to payment and delivery on due dates, the seller was entitled to resell the grain pits according to the mark...
Moti Lal Ramchandar Vs. Durga Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-24-1930
Reported in: AIR1930All830; MANU/UP/0193/1930
Mukerji, J.1. This is an application in revision under the following circumstances: A decree was passed on 4th March 1927, in favour of the applicant firm Moti Lal Ram Chandar Das. Durga Prasad, the defendant, presented an application to set aside the ex-parte decree and the decree was set aside by the learned Small Cause Court Judge.2. By this revision the plaintiff seeks to set aside the order setting aside the ex parte decree on the ground that the application that was presented to the Court by Durga Prasad was not accompanied with either a security bond or the cash sum which had been decreed in favour of the plaintiff. Reliance is placed on the case of Badlu Singh v. Panthu Singh A.I.R. 1923 All. 2703.The facts are that Durga Prasad stated that he got notice of the decree on the 12th February 1929. On 23rd February 1929 he presented an application to set aside the decree. But that application was not accompanied by either a security bond or cash, and it is urged that the Court cann...
(Kuerani) Mt. Dan Kuer Vs. Ewaz Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-24-1930
Reported in: AIR1931All28a
Mukerji, J.1. This application in revision arises under the following circumstances: The respondent Thakur Ewaz Singh brought a suit for recovery of profits against the applicant Kuerani Mt. Dan Kuer for recovery of Rs. 700 odd as profits, being the profits of a half-share in a mortgaged property. The respondent's case was that he and the defendant had taken a mortgage in equal shares from certain persons and the respondent had not been given his share of the profits, by the Kuerani Mt. Dan Kuer, who was in possession.2. In her defence the defendant raised the plea that she was the owner of the entire mortgage and that the plaintiff was not at all interested in the mortgage. The question of proprietary title to the property involved in the suit for profits having thus been raised, the learned Assistant Collector framed an issue and sent it through the District Judge to the Court of the Munsif at Shikohabad for trial. An application was made by the Kuerani Mt. Dan Kuer to the District J...
Khalilur Rahman Khan Vs. Collector of Etah
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-24-1930
Reported in: AIR1931All38
Banerji, J.1. This is a judgment-debtor's appeal under the following circumstances: One Abdul Jalil Khan, a zamindar of Aligarh, in the year 1909 or 1910, borrowed money from various people and several decrees for money were passed against him. The decrees were simple money decrees, and under the provisions of Schedule 3, Civil P. C, the property which was attached in execution of the decree being ancestral property, the execution proceedings were transferred to the Collector. Under the provisions of the law, the Collector on 29th August 1911, gave a lease to one Habiburrahman Khan of the properties of Abdul Jalil Khan for a period of seventeen years.2. On 25th September 1914, while the property was in the possession of Habib urrahman Khan under the aforesaid lease, Abdul Jalil Khan executed a simple mortgage in favour of Rao Maharaj Singh (now represented by the Collector of Etah in charge of his estate) for a sum of Rs. 15,000. A suit for sale on foot of this mortgage was filed in th...
Joti Prasad and anr. Vs. Hardwari Mal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-19-1930
Reported in: AIR1932All128; 137Ind.Cas.334
Sen, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendants from a final decree in a suit for rendition of accounts upon a dissolved partnership. It is not controverted that the parties took a contract to supply firewood to the Military Department at Dehra Dun in the names of the defendants for the financial year commencing on 1st April 1921, and ending on 31st March 1922, and were partners in the profit and loss in equal moieties. The plaintiffs also claimed to be the partners with the defendants in a contract for supplying grass to the Military Department. The defendants contended that the plaintiffs had no concern with the grass contract; that no interest between the parties had been agreed upon and that accounts between the parties had already been settled. The Court of first instance upheld the contention that there was no partnership in the gross concern. It held that there was an agreement to pay interest at the rate of annas 12 per cent per month and that no accounts had been rendered by the...
Mohamed Sharif Vs. Nasir Ali and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-18-1930
Reported in: AIR1930All742
1. These two appeals arise out of a suit brought by the plaintiff-respondent Syed Nasir Ali for recovery of Rs. 1,000 as damages for malicious prosecution. Defendant 1, Sharif, was a Police Inspector stationed at Khurja at the time when the offences for which the plaintiff-respondent was prosecuted were alleged to have been committed. Syed Zafar Ali and Aftab Husain, defendants 2 and 3, who are brothers, are related to the plaintiff. On 11th January 1924 defendant 2 made a report at the Khurja Police Station that his house, which is contiguous to that of the plaintiff, had been raided by the plaintiff and his associates and that he (defendant 2) closed his doors to prevent the raiders getting into his house and made good his escape by jumping down the roof of his house. As the officer-in-charge of the police station was indisposed, the head muharrir forwarded the report to the Circle Inspector, defendant 1, who, accompanied by a few constables, proceeded to the scene of occurrence. Sub...
Emperor Vs. Bashir
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-17-1930
Reported in: AIR1930All741
ORDERBoys, J.1. This is a case of a reference by the District Magistrate asking that an acquittal should be set aside and the case sent back for retrial. The ground of the reference is that the accused was acquitted by the Magistrate of a charge of harbouring only because that person had not yet been convicted though proceedings were pending against him whom the present accused was charged with harbouring. The person alleged to have been harboured has been since convicted. The accused was not acquitted on the merits. If the Magistrate thought it necessary, I do not say it was necessary, but if he thought it necessary, to know the result of the trial of the person who was alleged to have been harboured for the offence which he was alleged to have committed, he should have adjourned the trial and awaited the result of the other trial. The only contention which could be raised here against the reference is that the powers vested in the District Magistrate under Section 438, Criminal P.C.,...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »