Allahabad Court February 1931 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.
Mrs. T.C. Paul Vs. Nathaniel Gopal Nath
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-11-1931
Reported in: AIR1931All596
Mukerji, J. 1. This is the defendant's appeal arising out of a suit for a declaration and injunction instituted under the following circumstances : One Mr. G. J. Hope, who resided before his death at Mirzapur, deposited with the Imperial Bank of India three sums of money as shown at p. 67 of the 'printed paper book. He died on 24th March 1926. About 22 days before his death he executed a will and appointed the respondent and another the executors. The fixed deposits were in the following terms:Mr. G.J. Hope and Mrs. Clara Hope repayable to either or survivor.2. On the death of Mr. Hope, his wife withdrew two sums of money, namely, Rs. 7,000 and Rs. 1,000 as they fell due, leaving a fixed deposit of Rs. 5,000 untouched. Mrs. Hope died, approximately, in August 1926. Before her death, she also executed a will and by it left all her property to the defendant appellant.' When the respondent applied for a probate of the will of Mr. Hope, a contest was raised, presumably at the instance of t...
MihIn Lal Jwala Prasad Vs. Marguerite Butter Dairy Farm
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-11-1931
Reported in: AIR1932All38
Sen, J.1. This is an application under Section 25, Provincial Small Cause Courts Act. The applicant is a firm carrying on business under the name and style of Mihin Lal Jwala Prasad. The plaintiff firm alleged that it had deposited 96 pieces of cloth for sale with the firm of the defendant on 4th January 1925; that an account was settled between the parties on 25th February 1928 and that on instructions received from Jwala Prasad, the proprietor of the defendant firm, Bhekhar Chand, munim and mukhtaram, acknowledged the liability of the firm as regards a sum of Rs. 178-13-0 which was payable to the plaintiff by the defendant upon account. The defendant agreed to pay this sum to the plaintiff after a month.2. The suit was instituted on 1st of July 1929. It was resisted inter alia upon the ground that the claim was time barred; that Shekhar Chand was not authorized to acknowledge the liability and that the acknowledgment had been made after the period for the institution of the suit had ...
In Re: Shankar Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-05-1931
Reported in: AIR1931All580
Boys, J. 1. This case came up before us on 7th March 1930, for consideration as to what action, if any, should be taken by this Court under Section 10 (2), Bar Councils Act, 38 of 1926, in reference to a complaint forwarded by a Magistrate of the first class, Mr. Waliullah, charging Pt. Shankar Lal, an advocate practising at Fatehpur, with gross misconduct, in that he instigated a false complaint against Sub-Inspector, Mukhtar Ahmad. The complaint against Mukhtar Ahmad was filed by one Sheodarshan who alleged that having come to Court for the purposes of giving evidence in a case, he was taken by Sab Inspector Mukhtar Ahmad from the verandah of the Court to a little distance away under a tress and was there told that he must give evidence identifying a particular accused in another case. Sheodarshan, according to his own account then given, had refused and was threatened by the Sub-Inspector that he would be challaned under Section 110, Criminal P. C, and upon his persisting in his ref...
Ganesh and ors. Vs. Mallu Mal Girdhas Das
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-04-1931
Reported in: AIR1931All375
Banerji, J.1. This is a defendants' appeal against a judgment and decree of the learned Addl. Subordinate Judge of Benares in a suit for recovery of money.2. There are several defendants in the case but the case as presented to us does not require consideration of the case set up by the defendants, other than defendant 1, as defendant 1 must be treated as the 'karta' of the Joint family consisting of defendant 1 and the other defendants.3. The plaintiff's case as disclosed in the evidence of, Kashmiri Mal was that the 'sarkhat' Ex. 1 was executed by Ganesh Misir defendant 1, that on 18th October 1923 the accounts were balanced and Rs. 16,518-7-6 were found due to the plaintiff, that thereafter on 7th October 1924 there was another accounting, and finally, on 17th May 1926, Rs. 14,287-2-6 were found due to the plaintiff, and the plaintiff claims that sum together with interest.4. The defence was that the 'sarkhat' was not executed on the various dates mentioned, but everything was writt...
Radha Mohan Datt, Silk Merchant Vs. Abbas Ali Biswas and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-03-1931
Reported in: AIR1931All294
1. The facts of the. case which have occasioned this reference to the Full Bench lie within a narrow orbit and may be briefly indicated. Radha Mohan Datt brought a suit in the Court of the Munsif of Benares against several defendants for recovery of Rs. 3,500. Defendant 1, remained absent throughout and did not contest the suit. Defendants 2 to 4 were represented by counsel. They appear to have raised certain objections with regard to commission. Defendants 6 to 7 repudiated all connexion with the transaction which had given rise to the claim and impugned their liability in toto. The case was fixed for final disposal on 4th April 1929. On this date, defendants 2 to 4 through their pleader asked for grant of an instalment decree. Defendants 5 to 7 also appeared through a pleader and prayed for a postponement of the case to enable them to have certain witnesses examined on commission. This petition was rejected. Their counsel intimated that he had no instructions to proceed with the case...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›