Allahabad Court January 1932 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.
Sheo NaraIn Vs. Bala Rao
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-22-1932
Reported in: AIR1932All348; 137Ind.Cas.198
Sen, J.1. This is an appeal by one Sheo Narain defendant in Suit No. 21 of 1929 of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Jhansi. Sheo Narain and Bala Rao respondents were sons of one Ganesh. Ganesh died leaving considerable property. There was a dispute between his two sons as regards their share in the said property. Mt. Dulari is the widowed aunt of Ganesh. She claimed a right of maintenance.2. The dispute between Bala Rao and Sheo Narain reached such an acute stage that the police sent up a complaint against them in the Court of the Magistrate recommending that they should be bound over under Section 107, Criminal P.C. During the pendency of the proceedings against them under Section 107, Criminal P.C. two agreements were entered into between Bala Rao and Sheo Narain on 13th September 1928, under which they agreed that their disputes should be referred to the arbitration of a board of arbitrators consisting of seven persons. Mt. Dulari joined in one of these agreements. On 17th Octo...
Nathu Ram Vs. Madan Gopal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-22-1932
Reported in: AIR1932All408
Sulaiman, J.1. This is an appeal arising out of an insolvency proceeding. On an application made by a creditor the insolvency Court ordered the Official Receiver to take possession of certain property alleged to belong to the insolvent the Official Receiver, in pursuance of the said order, attached this property on 8th June 1929. On 2nd July the son of the insolvent applied to the insolvency Court alleging that the property was his own property. The insolvency Court decided that the house belonged to the son, and released it from attachment. In that Court no objection was taken that the application to the Court had been made more than 21 days after the attachment by the receiver.2. An appeal was preferred to the District Judge, before whom it was urged that the application having been made more than 21 days after the date of the attachment, it should not have been entertained.3. The learned Judge has overruled this contention, and in our opinion rightly. The house was attached under an...
Kanhaiya Lal Vs. Mt. Machadei
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-22-1932
Reported in: AIR1932All550a
Mukerji, J.1. This is an application to refund the court fee paid on the memorandum of appeal by the appellant under Section 13, Court-fees Act. The office report is in favour of the applicant, but we have considered the provisions of Section 13, in view of the rather complicated case before us. It appears that the suit was brought against six defendants for recovery of a certain sum of money by sale of property. The suit was dismissed in toto by the Court of first; instance. On appeal to the lower appellate Court the latter held that defendants 3 to 5 were liable, but defendants 1 and 6 were not liable. The lower appellate Court accordingly sent back the case to the Court of first instance for adjudication of the liability of defendants 3 to 5. The plaintiff was dissatisfied with this order of the lower appellate Court and filed a second appeal. Here this Bench held that defendants 1 and 6 were equally liable and passed the following order:We modify the decree of the Court below and r...
Mt. Fatima Begam and ors. Vs. Bansidhar and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-21-1932
Reported in: AIR1932All356
Niamatullah, J.1. This second appeal has arisen out of a suit brought by the plaintiff-respondent for recovery of possession of certain properties, specified at the foot of the plaint. The first Court dismissed the suit but the lower appellate Court decreed the plaintiff's claim in full. Some of the defendants have appealed to this Court.2. The facts of the case are no longer in controversy. The property in dispute belonged to one Chiranji and Mt. Dharman, who executed a deed of simple mortgage in favour of the plaintiff's predecessor-in-interest (hereinafter referred to as plaintiff). The defendant-appellants' predecessor-in-title (hereinafter referred to as defendant) held a simple money-decree against the aforesaid mortgagors and had the mortgaged property now in suit attached in execution of their decree shortly before the mortgagee instituted his suit for sale on foot of his mortgage. The sale in execution of the simple money-decree in favour of the defendants was not made till af...
Harakh Chand Vs. Mt. Sajida Begum and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-21-1932
Reported in: AIR1932All436
Mukerji, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for recovery of arrears of rent, and the question that we have to decide is whether it is open to the Revenue Court to make a decree payable by instalments under the provisions of Order 20, Rule 11, Civil P.C.2. The plaintiff, who is the appellant before us, brought the suit out of which-this appeal has arisen, for recovery of arrears of rent. The defendants admitted the claim but asked for permission to pay by instalments. The learned Assistant-Collector directed that the arrears decreed by him might be paid by three instalments, lie took care to direct that in case of any instalment being overdue*-the whole decree might be executed. The; plaintiff appealed to the District Judge, and the learned District Judge dismissed the appeal. The plaintiff has come up to us, and the argument of the learned Counsel for the appellant is that so far as tenants other than a permanent tenure-holder and a fixed rate tenant are concerned, the provision of ...
B. Nand Kishore Vs. Behari Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-21-1932
Reported in: AIR1932All600; 140Ind.Cas.470
Mukerji, J.1. These two appeals arise out of the same suit brought by the plaintiff-appellant under the following circumstances:It appears that a number of mills which did the business of grinding corn were in existence in Moradabad in 1927. Fourteen persons, among whom was the plaintiff, agreed that only five of the mills should carry on the business of grinding corn, that they should charge the public at certain rates fixed, that they should contribute a certain amount towards a common fund and that fourteen members should receive out of the common fund a certain share as their profits. The whole idea of the agreement was to avoid competition and a consequent cutting down of the rates, so that the mills may not be obliged to work at a loss. The plaintiff's case is that by para. 17 of the agreement he was to get his share of the profits at the rate at which he was getting them, if the agreement could not last for the whole year for which it was meant. The agreement according to the pl...
Pt. Sidh Nath Tewari Vs. Tej Bahadur Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-20-1932
Reported in: AIR1932All411
Mears, C.J.1. On the civil revision' being opened Mr. Bankey Behari Lal referred the Court to the decision of Lachmi Dayal v. Sri Kishan Das [1905] 2 A.L.J. and also to Section 295, Civil P.C. of 1882 and contended that as there was an undoubted remedy by suit in respect of matters which Mr. Pandey sought revision, the proper practice for this Court is not to hear the revision. Mr. Pandey brought to our notice the case of Lila v. Mahange : AIR1931All632 and the observations of Sulaiman, J,, in that case. The position today with regard to revision is that there is no hard and fast rule about the matter, and when it manifestly appears to be right and convenient and proper that this Court should decide a revisional application in preference to allowing the parties to embark on long and expensive litigation, it is within the competence of the Court so to decide the revisional application. In each case it is a matter for the Judge to exercise his discretion but it is undesirable that there ...
Pandit Sidh Nath Tewari Vs. Tegh Bahadur Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-20-1932
Reported in: 138Ind.Cas.106
1. On the civil revision being opened Mr. Bankey Behari Lal referred the court to the decision of Laehmi Dayal v. Sri Krishan Das 2 A.L.J.370 and also to e. 295 of the Civil Procedure Oode of 1882, and contended that as there was an undoubted remedy by suit in respect of matters which Mr. Pandey sought revision, the proper practice for this Court is not to hear the revision, Mr. Pandey brought to our notice the case of Lila v. Manange 137 Ind. Cas. 634 : (1931) A.L.J. 974 : A.I.R. 1931 All. 832 and the observations of Mr. Justice Suiaiman in that case The position to-day with regard to revisions is that there is no hard and fast rule about the matter and when it manifestly appears to be right and convenient and proper that this Court should decide a revision application in preference to allowing the parties to embark on long and expressing litigation, it is within the competence of the court so to decide the decisional application. In each case it is a matter for the Judge to exercise ...
Sita Ram and anr. Vs. B. Jado Rai and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-19-1932
Reported in: AIR1932All353; 137Ind.Cas.785
Mears, C.J.1. This is an appeal under Section 75, Provincial Insolvency Act, from an appellate order of the District Judge of Agra, dated 15th December 1930, confirming an order of the Judge of Small Causes, dated 21st March 1930, in certain proceedings relating to one Ram Prasad, insolvent.2. One Girdhari Lal had four sons two of whom are Basanti Lal and Shambhunath. The names of the two others cannot be gathered from the papers before us. Basanti Lal died in the lifetime of Girdhari Lal leaving a son Ram Prasad.3. On 13th October 1913, Ram Prasad applied that he should be adjudicated an insolvent. He was so adjudicated on 18th May 1914. Babu Jado Rai, who is an advocate of this Court practising at Agra, was appointed a receiver on 3rd June 1914.4. The receiver took certain steps to take possession of some property in the possession of Girdhari Lal on the averment that it was joint ancestral property and that the insolvent had a share therein. This was opposed by Girdhari Lal on the g...
Girdhari Lal and anr. Vs. Firm Bishnu Chand
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-19-1932
Reported in: AIR1932All461; 140Ind.Cas.783
Bennet, J.1. This is a first appeal by the defendants against a decree of the learned Subordinate Judge of Shahjahanpur decreeing the plaintiff's claim for a sum of Rs. 18,467-9-0 together with costs and interest. The only question before us is one of limitation. The plaint set forth that the,' plaintiff's firm was a firm of money-lenders and that it was agreed that the defendants should borrow money from the plaintiff's firm, and interest would be payable on the loans at the rate of ten annas per cent per mensem, and that entries should be made of the loans in the account books of the plaintiffs. Para. 4 of the plaint set forth that on the date corresponding to 26th September 1925 the account as between the parties was adjusted and a sum of Rupees 16,043-8-9 was found due to the plaintiff by the defendants. The defendants admitted and acknowledged the said sum of money to be due by them. The plaints then set out an acknowledgment in the books of the plaintiffs, but we note that it is ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »