Allahabad Court October 1932 Judgments
Alif Khan Vs. Wajid Ali and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-27-1932
Reported in: AIR1933All306
Iqbal Ahmad, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal and arises out of a suit for a declaration that the sale-deed dated 30th June 1913, with respect to a shop executed by Ghasi Ram in favour of Latafat Ali, deceased father of defendants Wajid Ali and Ali Nabi was null and void and for possession of the said shop. The plaintiff and pro forma defendants are admittedly zamindars of Gauri Nawada and Ghasi Ram was a non-agricultural rai-yat residing in Gauri Nawada. The shop in dispute is situate in Gauri Nawada. The plaintiff's case was that Gauri Nawada is an agricultural village and that the residents of the said village have no right to transfer their houses with the right of residence. The defence to the suit was that Gauri. Nawada is a part of the town of Sam-dhin and is not an agricultural village,. and that there was a custom in Sana-dhin that entitled the owenrs of houses in Samdhin to transfer the houses themselves, and the right of residence therein to whomsoever they pleased, and tha...
Tag this Judgment!Panna Lal Vs. Basdeo
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-26-1932
Reported in: AIR1933All118
Iqbal Ahmad, J.1. This is an application in revision by the defendant from an order of an Assistant Collector of the First Class setting aside an order of dismissal of a suit for profits and restoring the suit to its original number. A preliminary objection has been taken to the hearing of this application on the ground that no revision lies to this Court. The suit for profits was filed on 18th July 1931. The suit was adjourned on several occasions to enable the plaintiff to produce the evidence and ultimately on 20th November 1931 the suit was adjourned with a view to enable the plaintiff to produce the patwari along with the khatauni. The next date fixed in the case was 18th January 1932. On that date the plaintiff failed to produce the patwari or the khatauni, and the Court dismissed the suit 'for want of prosecution.' On the same date, viz., 18th January 1932, the plaintiff filed an application for the setting aside of the dismissal of the suit and for its being restored to its ori...
Tag this Judgment!Mt. Kaushillya Vs. Arat Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-25-1932
Reported in: AIR1933All196; 150Ind.Cas.532
Sulaiman, J.1. This is an application in revision from a decree of the Court of Small Causes. An affidavit was filed in this Court to the effect that a part of the statement of a witness recorded by the Judge in the body of the order of that date and struck out by him was the statement as made by the plaintiff Arath Lal and that what was recorded on the earlier page as his statement was not the whole statement of Arathi Lal and further that the finishing of the statement of the process-server and the pronouncement of the order of rejection of the restoration application of the petitioner were done simultaneously and that the deponent was convinced that the Judge recorded, or more specifically, commenced the recording of the order before he finished the entire evidence of the case. If this were absolutely true, it would undoubtedly show that there has been a gross irregularity in the trial of the case and that the learned Judge made his mind to dismiss the suit before hearing the whole ...
Tag this Judgment!Moti Chand Vs. Balram Das
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-24-1932
Reported in: AIR1933All116
Sulaiman, C. J.1. The Court below has set aside an ex parte decree passed against a minor in a partition suit on the ground that the minor's father, who had previously given his consent to a deed of partition by sale in the lifetime of the grandfather, was not a fit and proper person for being appointed a guardian, that he was careless and did not appear on the date of hearing to defend the suit on behalf of the minor. In the connected application filed by the father on the ground that he was ill on the date and could not appear in Court it has also set aside the decree as against him on the main ground that in a partition suit the decree must be set aside against all the defendants. It has also removed the father' from the guardianship of the minor, and appointed the minor's mother as his guardian and allowed her to file a written statement on his behalf. We do not think that it can be said in revision that either the Court had no jurisdiction to pass the order that it has done, or it...
Tag this Judgment!Mrs. Edna May Olivia Hardless Vs. Mr. Harold Richard Hardless
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-21-1932
Reported in: AIR1933All56; 140Ind.Cas.62
ORDERYoung, J.1. This is the petition of Edna May Olivia Hardless against her husband, Harold Robert Hardless of the 'Sanctuary,' Chunar. The petitioner by her petition claims a dissolution of the marriage on account of the cruelty and adultery of her husband. Both the parties are Anglo-Indians domiciled in India and resident within the jurisdiction of this Court. She also claims custody of her children. The parties were married in the month of June 1927 when the petitioner was 16 years of age. There have been three children of the marriage, one girl and two boys, the eldest child being four years old and the youngest two years old. The petition which was originally defended is now undefended. Mr. Saila Nath Mukerji, counsel for the respondent,, has intimated to the Court that he is unable to put his client in the box' in denial of the charges. The petitioner herself has given evidence, and she has satisfied me both as to the adultery and the cruelty. The husband, who is a handwriting ...
Tag this Judgment!Pragmadho Singh and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-20-1932
Reported in: AIR1933All40
ORDERSulaiman, C.J.1. The office has brought it to my notice that there are certain judgments in criminal cases delivered by the late Mr. Justice L.M. Banerji in open Court and taken down by bis judgment-writer and which, owing to his death remained unsigned after having been faired out. Notes were made by the bench reader of the disposal of the case, and in some of these the learned Judge actually signed the release warrants. It is quite clear that Section 366,which requires that the judgment of every trial in any criminal Court of original jurisdiction shall be pronounced in open Court and Section 367 which provides that the written judgment should be dated and signed by the presiding officer in open court, do not apply to a High Court. Charter 26 applies to judgments delivered by criminal courts of originial jurisdiction. Section 424 of the Act makes the rules contained in Chap. 26 as to the judgments of criminal courts of original jurisdiction applicable to judgments of any appella...
Tag this Judgment!Lala Ramji Mal Vs. Devi Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-19-1932
Reported in: AIR1933All43
Sulaiman, C.J.1. This is an application in revision from an order of an Assistant Collector, an appeal from which has been dismissed by the District Judge. A preliminary objection is taken to the hearing of this revision on the ground that the remedy lay by way of revision to the Board of Revenue and not to the High Court. In our opinion this objection has no force. Under Section 220, Agra Tenancy Act, every suit brought by a thekedar against his lessor which is of the same nature as' any suit for application specified in Schedule 4, which may be brought by a tenant against his landholder shall be deemed to be included in that schedule under the same serial number as such similar suit. Section 99 provides the remedy for a tenant who has been dispossessed. Section 212 provides a remedy for a thekedar who has been dispossessed. In Schedule 4, Serial No. 12. Section 99 is mentioned and an appeal is provided to the Commissioner. By virtue of the provisions of Section 220 a suit under Secti...
Tag this Judgment!Suraj NaraIn Lal Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-19-1932
Reported in: AIR1933All213
Kisch, J.1. The appellant B. Suraj Narain Lal, Kayasth, has been convicted of an offence under Section 304, I.P.C., and sentenced to four years' rigorous imprisonment for causing the death of one Sukhoo Koeri. The facts of the case are common ground as between the prosecution and the defence in almost every particular. Sukhoo Koeri, the deceased, aged 30 years, was an orphan and had been brought up from his childhood by B. Suraj Narain Lal. On the night of 22nd April 1932 Sukhoo had been chatting with B. Suraj Narain Lal for an hour or so, and at about 11 p. m. Suraj Narain Lal retired to sleep in the verandah just outside the room in which his wife was reposing. Shortly after he heard his wife crying out 'who are you and why have you come? Are you mad?' He took up the lighted lantern by his side and went into the room where he found Sukhoo lying on top of his wife, who was struggling with him. He picked up a gandasa lying on a shelf near by and struck Sukhoo a number of blows with it....
Tag this Judgment!Gauri Singh and anr. Vs. Bechu Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-18-1932
Reported in: AIR1933All97
Mukerji, J. 1. This appeal is by the first two defendants, and arises out of a suit for sale and other reliefs, instituted on foot of a mortgage dated 9th September 1917. Defendant 1, Gauri Singh, on behalf of himself and his then minor son, defendant 2, made the mortgage in suit for a sum of Rs. 7,000 odd. The mortgage was in favour of some of the plaintiffs, the other plaintiffs being joint members of the family with the mortgagees. The plaintiffs' case was that out of the properties mortgaged they were not put in possession over some, and therefore under a clause of the mortgage, they were entitled to recover the mortgage money with interest at 2 per cent per mensem from the date of the mortgage, by sale of the mortgaged property. They accordingly asked for sale in lieu of principal and interest and, in the alternative, they asked for possession and mesne profits. The suit was contested by the two defendants, who are the appellants before us, but the suit succeeded, and a decree was...
Tag this Judgment!Sarnam Prasad and anr. Vs. Sunder Sahu and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-18-1932
Reported in: AIR1933All120
Mukerji, J.1. This appeal is by defendants 1 and 2, and arose under the following circumstances. One Rameshwar Koeri, defendant 3, has a daughter Dariyai Kunwar, who is married to defendant 1. Sarnam Prasad. Dariyai Kunwar's son is Hardeo. It appears that there was some dispute between Rameshwar Koeri, on the one side, and his daughter and daughter's son, on the other, as regards the occupancy holding of Rameshwar Koeri. The daughter and the daughter's son had no interest in the occupancy holding during the lifetime of Rameshwar Koeri, but the daughter's son was entitled to succeed after the death of Rameshwar Koeri, provided the daughter's son shared in the cultivation at the time of the tenant's death. There was a compromise between Rameshwar, on the one hand, and the daughter and the daughter's son and son-in-law, on the other, on 24th April 1924, which was filed in the Revenue Court in proceedings relating to rectification of a khatauni, and it was agreed that the names of the daug...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »