Allahabad Court October 1933 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.
Sabir HusaIn and anr. Vs. Farzand Hasan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-31-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All52
Niamatullah, J.1. The appeal has arisen from a suit brought by the two plaintiffs-appellants, who are husband and wife for recovery of Rs. 8,333-5-4, which represents their share of inheritance in the dower of Rs. 25,000 due to their deceased daughter, Aijaz Patima, who was admittedly married to Farzand Hasan, defendant 1. They claimed a right to recover that sum from the person and property of defendant 1 and the assets left by his father, Sibte Hasan, on the allegation that defendant 1 was an infant in 1914, when he was married under the guardianship of Sibte Hasan, who had bound himself personally to pay the dower. In the alternative, the plaintiffs rest their case on the rule of Mahomedan law applicable to Shias, that a guardian contracting marriage for his minor ward is personally liable if the child husband has no means of paying the stipulated dower. Defendants 2 to 4 are the other heirs of Sibte Hasan. They have been impleaded because they and defendant 1 are in possession of t...
In Re: S., Advocate
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-31-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All109a
Mukerji, J.1. Mr. S., an advocate of this Court practising at Budaun, has been called upon to show cause, why ha should not be dealt with under the disciplinary jurisdiction of this Court on the following charge, namely:That on 8th March 1927 you filed a certificate of fees for Rs. 876 in Civil Suit No. 70 of 1925 of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Budaun, Bhagwant Singh versus Chaudhri Bhau Singh and Lachman Singh, with a view that the said sum of Rs. 875 be taxed in costs against the plaintiff in that suit when you knew that any amount not paid before the hearing of the suit could not be entered in the schedule of costs as vakil's fee and when you knew that the said amount had not in fact been paid to you, and did succeed in having the said amount taxed against the plaintiff.2. Mr. S has appeared in person and also through counsel. The following facts will be material to understand the nature of the case against Mr. S., One Bhagwant Singh, a hrother'a son of two persons Bhau Si...
Mt. Chunna Kunwar Vs. Lala Mukat Behari Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-31-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All117
Niamatullah, J.1. These two appeals arise from a suit in which there was a triangular contest in respect of zamindari and other properties admittedly belonging at one time to Raj Bahadur, who died in 1895, leaving no issues. His widow, Mt. Durga Kunwar, who succeeded to his interest, died on the 20th February 1928. On her death three claimants appeared on the scene. The present plaintiff Mukat Behari Lal claimed as 'bandhu', being the son of Raj Bahadur's father's sister, Mt. Tulsha. His case was that no agnatic relation of Raj Bahadur descending indirect male line from the common ancestor was in existence and that the plaintiff was, therefore, entitled to his estate. The defendants first set, Ram Chandra and Sia Ram, claimed to be 'sapinda' relations of Raj Bahadur, being the descendants of the common ancestor Pran Nath in the direct male line and as such entitled to exclude the plaintiff, who claimed to be a relation of Raj Bahadur through a female. The third claimant was Mt. Chunna ...
Jagannath Vs. Ram Gopal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-31-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All160; 147Ind.Cas.342
ORDERKendall, J.1. This is an application for the revision of an order of the Judge of the Small Cause Court of Farrukhabad decreeing the plaintiff's suit. It has been argued before mo that the suit was barred by limitation, and also that no interest ought to be allowed.2. As regards the question of limitation, the cause of action arose on 24th September 1929 and the suit was filed on 11th October 1932, that is to say, on the day of the opening of the Courts after the long vacation. The plaint was stamped wife a court-fee stamp of Rs. 4 only instead of Rs. 39, and on the office report the Court ordered that the deficiency should be made good within two days. The deficiency was made good on 13th October 1932 and the suit was then registered. The argument for the applicant is that the suit was not duly filed until the 13th October on which date it was barred by limitation. Under Section 6 of the Court-fees Act.No document of any of the kinds specified as chargeable in the first or second...
Collector of Bulandshahr Vs. Gokal Chand
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-31-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All573
Sulaiman, C.J.1. This is an appeal by the Collector as manager of the Court of Wards against the plaintiff who was the creditor of the wards. In August 1927 the estate of the wards was taken over under the superintendence of the Court of Wards and the Collector of Bulandshahr began to manage the estate. The plaintiff, Gokal Chand held a promissory note dated 26th June 1926, said to have been executed by the wards for Rs. 5,000, which together with interest amounted to Rs. 6,750 on 10th June 1929, when the present suit out of which this appeal has arisen was filed. Originally the Collector was not impleaded as a defendant, but on his own application dated 23rd July 1929, he was made a defendant. In this application he alleged that the estate had not till then been released by the Court of Wards and that the suit as against the defendants named in the plaint was improper and contrary to law and that the Court of Wards proposed to set up a defence in the case on behalf of the defendants a...
In Re: Mr. Shiva NaraIn Jafa, Advocate, Badaun
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-31-1933
Reported in: 147Ind.Cas.608
1. Mr. Sheo Narain Jafa, an Advocate of this Court parctising at Budaun, has been called upon to show cause why he should not be dealt with under the disciplinary jurisdiction of this Court on the following charge, namely:That on March 8, 1927, you Babu Sheo Narain Jafa filed 'a certificate of fees for Rs. 875 in Civil Suit No 70 of 1925 of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Budaun, Bhagwant Singh v. Chaudhri Bhau Singh and Lachman Singh, with a view that the said sum of Rs. 875 be taxed in costs against the plaintiff in that suit when you knew that any amount not paid before the hearing of the suit could not be entered in the schedule of costs as Vakil's fee and when you knew that the said amount had not in fact been paid to you, and did succeed in having the amount taxed against the plaintiff.'2. Mr. Jafa has appeared in person and also through Counsel.3. The following facts will be material to, to understand the nature of the case against Mr. Jafa.4. One Bhagwant Singh, a brother...
Collector of Bulandshahr Vs. Gokul Chand
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-31-1933
Reported in: 153Ind.Cas.788
Sulaiman, C.J.1. This is an appeal by the Collector as manager of the Court of Wards against the plaintiff who was the creditor of the wards. In August 1927, the estate of the wards was taken over under the superintendence of the Court of Wards and the Collector of Bulandshahr began to manage the estate. The plaintiff Gokal Chand held a promissory note dated June 26, 1926, said to have been executed by the wards for Rs. 5,000, which together with interest amounted to Rs. 6,750 on June 10,1929, when the present suit out of which this appeal has arisen was tiled. Originally the Collector was not impleaded as a defendant but on his own application, dated July 23, 1929, he was made a defendant. In this application he alleged that the estate had not till then been released by the Court of Wards and that the suit as against the defendants named in the plaint was improper and contrary to law and that the Court of Wards proposed to set up a defence in the case on behalf of the defendants and c...
M. Abdul Rasheed Khan Vs. Pt. Balli Ram
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-30-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All107
ORDERKendall, J.1. This is an application for the revision of an order of the Judge of the Small Cause Court of Dehra Dun under Section 25, Provincial Small Cause Courts Act. The circumstances, out of which it has arisen, which are not referred to in the order itself, must be detailed here. The plaintiff-applicant had filed a suit for a sum of money and 12th June 1931 was fixed by the Court for the final disposal. Before that date the defendant had applied for an alteration of the date on account of a marriage, but this application was rejected by the Court before the date of hearing, and on 12th June 1931 the defendant's vakil appeared and made an application for an adjournment on the ground that had been given in the previous application. In his application the vakil stated that he had no instructions not to proceed with the case and he had no instructions to apply for an adjournment. The result was that the Court gave a decree to the plaintiff which is not worded as an ex parte decr...
Mt. Titli Vs. Alfred Robert Jones
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-30-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All273; 153Ind.Cas.733
Mukerji, J.1. This Letters Patent appeal arises out of a matrimonial suit. The suit as it originally instituted was based on the following allegations:The petitioner is a European domicile in India and since his very childhood has been deficient in mentality. He had to be looked after by bis relations throuf'hout his life. The respondent is a woman of loose character and has been so from her girlhood. Her brothers and brother's son, in October 1930, land on other occasions, several times threatened the petitioner that unless he married the respondent, he would be visited with 'dire consequences,' that the ground on which those threats were held out was a false one, being to the effect that the petitioner had 'deprived the respondent of her caste.' The respondent was already married and her husband, Mohammad Ali, was still alive. But in spite of this fact the petitioner, on account of the threats and being an 'idiot,' went through a form of marriage with the respondent, on lOfch Novembe...
Rama Nand Vs. Sheri
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-27-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All87; 150Ind.Cas.373
ORDERIqbal Ahmad, J.1. This is a reference by the learned Sessions Judge of Meerut under Section 438, Criminal P.C., and arises under the following circumstances:On 16th September 1932, one Sheri filed a complaint in the Court of a Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Meerut against Puran Mai and Batna Nand patwaris under Section 218, Penal Code. This complaint was transferred to the Court of Lt. Budh Prakash, Special Magistrate. The Special Magistrate dismissed the complaint and discharged the accused, About two weeks after the dismissal of the complaint and the discharge order, Sheri filed another complaint on the same facts in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate. This complaint was transferred to the Court of Meharban Ali, Special Magistrate, for trial. Rama Nand then filed an application in revision in the Court of the Sessions Judge challenging the competency of Section Meharban Ali to take cognizance of and to try the second complaint filed by Sheri, It was contended on behalf of ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »