Allahabad Court December 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.
Lachman Kachhi Vs. Secy. of State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-21-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All547
Sulaiman, C.J.1. This is a civil revision from a decree of the Court of Small Causes dismissing the plaintiff's claim, It appears that Mr. Baijal was appoint-ed the Official Receiver of an insolvent's estate. On 24th February 1926, the present plaintiff paid him Rs. 325 under a receipt signed by him as part of the purchase money of the estate of the insolvent which Mr. Baijal promised to transfer to him subject to the approval of the Insolvency Court. Apparently the Insolvency Court did not sanction the sale to the present plaintiff and the property was sold in auction on 5th September 1227. The receiver appears to have absconded. The plaintiff, accordingly applied to the Insolvency Court on 21st October 1929 for a refund of the amount paid by him to the receiver. This application was dismissed by the Court on 29th November 1929, on which the present suit was instituted on 16th May 1931, both against the Secretary of State through the Collector of Agra and the present receiver who has ...
Mt. Mewa Kunwari Vs. Bourey and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-20-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All388
Kendall, J.1. This is a plaintiff's application for the revision of an order of the Judge of the Small Cause Court of Cawnpore, dismissing his suit, which was based on a promissory note which has been held to be inadmissible as not duly stamped. The promissory note when tendered in evidence bore one half anna stamp, but the learned Judge has held that at the time of execution it bore two half anna stamps and was therefore at that time duly stamped. But one of the stamps appears to have been lost or removed, with the result that when tendered in evidence it was no longer 'duly stamped' and as the Judge has pointed out Section 35, Stamp Act, 1899, provides that:No instrument chargeable with duty shall be admitted in evidence...unless such instrument is duly stamped,and he has therefore held that the force of the word 'is' in the section is such that he had no power to admit the document in evidence. I have been asked by Mr. Pathak on behalf of the applicant to construe the section in a m...
Mool Chand and ors. Vs. Lalta Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-20-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All524
Iqbal Ahmad, J.1. This is a judgment-debtor's appeal arising out of an execution case. The decree-holder respondent obtained a simple money decree against the appellant on 22nd November 1926. The decretal amount was payable in six equal instalments, the last instalment falling due on 22nd December 1929. The decree provided that in the event of default of payment of an instalment, the decree, holder would be entitled to realize the entire decretal amount. It was also provided by the decree that the judgment-debtor will execute a security bond before 22nd January 1927, failing which the judgment-debtor shall not be entitled to pay the decretal amount in instalments but will be liable to pay at once the entire decretal amount.2. The judgment-debtor did execute a security bond on 19th January 1927, hypothecating certain immoveable properties. Default having been made in the due payment of the instalments, the decree-holder took out execution of the decree with respect to the entire decreta...
Suraj Bali Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-19-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All340; 152Ind.Cas.249
Bennet, J.1. These are three applications in revision on behalf of five persons who have been convicted in one trial under the same Section 325, Penal Code, and sentenced to six months' rigorous imprisonment and Rs. 100 fine or in default 2 months' further rigorous imprisonment by a Tahsildar Magistrate. The appeal to the Joint Magistrate was dismissed and an application in revision to the Sessions Judge has been dismissed. It is now for the fourth time that the matter has been brought before the Courts. Many grounds have been argued at considerable length. One point was that the medical witness made an examination on 18th January 1982, and another examination on 29th January 1932, 11 days later. In the first examination the medical witness discovered nine injuries, mostly contusions, which wore simple. In the second examination he discovered three grievous injuries including a fracture of the right fibula at its upper end and a fracture of the sixth left rib, the duration being about ...
Kunji and ors. Vs. Biyaz HusaIn and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-19-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All362; 152Ind.Cas.1
King, J.1. This was a suit for recovery of possession of land in the abadi of a village and for demolition of certain buildings constructed thereon. The plaintiffs are co-sharers in the village. They alleged that the building in question was situated upon two plots of land, one of which belonged to them and the other belonged to another group of zamindars who refused to join in the suit and therefore have been impleaded as pro forma defendants. Their case was that about 7 years before the suit one Mt. Faqaran Jan began to construct a room on the land in dispute and when the zamindars came to know of this, they raised objections and the construction was stopped. Subsequently, the other walls, about three feet in height, have been lying incomplete for five or six years. Then about two months before the suit the defendants began to build a mosque on the land in dispute without having obtained a permission from the zamindars, and refused to stop the construction when the zamindars remonstr...
Mt. Naima Khatun Vs. Basant Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-19-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All406
ORDERSulaiman, C.J. and Young, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of a suit for damages for breach of contract. On 18th September 1925 the plaintiff's husband sold half a village called Aghwan Hera to the defendant for Rs. 35,000. On 1st December 1925 three documents were executed : one was a sale deed by the defendant to the plaintiff for Rs. 25,000 re-turning the village previously purchased, another sale deed by the plaintiff to the defendant for Rs. 28,000 of shares in another village, Pilkhani, and a third a security bond executed by the defendant in favour of the plaintiff. Under the sale deed executed by the plaintiff in favour of the defendant Rs. 8,200 were acknowledged to have been previously received, and Rs. 19,800 were left in the hands of the defendant to be paid in equal amounts to two previous creditors. There was a statement in the deed that there were no prior encumbrances. Under the security bond executed by the defendant he agreed to indemnify the plainti...
Mithan Lal Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-19-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All439
Niamatullah, J.1. This is an application for revision by one Mithan Lal, who was convicted of an offence under Section 4, U.P. Prevention of Adulteration Act, No. 6 of 1912, and sentenced to a fine of Rs. 30 by a Magistrate, 1st Class, Moradabad. The applicant deals in wheat flour. A sanitary inspector in the employment of the local Municipal Board took a sample of the flour which was then in his shop and sent it to the public analyst, who detected a mixture of barley flour. The analyst did not, however, mention the proportion in which barley flour was found mixed with the wheat flour. His report is consistent with the hypothesis that the percentage of barley flour was negligible or infinitesimal. It is equally consistent with the hypothesis that the extent of barley flour was quite appreciable. In this state of uncertainty the case must be decided on a hypothesis most favourable to the accused. The question is whether the applicant can be held to be guilty of an offence described in S...
Pancham Palodar Vs. Kandhai Palodar and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-19-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All713
Kendall, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal from a decree and order of the Second Additional Subordinate Judge of Gorakbpur confirming the decision of the trial Court. The plaintiff-respondent filed a suit for specific performance of an agreement said to have been made by defendant 1, in his favour to lease a grove to him. As the agreement was not carried out, he filed this suit on 10th September 1928. A day after the suit had been filed, defendant 1, executed a lease of this same grove to defendant 2, who is the present appellant. Both the Courts below decreed the plaintiff's claim for specific performance of the contract, and the appellant claims that the decisions are wrong as they are based on the belief that Section 52, T.P. Act, applies to the case, and that the transfer in favour of the appellant is invalid. At this stage the only question that arises is whether Section 52, T.P. Act, will apply to the case. It has been remarked above that the lease in favour of the appellant was ...
Lala Jhao Lal Vs. Ahmudullah and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-18-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All335
Young, J.1. This is a second appeal from the decision of the learned District Judge of Moradabad. The plaintiff is a zamindar; the defendants are Mahomedan tenants. The plaintiff brought a suit for a declaration that a certain plot was not a graveyard and he asked that the plot should be delivered up to him after removing the graves and he prayed for an injunction to this effect. The trial Court came to the conclusion that the plot was a graveyard, but directed that the bodies of the deceased Mahomedans should be buried as closely as possible together and also directed that a tomb stone, which had recently been erected over a grave should be removed. The learned Munsif in the trial Court apparently thought that the zamindar had a right to graze his cattle upon the graveyard; that a license or grant of a plot for use as a graveyard was a license or grant only to bury and that nothing could be done in the graveyard in interfering with the zamindar's right of grazing cattle upon the grave...
Sukhdeo Vs. Donger and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-18-1933
Reported in: AIR1935All152
Kendall, J.1. The plaintiff-appellant in the suit from which this appeal arises had bought a well from one Bhopal, who had purchased it at an auction-sale in execution proceedings in which Donger and Narain Lal, respondents 1 and 2, were the judgment-debtors. They had made an objection to the sale of the well in those proceedings, but the matter was decided against them, and they failed to bring a suit for establishing their alleged right.2. They afterwards continued to use the well for irrigation purposes and consequently the plaintiff-appellant brought the present suit for damages and an injunction. The Courts below have decided that the well was not transferable by sale in execution of a decree-in spite of the decision of the executing Court, and they have therefore held that the plaintiff-appellant had no right to sue.3. No one has appeared in this Court on behalf of the respondents, and it appears from the judgment of the trial Court that they did not appear there and the suit was...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »