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.
Indian States Bank Ltd. Vs. Mt. Rukmini Rani and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-15-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All332
Bennet, J.1. This is a referencey by the taxing officer to the question as to whether a court-fee stamp should be affixed to written statements which are filed opposing an application by the Official Liquidator under the Companies Act, to set aside certain transfers as fraudulent. Under the Companies Act, the procedure is similar to the procedure under the Provincial Insolvency Act. That however does not throw much light on the matter because there is no special provision under that Act. These proceedings under either of these Act are apparently miscellaneous cases within the meaning of the General Rules (Civil) for Courts subordinate to the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, and miscellaneous cases are classified in the annual returns under Chap. 16, p. 193, from No. 95. A foot-note however to that form states that applications under the Provincial Insolvency Act 5 of 1920, are not to be entered in that particular statement, Form No. 95, and apparently they are separately entered....
Brij Mohan Lal Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-15-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All497
1. This was an application in revision against the conviction of one Brijmohan Lal under Section 299, U.P. Municipalities Act. The applicant was convicted for the infringement of a bye-law framed by the Agra Municipality with reference to motor lorries plying for hire. The bye-law was made by the Municipality under Section 298(2)H(c), U.P. Municipalities Act. The bye-law laid down that no motor lorry of any kind shall be let to hire or offered for hire within the limits of the Agra Municipality except in accordance with these rules, and the rules further laid down that the fee for the necessary license would be Rs. 100 per annum. It was proved that the applicant was a resident of Muttra and that he paid license fees for his lorry within the Muttra Municipality. He drove from Muttra to Agra and while he was in Agra he took passengers from Agra back to Muttra. It was proved therefore that he did ply his motor lorry for hire within the Municipal limits of Agra without having obtained a li...
LallaIn and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-15-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All514; 150Ind.Cas.376
Sulaiman, C.J.1. This is an application in revision by an accused person praying that the proceedings pending against him in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Konch be quashed. It appears that on 22nd August 1932 the complainant tiled a complaint under Section 379, Penal Code, against the accused in the Court of the predecessor of the present officer on the allegation that the complainant owed some money to the accused and the latter took away two of his she-buffaloes and one calf-buffalo in his absence without his consent and that later when he came to know of this and went to the accused and demanded a receipt from the accused in discharge of the debt, they refused to give the receipt or to return the promissory note. The Magistrate examined the complainant and summarily dismissed the complaint under Section 203, Criminal P.C. holding that the matter was of a civil nature and there was no use in dragging the accused to the criminal Court. Thereafter, the complainant made ...
ikram Ullah Khan Vs. Rahim Bux
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-15-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All770
Bajpai, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal in a suit brought by the plaintiff for a declaration that an amount of Rs. 1,000 said to be in deposit with him is not liable to be attached and sold by auction in execution of the decree obtained by Ikramullah against Habibullah. The facts of the case have been stated at length by the Courts below but they may be recapitulated. It appears that on 14th November 1922 one Habibullah sold a house to Rahim Bux, the plaintiff-respondent, for Rs. 2000 out of which he left the major portion of the sale consideration in the hands of the vendee for payment of various creditors. One of these creditors was Ikramullah, the present appellant, and a sum of Rs. 1,000 was left in the hands of Rahim Bux to pay Ikramullah. Rahim Bux did not pay this amount to Ikramullah with the result that Ikramullah brought a suit against Habibullah, obtained a decree and attached the house in question. Rahim Bux intervened and objected in the execution department that he was ...
Emperor Vs. Murat Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-15-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All904; 152Ind.Cas.1057
Bennet, J.1. This is a reference by the Sessions Judge of Jhansi recommending that a conviction of 21 persons by a Magistrate under Section 500, Penal Code, and fines of Rs. 5 each or in default one month's simple imprisonment, should be set aside. The accused were convicted for defamation of the complainant, Daya Ram, by making a statement in an application to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate dated 19th April 1933. The case in question was in regard to the appointment of a mukhia, and a complaint had been made by a lihamar called Ram Din, for the removal of the mukhia Panna Lai, and apparently for the appointment of Daya Ram in his place. The petition of the accused persons was in support of the mukhia Panna Lal and it represented that he was of good character and that Daya Ram who desired to get his place was a person unfit for the office of mukhia. The particular expression complained of in regard to Daya Ram is contained in I the following clause:Musammat Daya Ram aur Ram Kumar jo ke ...
Mt. Shahzadi and anr. Vs. Beni Prasad and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-14-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All390
Bennet, J.1. This is an application in revision on behalf of two ladies who were defendants against whom the Small Cause Court has granted a decree. The suit of the plaintiff was a claim for Rs. 100 principal and Rs. 53 interest on a loan to these ladies on 14th August 1930, within three years from the date on which the suit was brought, which was 11th August 1933. The plaintiff based his suit not only on the loan but also on a promissory note which he stated has been lost, but which was eventually filed. The promissory note purported to bear the thumb-marks of defendants 1 and 2 and to be signed by defendant 3, Wilayat Ali, the brother of defendant 1. Defendant 2 is the daughter of defendant 1. The plaintiff gave his evidence to the effect that the two ladies borrowed Rs. 100 from him through defendant 3, Wilayat Ali, and Wilayat Ali produced the promissory note in question purporting to bear thumb-marks and told him that the promissory note was executed by defendants 1 and 2 who were...
B. Narotam Das Vs. B. Bhagwan Dass
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All314
Young, J.1. This is a judgment-debtor's appeal against the order passed by the Court below refusing to set aside a sale.2. The decree-holder in execution of his decree against the judgment-debtor put to sale share in two villages and purchased them himself on 20th September 1932. The judgment-debtor filed objections challenging the sale on various grounds. They have all been rejected by the learned Subordinate Judge. The present appeal has been preferred against that dismissal.3. We have mentioned above that the auction-sale took place on 20th September 1932. The application asking for setting aside the sale under the provisions of Rule 90, Order 21, Civil P.C., should have been made within a period of thirty days from the date of the sale. It appears however as found by the Court below, that by mistake the clerk of counsel for the judgment-debtor presented this application in a wrong Court. The execution case was pending in the Court of the learned Subordinate Judge under whose order ...
Mohan Singh Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All472; 153Ind.Cas.697
Niamatullah, J.1. This is an appeal by one Mohan Singh from his conviction and sentence of 9 months' rigorous imprisonment under Section 498, I.P.C. and a fine of Rs. 60. The appellant is a sepoy in an Indian Army and is resident of village Bisaudkote in the District of Almora. The case against him was that he and two others, Kunwar Singh and An Singh, had kidnapped or abducted Mt. Bbawani, wife of Guman Singh of village Bargala, about two miles from his own village. The offence is said to have been committed on the evening of 16th June 1932, during the temporary absence of Guman Singh, who on return did not find his wife at home and started a search. With the help of a few others he searched for his wife and appears to have learnt that Kunwar Singh, An Singh and Mohan Singh, the present appellant, had taken her away. He and his companions proceeded to Haldwani and thence to Bareilly. His party divided itself into several groups, each proceeding in a different direction in search of he...
Lachhman Rai and anr. Vs. Jang Bahadur Rai and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-12-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All287
Mukerji, J.1. This is an application to-revise an order of the learned Munsif of Basra in the District of Ballia, dated 15th May 1933, by which he overruled the objections of the defendants-applicants and, accepting an award as a valid one, directed that a decree be framed in terms of the same. The facts which led to this petition in revision are briefly these : On 5th December 1932, the parties to the suit before the learned Munsif agreed that the dispute between them should be referred to the arbitration of five gentlemen. The date originally fixed for making of the award was extended to 21st January 1933. On that day nobody appeared before the Court, and there was no application on behalf of the arbitrators to extend the time for making the award. The learned Munsif in the circumstances passed an order superseding the arbitration and fixed 10th March 1933 for the trial of the suit before himself. On 26th January 1933 the plaintiffs put in two applications one of which contained the ...
Jageshar Prasad Vs. Mt. Janki
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-12-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All357
Mukerji, J.1. This is an application to revise an order of the learned Subordinate Judge of Gawnpore, dated 3rd December 1932, by which he called upon the Supurddar to hand over a motor car, which had been attached and handed over to him for safe custody. It appears that the motor car was attached before judgment in a Small Cause Court Suit No. 1663 of 1931, situated at Cawnpore. The plaintiff in this case was one Lachmi Narain and the judgment-debtor was Kishan Narain,2. The opposite party, Mt. Jankis's husband, obtained a decree in suit No. 1024 of 1927 in the Court of the Munsif of Deoria against Kishan Narain. The decree was transferred to the Munsif's Court at Cawnpore and an application was made for its execution. In execution of that decree a warrant of attachment was issued against the same motor car which had been attached in the Small Cause Court Suit No. 1663, mentioned above. The warrant for attachment mentioned that the property sought to be attached had already been attac...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »