Allahabad Court March 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.
Secy. of State Vs. Ghanshyam Das Baij Nath
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-31-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All393
Iqbal Ahamd, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal and arises out of a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs. 1,309-6-0 on account of the shortage in weight of mustard oil despatched by the plaintiff from the Agra City station and for the recovery of a further sum of Rs. 85-13-0 that the plaintiff had to pay on account of freight under circumstances to be presently stated. The trial Court decreed the claim for rupees 1,089-6-0 on account of the shortage and for a sum of Rs. 85-13-0 on account of the freight. The decree of the trial Court was, on appeal by the defendant, affirmed by the lower appellate Court.2. On the 20th April 1929, the plaintiff despatched mustard oil in a tank to Nimtullah station on the F.B. Railway. The carrying capacity of the waggon was 16 tons or 435 maunds and 20 seers. The waggon was despatched from the Agra city station soon after the 20th April 1929, and it ia common ground that it reached a station named Chitpur on the 26fch April 1929 at 3-20 P.M. Till then there ...
Ram Prasad Vs. Binaek Shukul
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-31-1933
Reported in: AIR1933All453a
Niamatullah, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal and has arisen out of a suit for recovery of Rs. 1,070-3-6 made up of Rs. 595-13-9 principal and Rupees 474-7-6 interest together with another sum of 0-2-3 which need not be detailed, on the allegation that the defendant purchased on 25th June 1914 from the plaintiff ornaments and cloth of the aggregate value of Rs. 1,003-9-6. and that he paid Rs. 210-10-0 on that date promising to pay balance within a month. It is also alleged that the defendant agreed to pay interest in case of non-payment of the aforesaid sum within the stipulated time.2. The plaintiff's shop is at Badhohi in the Benares State. The transaction to which the suit relates had also taken place in Badhohi. The plaintiff instituted a suit in the Benares Court and obtained a decree on 27th July 1916 for the sum then due. Certain payments were made from time to time by the defendant and an application for execution of decree was made some time in 1926 and a sum of Rs. 100 was p...
Sheo Baran Singh Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-31-1933
Reported in: AIR1933All533
Bennet, J.1. This is an appeal by one Sheo Baran Singh who has been sentenced to death under Section 302, I.P.C., for the murder of one Mt. Gangola on 18th October 1932 and there is a reference before us for confirmation of that sentence. The facts are very simple and it is shown by the prosecution witnesses that the accused had the deceased as his mistress for about 11 years, with the connivance of her husband Baldeo Singh, who died about a year ago. The accused was a partner with Baldeo Singh in the cultivation of about 50 or 60 bighas of land and after the death of Baldeo Singh in Asarh the son of Baldeo Singh Sheoraj who had attained the age of 20 years, told the accused that he should no longer be a partner and partnership terminated. On the occasion of the crime various witnesses for the prosecution state that they heard the woman Mt. Gangola crying out that she was being struck by the accused, and her cry came from the room of the accused. The witnesses asked the accused to open...
Mt. Inoyia Vs. Harbans Prasad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-30-1933
Reported in: AIR1933All482a
Kendall, J.1. This application for revision arises from a case in which certain persons were prosecuted under Sections 147 and 304, Penal Code, and the Magistrate after a prolonged inquiry discharged them on 22nd August 1932 without framing a charge. An application for the revision of his order was made to the Sessions Judge, some of whose remarks in his order probably inspired the present application, which is made by the mother of the man who died as a result of injuries received in the course of a riot. A further point for remark is that the application to this Court was made about four months after the Sessions Judge's order, refusing to interfere in revision, had been passed. The remarks made by the Sessions Judge to which I have referred are as follows:The main contention of the applicant is that the learned Magistrate has usurped the functions of the Sessions Court as the case was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions and that his judgment clearly indicates this. I may at...
Secy. of State Vs. Madhuri Das-naraIn Das
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-30-1933
Reported in: AIR1933All477
Niamatullah, J.1. This is an application in revision by Secretary of State for India in Council against a decree passed by the Judge of the Small Cause Court at Allahabad in a suit brought by a plaintiff opposite-party for damages arising out of late delivery of a consignment sent by G.I.P. Railway from Lalitpur to Naini. The consignment was under risk note B, which implies that in consideration of payment of a lower freight the railway company is relieved of its responsibilities as bailee to a certain extent. The circumstances leading to the institution of the suit which has given rise to this application in revision are briefly as follows:The consignment in question arrived at its destination, Naini, on 19th August 1931. The name of the consignee entered in the railway receipt was that of the firm Madhuri Das Narain Das, the plaintiff opposite-party. The railway receipt described the relative consignment as No. 23, which implied that the consignment also bore the same number, so that...
Surendra Nath Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-29-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All385
ORDERMukerji, J.1. These are two Civil Revisions arising out of the same civil proceedings, viz., suit No. 52 of 1930 in the Court of the Subordinate Judge at Cawnpore. The history of the case is given in the judgment of Mr. Ram Ugrah Lal Srivastava and they are mentioned there very clearly. The learned Judge came to the conclusion that certain persons, viz., Surendra Nath applicant, in Civil Revision No. 652 of 193, Mohan Lal, respondent, in Civil Revision No. 689 of 1932 and some other persons had taken part in an attempt to defraud the Punjab National Bank, Limited. He also found that for this purpose a false personation was committed and a man who did not bear the name of Karan assumed that name and executed a sale-deed in favour of Mohan Lal, that Surendra Nath was an active party in this conspiracy because it was his property which was to be saved by the false sale-deed, and so on. The learned Judge directed that four separate complaints should be filed under Sections 207, 465/10...
Lachhman Das Babu Ram Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-29-1933
Reported in: AIR1933All853
Mukerji, J.1. This is a very short matter and is concluded by a decision of this Court in Radhey Lal Balmukand : AIR1931All23 . In an income-tax matter decided on 9th July 1929, this Court awarded to the assessee his costs against the opposite party. The costs would naturally include the amount of Rs. 100 deposited as fee for a reference under Sub-section (2), Section 66, Income-tax Act, The High Court office in preparing the memorandum of costs omitted to include this sum. The applicant now asks that this sum should be included.2. Mr. Verma has argued three points against the application. One is that this virtually asks us to review our judgment. Secondly, it is not open to the High Court to deal with the fee paid for reference, and thirdly, that the application is a belated one. On the first point we do not think that it is an application for review of judgment. When we awarded costs to the assessee we awarded all the costs without any exception, and if, as was rightly held in the ca...
Lachman Das Babu Ram Vs. the Commissioner of Income-tax, U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-29-1933
Reported in: [1933]1ITR275(All)
MUKERJI, J. - This is a very short matter and is concluded by a decision of this Court in Radhey Lal Balmukand.In an income-tax matter decided on July 9, 1929, this Court awarded to the assessee his costs against the opposite party. The costs would naturally include the amount of Rs. 100 deposited as fee for a reference under sub-section (2) of Section 66 of the Income-tax Act. The High Court office in preparing the memorandum of costs omitted to include this sum. The applicant now asks that this sum should be included.Mr. Verma has urged three points against the application. One is that this virtually asks us to review our judgment. Secondly, it is not open to the High Court to deal with the fee paid for reference, and, thirdly, that the application is a belated one.On the first point we do not think that it is an application for review of judgment. When we awarded costs to the assessee we awarded all the costs without any exception, and if, as was rightly held in the case quoted abov...
Bindesari Prasad and ors. Vs. Ram Tapesha Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-28-1933
Reported in: AIR1933All577
Kendall, J.1. This application arises from a suit in which the Judge of the Small Cause Court of Ghazipur dismissed the plaintiff's claim. The defendant is said to have borrowed Rupees 300 from the plaintiff's father in 1926 and executed a 'sarkhat,' but he is said to have paid this amount on 21st July 1929, and on the following day he borrowed a further sum of Rs. 250 adding a note of memorandum on the old document. This note or memorandum formed the basis of the plaintiff's suit, but it was not stamped,, and the Court held that it required a stamp of one anna and was not 1933 admissible in evidence as 'it was an acknowledgment.' The decision of the learned Judge has been assailed from two points of view. It is said in the first place that the document is either a receipt, in which case it might have been admitted in evidence on payment of a penalty, or else a mere memorandum on which no stamp was necessary. The document in question reads as follows:Dastkhat Ramtapesa Singh: do sou pa...
Sarjoo Ram Sahu Vs. Partap NaraIn and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-28-1933
Reported in: AIR1933All563
ORDERKisch, J.1. These are decree-holder 5 applications directed against an order of the Subordinate Judge of Basti, allowing ' the opposite parties rateable distribution. The applicant Sarju Ram Sahu had obtained a decree against his judgment-debtor in the Court of the Subordinate Judge. On 7th February 1930, he attached certain property belonging to the judgment-debtor and this property was eventually sold and the proceeds deposited in the Subordinate Judge's Court. The opposite parties had also obtained decrees against the same judgment-debtor in the Court of the Munsif and had attached the same property on 15th February 1930. As under Section 63, Civil P.C., when property has been attached in execution of decrees of several Courts the property must be realised by the Court of the highest grade, the decree-holders in the Munsif's Court applied to the Subordinate Judge's Court that they be given a rateable share out of the sale proceeds of the property attached by them. They did not ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »