Allahabad Court August 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.
Madho Lal Vs. Lal Bahadur Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-18-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All103
Rachhpal Singh, J.1. This is a plaintiff's second appeal and arises out of a suit for ejectment. The plaintiff-appellant instituted a suit in the trial Court for ejectment of the defendant from the land in suit and for the recovery of Rs. 12 as mesne profits on the allegations that the defendant who had been occupying the land in suit as a lessee had denied his title to the land as a landlord and this denial had entailed a forfeiture. The defendant resisted the claim and contended that he had not denied the title of the plaintiff as landlord which would put an end to the lease in accordance with the provisions of. Rule 111, T.P. Act. Both the Courts below have found that the plaintiff had failed to establish that there had been a denial by the defendant of the plaintiff's right as landlord in the land in suit, and therefore the plaintiff's claim for ejectment was dismissed. The present second appeal has been preferred by the plaintiff against the decision of the Court below. The plaint...
Sohan Lal and ors. Vs. Atal Nath
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-1933
Reported in: AIR1933All846
Sulaiman, C.J.1. This is a defendants' appeal arising out of a suit for specific performance of a written contract. Originally seven defendants filed this appeal jointly. With the exception of Bansidhar all the others applied to withdraw the appeal. So far as the adult appellants were concerned, their appeal has been withdrawn and they have submitted to the decree of the Court below. An application was made on behalf of the minor appellant, Har Mohan, by his guardian and also by his mother to withdraw the appeal, but no order was passed, inasmuch as it was not clear whether there had been any compromise with the minor's guardian and whether such a compromise was for the benefit of the minor.2. The parties belong to the same family with distinct branches. It appears that at one time all the members had a common fund, though the family was not joint in status. The leading members proposed to purchase three villages in Benares from Raja Madho Lal for a sum of Rs. 90,200. The plaintiff Ata...
Bansidhar and anr. Vs. Shiv Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-1933
Reported in: AIR1933All908; 147Ind.Cas.575
Sulaiman, C.J.1. This is a plaintiffs' appeal arising out of a suit for sale on the basis of two mortgage-deeds.2. It appears that on 20th March 1906 a mortgage-deed was exeeuted by Bansidhar in favour of Lachhmi Narain and others hypothecating shares in 3 villages: (1) Nahil, (2) Sambhalpur and (3) Nawadia. This was a simple mortgage on the basis of which a suit was instituted subsequently and a mortgage decree obtained in 1916. On 6th May 1919 the mortgagors executed another mortgage in favour of plaintiff Mange Lal and others for Rs. 7,000 carrying interest at Re. 1-4-0 per cent per mensem compoundable annually under which shares in 2 out of the 3 villages, namely, Nahil and Sambhal-pur, only were mortgaged. There was another mortgage of 1st March 1920 in favour of another person, Lachhman Prasad. On 12th March 1921 the mortgagors executed a second mortgage-deed in favour of the plaintiffs Mange Lal and others for Rs. 22,000 carrying interest at 14 annas per cent per mensem compound...
Noor Ahmad Vs. Irshad Ghaus
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-16-1933
Reported in: AIR1933All821; 147Ind.Cas.205
ORDERKendall, J.1. This is a plaintiff's application for the revision of an order of the judge of the Small Cause Court of Piliibhit dismissing the suit on the ground that the promissory note on which it was originally based was not admissible in evidence because it had not been properly stamped. The trial Court admitted the promissory note which bore a one anna stamp though under the law it should have borne a two anna stamp. It was initialled by the trial Court and was produced in evidence. It was not until the defendant pointed out in the course of evidence that a second one-anna stamp had been added subsequently to the execution of the promissory note that the Court's attention was drawn to this point, and the Court thereupon came to the conclusion that the second stamp had been affixed later, and that the promissory no should not have been admitted in evidence. With reference to Section 36, Stamp Act, 1899, this was too late a stage at which to take objection to the admissibility ...
M.H. Faruqi Vs. Municipal Board
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-16-1933
Reported in: AIR1933All814
ORDERRachhpal Singh, J.1. This is a revision application against the order of the learned Sessions Judge of Allahabad setting aside an order of the trial Court awarding Rs. 100 as compensation to the applicant under Section 250, Criminal P.C.2. Dr. Faruqi, the applicant, obtained a license for his motor from the Municipal Board, Allahabad. The period for which the license was obtained ended on 30th March 1930. After this date Dr. Faruki did not apply for the renewal of his license. On 2nd November 1931, about one year and nine months after the expiry of the old licence, the Municipal Board sent him a notice inviting his attention to the fact that he was using his car without obtaining license and requesting to make an application, for a license without any delay. In. a letter dated 12th November 1931,. Dr. Faruqi acknowledged the receipt of the notice and expressed his willingness to apply for a license. In that letter he inquired from the Municipal Board to let him know the exact amou...
Dr. M.H. Faruqi Vs. Municipal Board
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-16-1933
Reported in: 146Ind.Cas.691
Rachhpal Singh, J.1. This is a revision application against the order of the learned Sessions Judge of Allahabad getting aside an order of the trial Court awarding Rs. 100, as compensation to the applicant under Section 250 of the Criminal Procedure Code.2. Dr. Faruqi, the applicant, obtained a license for his motor from the Municipal Board, Allahabad. The period for which the license was obtained ended on March 30, 1930. After this date Dr. Faruqi did not apply for the renewal of his license. On November 2, 1931, about one year and nine months after the expiry of old licence, the Municipal Board sent him a notice inviting his attention to the fact that he was using his car without obtaining a licence and requesting him to make an application for a licence without any delay. In a letter dated November 12, 1931, Dr. Faruqi, acknowledged the receipt of the notice and expressed his willingness to apply for a licence. In that letter he enquired from the Municipal Board to let him know the ...
Banwari Lal Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-15-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All60
ORDERYoung, J.1. This is an application in revision from the decision in appeal of the learned Sessions Judge of Agra. Banwari Lal was charged in the Court of the City Magistrate of Agra under Section 379, Indian Penal Code, read with Section 39 of the Indian Electricity Act. The allegation against him was that he had dishonestly abstracted and consumed electrical energy and thereby committed a theft. The-learnad City Magistrate found Banwari Lal guilty and sentenced him to six months' R.I. and to a fine of Rs. 200. The learned Sessions Judge dismissed the appeal and confirmed the sentence.2. Banwari Lal originally was in the employ of the United Provinces Electric Supply Company at Agra. Some months ago he was dismissed. He was the lessee of a house in which he and his family lived, and in which he kept boarders. The boarders took a sublease from him of' certain of the rooms. These boarders did not have meters in their rooms and paid an inclusive rate to the accused. They were not int...
Mt. Akbari Begam Vs. Rahmat HusaIn and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-14-1933
Reported in: AIR1933All861
Niamatullah, J.1. This is a plaintiffs' appeal and arises in the following circumstances:2. The property in dispute in the case belonged to one Ahmad Husain, who died on 10th December 1925, leaving two daughters, Mt. Akbari Begam and Mt. Soghra Begam, the two plaintiffs, and three sons, Rahmat Husain, Shafqat Husain and Azmat Husain, the three defendants. The plaintiffs instituted the suit, which has given rise to this appeal, on 10th December 1928 claiming their legal share in the immovable property entered in list A and in the moveables detailed in list B annexed to the plaint. Subsequently the plaint was amended and several deeds of gifts, which the defendants had relied on in the written statement filed in the meantime, were impugned on the ground that the same had been obtained by the exercise of undue influence. Similarly certain other gifts relied on by the defendants were impeached on the ground that the same, if made at all, were vitiated by marzul maut from which Ahmad Husain...
Suraj Ket Prasad Vs. Chandra Mul and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-14-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All1071; 153Ind.Cas.517
Sulaiman, C.J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal from an order rejecting his plaint. The suit was brought by Suraj Ket Prasad, one of the grandsons of Gur Charan Lal. It was alleged in the plaint that a partition suit, was filed in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Fyzabad, which went up in appeal to the Chief Court at Lucknow, that in that appeal a compromise was filed between the parties and was signed by the plaintiff's father, which was accepted by the Court and a decree in terms of the compromise was passed. The plaintiff alleged that his father was a person of weak intellect, addicted to hemp, that he was under the undue influence of the other defendants, that he was in collusion with them at the time and it was in these circumstances that he made the application, styling it as a compromise, on 20th November 1919. The decree of the Judicial Commissioner of Oudh was passed in January 1920. The plaintiff alleged that the compromise was not binding on him and the decree passed by t...
Mt. Hasina Begum Vs. Munshi Abdul Hafiz
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-11-1933
Reported in: AIR1934All139
1. The order in this case (first Appeal from Order No. 137 of 1932) will also govern and dispose of Civil Revision Nos. 499, 500, 501 and 504 of this Court. In order to understand these cases it is necessary to state a few facts. One Shaukat Ali left four sons, Abdul Hafiz, Abdul Jalil, Abdul Shakur, Abdul Jamil and one daughter Mt. Homera Bibi. He owned shares in several villages in Shahjahanpur and Pilibhit Districts. Abdul Jamil, one of the sons of Shaukat Ali, died on 17th March 1927, leaving his widow Mt. Hasina Begam, one son and five daughters.2. After the death of Abdul Jamil, his three brothers and sister instituted four suits for profits in Bent Court against his heirs (Mt. Hasina Begum and others). Two of these suits related to villages in which Abdul Jamil was a lambardar and they were instituted under Section 226, Agra Tenancy Act, while the other two related to villages in which he was only a co-sharer and they were instituted under Section 227 of the aforesaid Act. One o...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »