Allahabad Court January 1934 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.
Amarchand and anr. Vs. Parmanand and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-03-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All474; 150Ind.Cas.323
Mukerji, J.1. This second appeal raises an important question of law. The facts involved are simple and are as follows:One Raj Bahadur alias Avadh Behari died indebted to several persons. On Raj Bahadur's death, two persons claimed to be his heirs under the Hindu law, namely, the plaintiff, who is respondent 1 before us, and the respondent 2, Raj Bahadur. The mutation Court held that Raj Bahadur was in possession, and directed the plaintiff, Parmanand, to seek his relief in the civil Court. This was some time in 1925, Raj Bahadur having died on 14th November 1924. Two decrees for money were obtained against Raj Bahadur, respondent 2, one by Seth Kishori Lal, one of the appellants, and the other by Seth Nathu Lal and Bala Prasad respondents. Kishori Lal in execution of his decree obtained against Raj Bahadur (defendant 1 and respondent 2, son of Mohan Lai) proceeded to sell the property of the deceased Raj Bahadur alias Avadh Behari. The property was sold at an auction sale held by the ...
Ganga Dwar Choubey Vs. Tilok Dhari Rao and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-03-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All496
1. This revision arises out of a suit instituted in the Court of Small Causes at Gorakhpur on a promissory note. The defence was that the promissory note was executed without any consideration. The finding of the learned Judge of the Small Causes Court was that there was no consideration for the promissory note. On this finding the suit was dismissed. In revision before us it is contended that it was not open to the defendant to take the plea, much less was it open to him to bring in evidence to prove the plea that there was no consideration for the promissory note. The revision came before a learned Judge of this Court and that learned Judge on account of some supposed conflict of opinion in this Court referred the matter to a larger Bench. Section 92, Evidence Act, has got several provisos. The first runs as follows:Any fact may be proved which would invalidate any document, or which would entitle any person to any decree or order relating thereto such as fraud, intimidation, illegal...
Municipal Board Benares Vs. Krishna and Co.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-03-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All550
Young, J.1. This is a second appeal from the decision of the Additional Subordinate Judge of Benares. The point raised is an interesting, one concerning the right of the Municipality of Benarea to levy octroi duty on goods entering the Municipal boundaries under the rules in force at the date of the plaint. The plaintiffs are dealers in electrical goods and similar articles. They were in the habit of importing electric fans into Benares. On one occasion they thought fit to declare the value of some Seimen ceiling fans at Rs. 20 each. The Municipality not unnaturally thought that this was a wholly inadequate value to declare, with the result that the goods were detained in the octroi barrier and the Municipality refused to allow the plaintiffs to take possession of them until payment of duty. The plaintiffs then considered their position and, no doubt under legal advice, discovered the schedule of octroi rates of the Benares Municipality. It was there discovered that electric fans were ...
Nanwan and anr. Vs. Bishen Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-02-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All395
Mukerji, J.1. This is a revision under Section 25 of the Small Cause Courts Act and arisen under the following circumstances : Them is a joint Khata of three tenants, Lekhraj, Jawahir and Puran who are occupancy tenants paying a sum of Rs. 238 as the rent of the holding to the Zamindar. By mutual consent these three tenants have divided the land for purposes of cultivation. Jawahir let out out of the land which fell to his share, 7 bighas odd to Lachhman Sarup. Lachhman Sarup in his turn, sublet A. bighas 5 biawas of land constituting the plot No. 438 to the applicants before us. The Khata being joint and the rent payable for the whole Khata being in arrears, the Zatnindar distrained the crops of plot No. 438 and realized a sum of Rs. 180. Thereupon the applicants before us brought the suit out of which this revision has arisen in the court of Small Causes at Bulandshahr, seeking to recover the amount realized from their crop. The defendants to the suit were the three principal tenants...
Cantonment Board Vs. (Firm) Hazari Lal Ganga Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-02-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All436
Sulaiman, C.J.1. This is an application in revision by the Cantonment Board of Allahabad from a decree of the Court of Small Causes granting a relief for recovery of money to the plaintiff. The plaintiff is a shop-keeper who alleged that he had supplied certain materials to the Board between July 1928 and January 1930, but had not been paid the full amount of the price. He claimed nearly Rs. 300 as the amount of the balance with interest. His case was that after having supplied the goods he waited patiently for sometime, but the Board did not make any further payment, in consequence of which he was obliged to sue the Board after serving notice upon it as required by law. The Board denied the receipt of all the materials alleged to have been supplied by the plaintiff and also pleaded that the claim was barred by six months' rule of limitation. The Board however did not assert that prior to the refusal contained in the reply to the notice served upon it by the plaintiff there had been an...
Peare Lal and ors. Vs. Nathi Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-02-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All692
Young, J.1. This is a second appeal from the decision of the Additional District Judge of Agra. The plaintiffs brought a suit for profits against a co-sharer. The facts are that the grandfather of the defendant held the plot in this case as his sir in 1887, and it continued to be so recorded up till 1902. The plaintiffs brought a suit against the present defendant for the share of profits which he had to account for the general co-parcenary body for this plot. The defence was that the defendant had planted a grove upon this land and therefore was not liable to account for profits of this portion of land. The lower appellate Court has come to the conclusion that this defence is sound. The learned Judge says that in the years in suit this was not sir land, but grove land, and so long as it is grove it cannot be treated as sir. The plaintiffs appeal. It is now in my opinion impossible to up hold the judgment of the lower appellate Court. The mere planting of trees upon sir land cannot tak...
M. Sunder Lal Vs. Mt. Razia Begam and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-02-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All785; 152Ind.Cas.886
Sulaiman, C.J.1. This is an application in revision by one of the defendants from an order of the Court below allowing a certain amendment asked for by the plaintiff. The plaintiff had brought a suit for possession of a half share in the house in dispute against the defendants of whom the defendant-applicant alleged to be in possession as a trespasser. It was pleaded in the written statement that the Court had no pecuniary jurisdiction inasmuch as the value of the half-share claimed was more than Rs. 5,000. On this the plaintiff applied for an amendment of the plaint expressly stating that she did not want possession of the half share of the house as it stands, but only for the possession of the half share of the house as it stood before the alterations made by the defendant and for the demolition of the superstructures recently put up. It is not necessary to consider in this case whether the plaintiff is entitled to the relief in the modified form in which she has claimed. If it turns...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›