Allahabad Court March 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.
Raghubar Dayal Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-14-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All735; 152Ind.Cas.120
ORDERIqbal Ahmad, J.1. The judgments of the Courts below are impossible judgments and must be reversed. The judgment of the trial Magistrate is a document full of special pleadings for the prosecution. It exhibits in a remarkable degree an utter disregard of repeated judicial pronouncements emphasising that in cases arising out of security proceedings the Courts ought to approach the consideration of the case in a fair way, having regard to the interest not only of the prosecution, but also of the accused. It teems with unfounded assumptions made as regards the credibility and impartiality of the evidence led by the Crown and with fantastic reasons for discarding the evidence for the defence. It is marked by an absence of logical reasoning and is unredeemed by slightest tinge of judicial balance. The judgment of the learned Sessions Judge is an abridged edition of the judgment of the learned Magistrate and is open to the criticism, to which it has been subjected by the Learned Counsel ...
Sheo NaraIn Vs. Town Area Panchayat
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-14-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All792; 153Ind.Cas.549
Young, J.1. This is a second appeal from the decision of the learned Subordinate Judge of Farrukhabad. The plaintiff, who is the mukhtar, practising in Chhibramau Tehsil, was assessed under the Town Areas Act by the local panchayat and taxed as an occupier of land under Section 14 of the said Act. He appealed to the District Magistrate. The District Magistrate dismissed the appeal. There after he filed civil suit, which is now in second appeal before me. The learned Judge in the lower appellate Court came to the conclusion that the plaintiff was an occupier of land within the meaning of Section 14, and further that under Section 14 of the said Act any civil action was final and completely barred. The plaintiff appeals. The plaintiff practises, according to the finding, regularly in the Tehsil Court of Chhibramau. In accordance with the practice of these gentlmen the plaintiff spread a bister of carpet upon the ground and there sat at the seat of custom regularly every day. Clients came...
Narotam Vs. Mt. Tapesra and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-14-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All849
Iqbal Ahmad, J.1. This appeal is directed against an order of the Court below appointing Mt. Tapesra as guardian of the person of Mt. Piyari minor. Mt. Tapesra is the own sister of Mt. Piyari. Sita Ram the father of Tapesra and Piyari died in the year 1931. Narotam the appellant before us professes to be the real brother of the maternal grandmother of Mt. Piyari. He filed an application in accordance with the provisions of Section 10, Guardians and Wards Act, to be appointed guardian of the person of Mt. Piyari. The application was opposed by Mt. Tapesra and by another woman named, Mt. Sahodra. The learned Judge, after consideration of the evidence in the case came to the conclusion that Narotam and Sahodra were not fit persons to be appointed guardian of the minor. He held that Tapesra was the most suitable person to be appointed guardian and accordingly passed the order appealed against.2. The first contention raised by ^the Learned Counsel for the appellant is that as Tapesra had no...
Chotey Lall Vs. Ganpat Rai and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-13-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All590; 150Ind.Cas.411
ORDER1. These are two connected appeals arising out of execution proceedings. The facts which have given rise to this litigation between the parties are as follows:Chotey Lall, appellant in appeal No. 498 had a brother named Basheshwar Das. Bameshwar Das, appellant in appeal No. 499 is the adopted son of Basheshwar Das. These three persons constituted a joint Hindu family, which possessed ancestral property. The decree-holder obtained a mortgage decree against Basheshwar Das on the basis of a mortgage deed, and in execution of which the mortgage property was sold. The sale proceeds, however, proved insufficient to discharge the mortgage debt; and so, the decree-holder applied for, and obtained a personal decree to the extent of the assets of Bhasheswar Das in the hands of his son Rameshwar Das. In execution of this decree one-half share in certain joint family properties have been attached. Both Rameshwar Das and Chotey Lall objected to the at-tachment on the ground that the properties...
Nanak Vs. Faqir Chand
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-13-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All697; 153Ind.Cas.553
Kendall, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal from a decree and order of the Second Subordinate Judge of Shahranpur, confirming the decision of the trial Court. The suit was one for recovery of a sum of money said to be due on a deed of mortgage executed by defendant-appellant on 20th December 1934 for Rs. 450. The mortgage-deed provided for payment of monthly instalments of Rs. 7-8-0. If these instalments were paid regularly, no interest was to be charged over the whole period of five years at the end of which the principal sum would have been repaid; but if there were a default of any instalment the whole sum would be recoverable with interest in a lump sum. The instalments were not paid regularly, but nine payments amounting in all to Rs. 405 were made on various dates within the five years by the defendant-appellant. The plaintiff-respondent claimed that he could demand the whole sum with interest at the rate stipulated in the bond on the ground that there had been a default, but he d...
Sri Chand and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-13-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All815; 152Ind.Cas.802
ORDERBennet, J.1. This is an application, for bail on behalf of three persons who are shown by para. 17 of the affidavit to have been committed to the Court of Sessions for trial on, a charge of murder of one Hira Lal. The affidavit consists of 19 paragraphs and not one single paragraph explains one single ground on which the application for bail is desired. Orally I have ascertained from Learned Counsel that he desires to base his application for bail on the ground that he considers that, the accused will be eventually acquitted. Apparently be desires to base his application on the ground stated in Section 497, Criminal P.C., that there are. not any reasonable grounds for believing that the accused have been guilty of the offence. It is highly desirable that an affidavit supporting an application for bail should set forth' in the beginning on what ground; bail is desired, and after having set forth the ground the reasons, for the ground should be explained. In the present application ...
Surendra Singh Vs. Gambhir Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-12-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All728; 152Ind.Cas.196
ORDERBennet, J.1. There was a suit brought for a declaration as follows: That it may he declared that under the, family partition the plaintiffs alone are the owners in possession of the property entered in list A and that the defendant has no concern with it, and that the defendant is not competent to have the villages of Shamspur alias Manikpur and Pabsara entered in list A partitioned; and for some other similar declarations, five in all.2. The Court of first instance decreed the suit of the plaintiffs for a declaration in regard to part of the property and dismissed it in regard to part of the property. A first appeal was brought by the defendant in this Court and the plaintiffs have filed cross-objections in regard to the declaration which was not granted by the lower Court. The cross-objection sets out that the value of the objection is Rs. 26,758-5-0, and that the court-fee has been paid on Rs. 20. In the case of the plaint and in the case of the memorandum of appeal there was a...
Lalmani Vs. Bejai Ram Chaudhari and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-12-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All840; 152Ind.Cas.30
ORDERBennet, J.1. This is an application in civil revision against an appellate order of the District Judge of Kurnaun upholding an order of the Court of first instance an Honorary Assistant Collector, refusing to accept an application for setting aside an ax parte decree. The question was whether service had been effected by tender to the defendant personally and refusal of the defendant to accept the notice. The process-server and a witness gave evidence to this effect and the lower appellate Court believed that evidence. Learned Counsel argued that a certain witness for a story of the defendant that he was absent from his house at the time had not been accepted by the trial Court. The name of this witness was Lachhi Ram The trial Court took the evidence of a witness Ratangiri who stated that he was present on the 15th or 16th of Phagurt last at the house of the defendant Lalmani and the chaprasi came for service during the absence of the defendant and his wife said that he was absen...
Sheo Raj Chamar and anr. Vs. Mudeer Khan and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-12-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All868
Mukerji, J.1. These two appeals Nos. 936 and 967, arise out of the same suit brought by the appellants to obtain a declaration that certain plots of land described by their numbers in the plaint were the occupancy holdings of the plaintiffs and that the defendants had no right to bury corpses therein, and to obtain an injunction and damages. The defence was that the defendants were concerned only with one of the several plots in suit, namely, with plot No. 770 and that they had been burying the dead bodies of members of their family on the plot for a very long time.2. The Court of first instance held that the plaintiffs had no cause of action in respect of plots other than the plot No. 770; that the defendants buried the dead persons of their family on the land plot No. 770 as mere licensees of the land-holder and plaintiffs, who claimed under the land-holder, and that therefore the defendants were not entitled to bury the dead bodies in future, as the plaintiffs objected to such a con...
Shyam Lal Vs. Hira Nath Chela
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-09-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All685; 153Ind.Cas.479
Mukerji, J.1. The suit out of which this appeal has arisen was instituted by the plaintiff against an idol, Nageshwar Mahadeo, established in Dehra Dun through one Mahant Hira Nafch. The suit had originally been led against Hira Nath alone, but on the objection of Hira Nath, the idol was made the defendant, and Hira Nath was described as the Mahant representing the idol. Shortly, the plaintiff's case was this. On 23rd May 1908, Hira Nath, as the Mahant and manager of the temple of Nageshwar Mahadeo, executed in favour of one Shyam Lal, son of Tika Ram, a lease in respect of a certain area of land for a period of 30 years, The successor in title of the lessee, Shyam Lal, son of Tika Ram, granted a sub-lease to the plaintiff, who is also known as Shyam Lal, on 28th September 1920. The plaintiff was in possession, but the defendant wag interfering with his possession and therefore the prayer was fore declaration of title, including a declaration that under the terms of the lease, the leas...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »