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.
Gauri Shankar Vs. Gopal Das and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-09-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All701
Mukerji, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for partition of a house instituted by the appellant, Gauri Shankar, on the strength of a sale deed executed in his favour by defendant 2, Mt. Savitri. It was for partition of a half share out of one-third said to have been owned by Peare Lal and Gopal Das. Mt Savitri is Peare Lal's widow. Defendant 1, Gopal Das, defended the suit on the ground that Peare Lal died joint with him and the property in suit passed by right of survivorship to him. The important question to be decided therefore was whether Peare Lal died joint or separate from Gopal Das. It further appears that Savitri 4 years prior to the execution of the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff executed a document in favour of Gopal Das by which she professed to hand over the property, namely, her husband's half share, in suit to Gopal Das on his undertaking to pay her husband's debt and to maintain her. That document was registered in Kumbhakonam, whereas the property in dispute ...
Syed Ahmad Vs. Hafiz Zahid HusaIn and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-09-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All732; 153Ind.Cas.1095
Niamatullah, J.1. This is an appeal from a decree passed by the learned District Judge, Moradabad, reversing that of a Munsif of that district in a suit brought by the plaintiff-appellant for recovery of possession of a certain 'chabutra' appertaining to a mosque situate in Mohalla Chilla, town Amroha, district Moradabad. The facts found by the lower appellate Court, and which can no longer be questioned in second appeal, are as follows:The mosque in question was built nearly 300 years ago. The plaintiff's ancestor was a local saint, who became somehow associated with this mosque. In the courtyard of the mosque, there is a place known as 'chilla-gah,' which means a place where the saint used to retire in seclusion. As is not unusual in towns having Muslim population, a small 'maktah' or school for religious instruction inside the mosque premises was in existence. The mosque had on two sides of it spare land appertaining to it. On the land lying to the east of it three rooms and a veran...
Emperor Vs. Mokhi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-09-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All767
Thom, J.1. These are appeals by the Local Government against the orders of acquittal of members of a criminal tribe who were charged under Section 22(2)(b), Criminal Tribes Act of 1924. The same point is raised in all the appeals which therefore may be conveniently disposed of in one judgment. It appears that on the night of 23rd-24th May 1933 the accused were found absent from their houses. The village mukhia and the chaukidar visited their houses after 12 o'clock at night and none of the accused were found in. The learned Sessions Judge of Bijnor who heard the appeals against the convictions of the accused by the Magistrate of Bijnor states in the course of his judgment:But more absence of a registered member under the Criminal Tribes Act from his house in the night is not an offence under the Criminal Tribes Act, as there are no rules made by the Local Government under Sub-clause (e), (f) or (h) of Clause 2 of Section 20 thereof whereby he may have been prohibited from leaving his h...
Jagannath Prasad Vs. Rafat Ali Khan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-09-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All827; 153Ind.Cas.1075
Kendall, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal from a decree and order-of the Additional Subordinate Judge of Etah, confirming the decision of the trial Court. The plaintiff sued the defendant, who is a Deputy Collector and Magistrate, for damages on account of certain expressions used by the Magistrate while presiding over his Court in which the plaintiff was being examined as a witness for the defence in a criminal case under Section 110, Criminal P.C. The circumstances alleged by the plaintiff wore that when he was being examined by the counsel for the accused he was asked 'is the Deputy Collector on intimate terms with Baquallah?' and when he replied in the affirmative the Magistrate said 'dishonest, liar, foolish and peat of Aliganj.' The trial Court found that the Magistrate did use these expressions in these circumstances, and the lower appellate Court has found that he did utter if the words 'dishonest, liar and foolish' to the plaintiff when he was in the witness-box and that he u...
Hira Lal Vs. Mt. Jamna and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-09-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All866; 150Ind.Cas.1041
Niamatullah, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for declaration brought by Mt. Jamna and Ram Katori. The latter is the daughter of Mt. Saraswati. The property in dispute is a certain house which was purchased in 1916 in the names of Mt. Jamna and Saraswati who has since died and is now represented as regards her 'stridhan' property, by her daughter Katori one of the two plaintiffs. The plaintiffs' case was that the house purchased under the sale referred to above belonged to the vendees and that it was not liable to be attached and sold in execution of a decree obtained by the appellant, Hira Lai, against Daryao Singh, husband of Mt. Saraswati, and his son Bam Sarup, husband of Mt. Jamna, the other plaintiff. Hira Lal pleaded that the house was purchased by his judgment-debtors 'benami' in the names of their wives. The trial Court gave effect to this plea and dismissed the suit. On appeal by the plaintiff the lower appellate Court took a contrary view and decreed the suit.2. The sol...
(Rai) Govind Chand Vs. Gajadhar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-08-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All677
Niamatullah, J.1. This is by far the most curious case I have had experience of. It has arisen out of a suit brought by Rai Govind Chand, against Gajadbarand Bijai Mai for possession of a piece of land by demolition of certain constructions alleged to have been made by the defendants. The plaintiff is the sole zamindar of village Sikhar, in which the land in dispute is situate. His case was that the land in dispute had become 'parti' the house of Gajadhar, which stood thereon, having fallen down many years before the suit and that the defendants started a new construction about eight days before the institution of the suit. On the date fixed for settlement of issues, an application signed by the defendant Gajadhar and by his pleader was filed in the trial Court. He declared that he had no interest in the house or the land, and that he had been improperly impleaded as the defendant. He prayed that an order of discharge from the array of the parties be passed and costs awarded to him. Th...
Sadayatan Pande Vs. (Firm) Ram Chandra Gopal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-08-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All688
Sulaiman, C.J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of a suit which has been dismissed on the ground that the claim is barred by limitation. Previous to the present suit the plaintiff had instituted a suit on the same cause of action against two sets of defendants. An objection was taken that the suit was defective on account of multifariousness because different causes of action arising against different defendants had been wrongly joined together. The Court expressed the opinion that there was this serious defect and actually ordered that the plaintiff should elect as to which of the two classes of defendants he would like to proceed against. After this order was passed the plaintiff filed an application under Order 23, Rule 1, Civil P.C., for withdrawal of the suit against one set of the defendants with permission to institute a fresh suit against them afterwards and chose to proceed with the suit as against the remaining defendants. The Court ordered the suit to be withdrawn ...
Alley Rasul Ali Khan and anr. Vs. Balkishun and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-08-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All709
Mukerji, J.1. This is a reference by the learned Commissioner and District Judge of Ajmer-Merwara, purporting to have been made under Section 17 of Regulation 1 of 1877. Several preliminary points have been taken by Mr. Banerji on behalf of the opposite party contending that the reference is not competent. His first point is that the proceedings would be governed by the new Regulation, namely, Regulation 9 of 1926 and, therefore, an appeal from the decision of the Subordinate Judge would lie directly to the Judicial Commissioner and no appeal lay as under Regulation of 1877 to the Commissioner. Connected with the same objection is a further objection that as no appeal lay to the Commissioner a reference by the Commissioner to this Court was not competent. The point raised is really covered by a Full Bench decision of this Court, namely, Rama Singha v. Shankar Dayal : AIR1928All437 . It was held there that an appeal being a mere continuance of the original proceeding initiated by the fi...
Emperor Vs. Nur Ahmad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-08-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All842
Thom, J.1. This is an appeal by the Local Government against the acquittal of one Nur Ahmad who was charged under Section 4 of the Prevention of Adulteration Act of 1912.2. In support of the charge the prosecution examined two witnesses, the sanitary Inspector and the Health Officer. Both these witnesses deposed that the accused sold them ghee on a certain date. The ghee was bought by the witnesses for the purposes of analysis. Two samples were taken by the witnesses and one sample was left with the accused. The accused also gave a receipt Ex. P-1. which is in the following terms:Pandit Tribhuwan Nath Zutshi, Sanitary Inspector, purchased three Chataka of ghee from my shop this 5th day of July 1933. He put that ghee in three phials and sealed them in my presence. Out of those phials he took two with him for testing the ghee and gave one phial to me.3. This receipt is signed by the accused and he has not denied his signature.4. The accused in his defence led evidence to show that he was...
Ajodhya Pandey Vs. Mt. Rajna and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-08-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All875; 152Ind.Cas.114
Kendall, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal from a decree and order of the Second Additional Subordinate Judge of Jaunpur confirming the decision of the trial Court. The facts are given sufficiently fully in the judgment of the lower appellate Court, and the only question that I have to decide in second appeal is that of whether the succession to the estate opened on the death of Madho the last male holder (which occurred before the N.W.P. Tenancy Act, 1901, came into force) or on the death of Madho's widow, which took place in 1924 when that Act was in force. At the present stage of the suit the plaintiff-respondent, who is the daughter of Madho, is claiming a declaration of her title, while the defendant-respondents rely on their possession and deny the plaintiff-respondent's title. It is admitted on behalf of the appellant that if succession opened on the death of Madho and the provisions of the Act of 1881 applied the appeal must fail. On the other hand, if it is to be held that Mad...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »