Allahabad Court August 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.
Aziz Khan and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-23-1934
Reported in: AIR1935All103
Sulaiman, C.J.1. This is an appeal by eight accused persons from an order convicting them under Section 395, Penal Code, and sentencing them to transportion for life.2. So far as the facts relating to the commission of the dacoity itself are concerned, there cannot be much doubt. On the night between 24th and 25th May 1933, a gang of about 15 dacoits raided the house of one Brij Lal at about 1 a.m. His servant Sita Ram was sleeping immediately outside the door, while another servant Sher Ali was sleeping in his cart a few paces away. Another villager He sho was passing that way about that time. The dacoits seized both Sita Ram and Kesho and tied them both by their feet to Sita Ram's charpoy and threatened to kill them if they made any outcry. Sher Ali, who' was sleeping in the cart on the other side of the road and was not noticed by the dacoits escaped to the village and raised the alarm. The dacoits in the meanwhile got into the house and seized the inmates and obtained the keys of t...
Aijaz Ahmad Vs. Nazirul Hasan and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-23-1934
Reported in: AIR1935All849; 158Ind.Cas.447
Kendall, J.1. On this appeal being called for hearing a preliminary objection was raised on behalf of the plaintiff-respondent that the decision of the trial Court with regard to the valuation of the suit was wrong. The suit was originally valued by the plaintiff at Rs. 2,050, but on the matter going up in appeal to the District Judge the question of the sufficiency of this valuation was raised before him, and he referred the issue back to the trial Court, which has now decided that the proper valuation is Rs. 16,800 so that the appeal from, the finding of the trial Court will lie to the High Court. This is the decision that is questioned now.2. It was argued by Mr. Khwaja in the first place that the Court is bound to accept the valuation stated by the plaintiff in the plaint. The suit is one that comes under Section 7, Clause (4), Court-fees Act, of 1870, and under that section the amount of fee payable is to be computed 'according to the amount at which the relief sought is valued in...
Tulshi Prasad Vs. Jagmohan Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-22-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All1048; 152Ind.Cas.92
1. This is a plaintiff's appeal. The plaintiff is a daughter's son of one Ganga Ram who died on 5th February 1904. He left a widow, by name Mt. Mohani Kunwar who died on 1st February 1922, leaving a daughter Mt. Kausilla. Tint latter died on 12th May 1922, and the plaintiff is her son. On 20th November 1904, i.e., nine months after her husband's death Mt. Mohani Kunwar executed a sale-deed for Rs. 20,000 in respect of certain property in the village of Baghwala in equal shares in favour of Matru Mal and three brothers by name Ulfat Rai, Gulzari Lal and Mulchand. Ulfat Rai, and Gulzari Lal were sons-in-law of Ganga Ram, and Mt. Mohani Kunwar, Gukari Lal's wife was already dead, but Ulfat Rai's wife was Mt. Kausilla, mother of the plaintiff. The ostensible reason for this sale-deed was the obligation which rested upon Mt. Mohani Kunwar to pay the debts of her deceased husband and it was alleged that Ganga Ram had actually given her instructions to this effect before his death.2. On 17th ...
Bansi Dhar and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-22-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All1032
Sulaiman, C.J.1. This is an appeal by Bansidhar and Ram Kishen from their convictions under Section 460, Penal Code, based on the unanimous verdict of the jury that they were guilty. The grounds taken in the memorandum of appeal are : (1) That there has been a grave misdirection to the jury and the verdict is therefore vitisted. (2) That the sentence is too severe. The facts are perfectly clear. The deceased Gauri Shankar was an old gentleman of about 75 years of age who was a retired Deputy Collector. He was living in a big house with many rooms and several doors and had considerable valuables in the house, most of which were kept in an iron safe. On the night preceding the 24th January, he was found murdered in one of the rooms with his neck cut. The medical evidence showed that there were at least three cuts on his neck which had caused his death. There were plenty of blood marks on the bedstead on which his body was found as well as on the ground. There can therefore be no manner o...
Bansidhar and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-22-1934
Reported in: 153Ind.Cas.364
1. This is an appeal by Bansidbar and Ram Kishen from their convictions under Section 460, Penal Code, based on the unanimous verdict of the jury that they were guilty, The grounds taken in the memorandum of appeal are: (1) That there has been a grave misdirection to the jury and the verdict is therefore vitiated. (2). That the sentence is too servere.2. The facts are perfectly clear. The deceased Gauri Shankar was an old gentle man of about 75 years of age who was a retired Deputy Collector. He was living in a big house with many rooms and several doors and had considerable valuables in the house, most of which were kept in an iron safe. On the night preceding the 24th January, he was found murdered in one of the rooms with his neck cur. The medical evidence showed that there were at least three cuts on his neck which had caused his death. There were plenty of blood marks on the bed stead on which his body was found as well as on the ground. There can therefore be no manner of doubt o...
Emperor Vs. Mohd. Mehdi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-20-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All963
Sulaiman, C.J.1. Two questions have been referred to the Pull Bench by the Division Bench before which the appeal came up for hearing. These are: (1) Is permission of the authorities mentioned in Section 83, Registration Act, necessary before an accused can be prosecuted under Section 82, Registration Act (2) Does the permission accorded by the Inspector-General of Registration on 28th August 1933, validate the trial? It appears that the accused persons were prosecuted under Section 467 read with Section 471, Penal Code, and under Section 82, Registration Act, (10 of 1908). The case against them was that a forged document purporting to bear the thumb-impression of another person was executed and then presented for registration before the Sub-Registrar and a false person was identified as the executant. No permission of either the Inspector-General or the Registrar or the Sub-Registrar was obtained before the inquiry was made by the Magistrate. He took action on the complaint made by a ...
Mohammad Mehdi and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-20-1934
Reported in: 152Ind.Cas.667
1. Two questions have been referred to the Full Bench by the Division Bench before which the appeal came up for hearing. These are: (1) Is permission of the authorities mentioned in s, 83, Registration Act, necessary before an accused can be prosecuted under Section 82, Registration Act? (2) Does the permission accorded by the Inspector-General of Registration on August 28, 1933, validate the trial2. It appears that the accused persons were prosecuted under Section 467 read with Section 171, Penal Code, and under Section 82, Registration Act (XVI of 1908). The case against them was that a forged document purporting to bear the thumb-impression of another person was executed and then presented for registration before the Sub-Registrar and a false person was identified as the executant. No permission of either the Inspector-General or the Registrar or the Sab-Registrar was obtained before the inquiry was made by the Magistrate. He took actionon the complaint made by a Deputy Collector wh...
Randhir Singh Vs. L. Thaman Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All951; 153Ind.Cas.551
ORDERKendall, J.1. The question that has arisen in this application for revision is whether the learned Judge of the Small Cause Court of Meerut was right in admitting in evidence and using as an acknowledgment a document which is undoubtedly worded as a promissory note. The plaintiff had sued on a promissory note dated 10th August 1924. But he has also produced the document in question which is dated 4th August 1927. It is now admitted on behalf of the opposite party that this second document undoubtedly fulfils the definition of a promissory note and: is inadmissible in evidence as such; but the Court has relied on it as an acknowledgment of the debt due under the earlier promissory note. Dr. Faruqi, for the applicant, has referred to Section 35, Stamp Act, to show that a document which is insufficiently stamped should not be admitted in evidence for any purpose. This document however has been admitted, and under Section 36 the actual admission Of the document is not to be called in ...
Upendra Nath Basu Vs. Municipal Board
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All1007; 153Ind.Cas.359
1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit brought by the Municipal Board for recovery of house and water taxes assessed on the defendant's house and garden. For a part of the period in dispute the defendant did not personally occupy the premises in the sense that neither he nor his relations lived there. It is also a fact that during part of the period no tenant ever occupied the premises. But during this time the defendant maintained the garden in the compound. He had a gardener whom he naturally paid a monthly salary and who was living in a hut in the compound, and he also had bullocks working in order to irrigate the numerous fruit trees and plants in the compound. During this time he also appropriated the produce of the garden. There is no suggestion that he sold the produce. Certainly he did not let out the fruit trees during part of the period. But inasmuch as the defendant got some produce from the garden, although he spent money in maintaining the name, the Courts b...
Daya Ram Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-16-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All988a; 153Ind.Cas.133
Rachhpal Singh, J.1. This is a revision by the appellant against his conviction under Section 193, Penal Code. The facts of the case are very simple. One Panna Lal was the headman of a village. The police reported to a Magistrate against Panna Lal whereupon the Magistrate held an enquiry during the course of which Daya Ram, a witness, was examined. He deposed in his statement that he had filed a complaint against Panna Lal under Section 500, Penal Code, and that on that complaint Panna Lal had been fined. It was found that this statement was false. Both the Courts below have held that Daya Ram has been guilty of an offence under Section 193, Penal Code. The only question for determination in this case is whether the conviction of the applicant under Section 193, Penal Code, can be sustained. That will depend on a decision of a further question whether the Magistrate who examined him had power to administer oath to him. Section 45, Criminal P.C., empowers Magistrates to make appointment...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »