Allahabad Court October 1935 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.
Chhotelal and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-21-1935
Reported in: AIR1936All74; 160Ind.Cas.1089
ORDERCollister, J.1. These two revisions can be dealt with together. In one case Chhote Lal and Mahabir were convicted under Section 353, I.P.C. and Section 295, Municipalities Act, and in the other case Sheo Narain and Ram Prasad were convicted of similar offences. It appears that the applicants were in arrears in respect to certain taxes which were due to the Notified Area Committee of Chunar. First a bill of demand was issued to them and then a notice of demand, and finally a distress warrant was issued. The Superintendent of the Notified Area Committee went with a peon and attempted to execute the warrant; but they were resisted and the applicants were accordingly prosecuted. The trial Court sentenced each of them to undergo two years' rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 200 each under Section 353, I.P.C., and to pay a fine of Rs. 50 each under Sections 295, Municipalities Act; but in appeal the Sessions Judge was very rightly of opinion that there was no sufficient grou...
Manni Gir Vs. Amar Jati Chela and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-21-1935
Reported in: AIR1936All94; 160Ind.Cas.1030
ORDERIqbal Ahmad, J.1. This is an application in revision against a decree passed by a Court of Small Causes in a suit brought by the plaintiff for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 306-8-0 on the basis of a promissory note dated 16th August 1931, executed by one Sheo Narain Jati. Sheo Narain died before the institution of the suit and the plaintiff impleaded one Jadu Nandan Jati as the sole defendant in the suit. It was alleged in the plaint that the loan was taken by Sheo Narain in the capacity of the mahant of a particular math, with a view to defray the expenses of the math, and the plaintiff, accordingly, prayed for a decree declaring his right to realize the amount due to him from the math property. The learned Small Cause Court Judge however held that the allegation that the debt was taken for the purposes of the math was not proved, and, as such, the plaintiff was not entitled to realize the amount due to him from the math property. This decision of the learned Judge is not assailed...
B. Sheo NaraIn Vs. Town Area Panchayat
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-18-1935
Reported in: AIR1936All117; 159Ind.Cas.897
1. This is a Letters Patent appeal by one B. Sheo Narain against & decree of a learned Single Judge of this Court confirming the decrees of the two lower Courts dismissing the suit which the appellant has brought against the. Town Area Panchayat of Chhibramau. The suit as brought by the appellant asked for a declaration that the assessment of town tax on the plaintiff is illegal and ultra vires being beyond the scope of the powers conferred on a panchayat by law, that the defendant be restrained by a perpetual injunction from realising the said tax of Rs. 36 from the plaintiff. Now the learned Single Judge of this Court and the Courts below have held that this is a suit which is not within the jurisdiction of the civil Courts. The suit was brought in the Court of a Munsif. Section 9, Civil P.C., provides as follows:The Court shall (subject to the provisions, herein contained) have jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature excepting suits of which their cognizance is either expres...
Emperor Vs. Masuria
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-17-1935
Reported in: AIR1936All107; 159Ind.Cas.804
ORDER1. This is an application in revision by Government from the order of the Sessions Judge of Allahabad admitting the opposite party to bail, who had been bound over under Section 118, Criminal P.C., for a period of one year to be of good behaviour unless he furnished two reliable sureties. Two questions are raised in this revision. The first is that the Sessions Judge had no jurisdiction to admit Masuria to bail at all; and the second is that the period during which Masuria would remain on bail should be excluded from the period of one year for which he has been bound over, if his appeal be dismissed ultimately. As regards the first point it was held by a learned Judge of this Court in Katwaroo Rai v. Emperor 1932 ALJ 624 , that the words 'convicted persoii' in Section 426(1), Criminal P.C., include persons against whom an order has been passed by a criminal Court from which there is an appeal allowed, and accordingly persons bound over under Section 107, Criminal P.C., to keep the...
L. Dina Nath Vs. Collector of Farrukhabad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-15-1935
Reported in: AIR1936All63
Ganga Nath, J.1. This is a judgment debtor's appeal arising out of execution proceedings. A decree was obtained by the Collector of Farrukhabad, as manager of the Court of Wards in charge of the estate of Suraj Narain and Raj Narayan minors, more than six years before the execution application was made. An objection was filed by the appellant-that the application for execution of the decree was time-barred. Both the Courts below have disallowed the objection on the ground that the decree-holders are minors and therefore the execution of the decree cannot be regarded as barred by limitation. It was-urged by the learned Counsel for the appellant that Section 6, Lim. Act does not apply to the case because the decree has been obtained in the name of the Collector. Section 6, Lim. Act, lays down:Where a person entitled to institute a suit or make an application for the execution of a decree is, at the time from which the period of limitation is to be reckoned, a minor, or insane, or an idio...
Secy. of State Vs. (Firm) Sheo Bhagwan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-15-1935
Reported in: AIR1936All69; 160Ind.Cas.703
Thom, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit in which the plaintiffs seek to recover the sum of rupees 3,752-5-9 in respect of goods which they allege belonged to them and which were destroyed by fire whilst under the custody of the defendant on 1st February 1929. The main facts of the dispute between the parties are really not in dispute and may be very briefly stated: On 31st January 1929 the plaintiffs' servant took 465 bales of hemp belonging to the plaintiffs to the railway station at Sheopur near Benares. The bales were intended for despatch to Calcutta. No wagon was immediately available to receive the bales, which were accordingly left overnight in the shed belonging to the railway in close proximity to their running line. The following day part of the consignment of bales was destroyed by fire. The plaintiffs allege that sparks from a passing engine of a goods train alighted on the bales and set fire to them. The plaintiffs claim that they are entitled to reco...
District Board Vs. Lala Behari Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-14-1935
Reported in: AIR1936All18
Sulaiman, C.J.1. This is an application in revision by the District Board of Allahabad from a decree of the Court of Small Causes against a contractor who had brought a suit for refund of a deposit made by him as security, for the price of certain moram supplied and for payment for certain extra work done. The Court of Small Causes has given to the plaintiff a decree for the first two items but not for the third. The Board at the trial had conceded that it would refund the security money; nevertheless that point also is raised again in revision. The main question in the case is one of limitation as to whether the claim was governed by the six months rule as laid down in Section 192 of the District Boards Act, (Act 10 of 1922). There is no direct authority under this section, but there are several cases under Section 326, Municipalities Act (Act 2 of 1916), which has the same phraseology, and there are numerous cases under Section 80, Civil P.C., which has some similarity, and also one ...
Thakur Das and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-14-1935
Reported in: AIR1936All109; 160Ind.Cas.998
ORDERIqbal Ahmad, J.1. In deciding the present application it is impossible to overlook the fact that the Hathras police have at least on two previous occasions unsuccessfully tried to implicate Babu Lal alias Tirkha, one of the applicants before me, of offences punishable under the Gambling Act, and that in one of those cases the evidence led by the prosecution was positively false. Babu Lal resides in the town of Hathras which has been described by the learned Sessions Judge in the course of his judgment in the present case as a den of gambling.' This remark of the learned Judge may or may not he correct; but it is wholly irrelevant in the consideration of the question as to whether there was sufficient material on the record to justify the conviction of the applicants under the Gambling Act. No presumption against the accused can be made by the mere fact that residents of a particular locality are addicted to gambling; and in a case where it is manifest that police has on previous o...
Shibcharan Das Vs. (Firm) Gulabchand Chhotey Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-14-1935
Reported in: AIR1936All157
1. This is a plaintiff's appeal against a decree of the Subordinate Judge of Agra. The plaintiff-appellant claimed from the defendant-respondent a sum of Rs. 5,350 as principal and interest due under a promissory note dated Kunwar Badi 7th, Sambat 1984 which corresponds to 17th September 1927. It was the plaintiff's case that upon this day the defendant executed a note in favour of the plaintiff for the sum of Rs. 4,200 which sum was to carry interest at the rate of annas 12 per cent. per mensem, that is Rs. 9 per cent per annum. The defendant-respondent admitted that on the day in question he executed the promissory note sued upon, but he alleged that he had not received the whole of the consideration stated upon the face of the note. According to the defendant a sum of Rs. 3,750 only was paid by the plaintiff and that the balance, in spite of repeated promises, was never paid. The defendant further alleged that eight months after the promissory note was executed, the rate of interest...
Upper Doab Sugar Mills. Ltd. Vs. Daulat Ram
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-14-1935
Reported in: AIR1936All493; 163Ind.Cas.644
Bajpai, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 30 Workmen's Compensation Act (Act 8 of 1923) against the order of the Commissioner of Labour awarding Rs. 50 per cent of Rs. 1,890 to Daulat Ram against the Upper Doab Sugar Mills, Ltd., Muzaffarnagar. The facts of the case are that Daulat Ram was employed as a blacksmith in the factory of the Sugar Mills and he lost the index and middle fingers of his right hand in an accident on 14th October 1934. The compensation was awarded by the Commissioner of Labour under Section 4 of the Act.2. It was agreed between the parties that Rs. 45 were the emoluments of Daulat Ram fitter including all perquisites and it is clear that Rs. 1,890 would be the correct figure under Schedule 4 in the case of permanent total disablement. The percentage has now got to be worked out under the provisions of Schedule 1 as this is a case of permanent partial disablement. The case for the Mills is that as the employee has lost his index finger he is entitled to 10 per ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »