Allahabad Court December 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.
Bharatpur State Vs. Sri Krishan Das and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-19-1935
Reported in: AIR1936All327
ORDERCollister and Bajpai, JJ. 1. This is a plaintiff's appeal, the plaintiff being the Bharatpur State through its administrator. On 15th January 1934 Bohra Dip Chand deceased, 'who was the father of defendants second set took a lease of the village of Pani Gaon for a period of nine years from the plaintiff at an annual rental of Rs. 2,700. On 24th April 1924 he executed a security bond for Rs. 8,000 for due payment of the lease money and by means of that security bond he mortgaged a certain property in the village of Kanchrouli. Bohra Dip Chand defaulted in payment of the lease money in 1332 and 1333 Fasli; and then he gave up the lease, and soon afterwards he died. Thereafter the plaintiff State sued the sons of Bohra Dip Chand, i.e. defendants second set for recovery of the arrears of rent in respect of 1332 and 1333 Fasli and the suit was decreed by a Revenue Court in the District of Muttra on 25th May 1928. That decree was subsequently transferred for execution to Aligarh, in whi...
Bachchoo Lal Vs. Mt. Bismilla and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-19-1935
Reported in: AIR1936All387
Ganga Nath, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff and arises out of a suit brought by him against the defendants for restitution of conjugal rights with defendant 1. As the defendants are absent, the case has been heard ex parte. The plaintiff's case was that Mt. Bismillah, defendant 1, was his legally married wife. The defendants contended that she had been divorced by the plaintiff. The trial Court did not go into the question of divorce and decreed the suit. On appeal the learned Subordinate Judge found that Mt. Bismillah had been divorced by the plaintiff and dismissed the suit. The only point which has been urged by the learned Counsel for the appellant and is for consideration is whether the plaintiff could divorce his wife under a contingent deed of divorce. Reliance is placed on a deed, dated 5th January 1930, executed by the plaintiff himself. This deed shows that the plaintiff had not made any provision for the maintenance of his wife till the time of the execution of the d...
B. Durga Prasad Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-19-1935
Reported in: AIR1936All439
ORDER1. This is a criminal revision from a conviction under Section 109, Railways Act. The accused, a Sub-Inspector of Police, on 7th July 1934, entered a compartment occupied by the ice-vendor with his ice, aerated waters, &c.; which compartment had been entered in the Guard's Constitution Book as reserved for the ice-vendor and on the outside of which the words 'Ice-Vendor' were stencilled. The guard of the train when informed of it warned the accused that he was occupying the compartment reserved for the ice-vendor and asked him to vacate it. The accused maintained that the compartment was not reserved for the ice-vendor and declined to vacate it. A report was made to the station police but neither they nor the Assistant Station Master succeeded in persuading the accused to leave the compartment though the train had to be detained for some 23 minutes at Rtawah. Again at Cawnpore a similar request was made by the station authorities to the accused to get out of the compartment but he...
Bachchoo Lal Vs. Musammat Bismilla and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-19-1935
Reported in: 163Ind.Cas.228
Ganga Nath, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff end arises out of a suit brought by him against the defendants for restitution of conjugal rights with defendant No. 1. As the defendants are absent, the case has been heard ex parte. The plaintiff's case was that Musammat Bismillah, defendant No. 1, was his legally married wife. The defendants contended that the had been divorced by the plaintiff. The trial Court did not go into the question of divorce and decreed the suit. On appeal the learned Subordinate Judge found that Musammat Bismillah had been divorced by the plaintiff and dismissed the suit. The only point which has been urged by the learned Counsel for the appellant and is for consideration is whether the plaintiff could divorce his wife under a contingent deed of divorce. Reliance is placed on a deed dated January 5, 1930, executed by the plaintiff himself. This deed shows that the plaintiff had not made any provision for the maintenance of his wife till the time of the ex...
Kr. Nandan Singh Vs. Musammat Sundar Kuar and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-18-1935
Reported in: AIR1936All410; 163Ind.Cas.226
1. This is an application asking us in revision to set aside an Order passed by the Court below which set aside an ex parte decree. The basis upon which the Court acted was that the applicant in that application, that is the person who was seeking to get the decree set aside, had not been served with notice and no argument has been addressed to us upon the facts of the case. The contention is that the present applicant who was a party to the suit and a party to the decree was not given any notice of the application to set that decree aside and was not even mentioned in the application as one of the persons concerned. The decree was one for sale en a mortgage. The present applicant, Mandan Singh, was a subsequent purchaser of a part of the mortgaged property and was a necessary party to the mortgage suit and had been impleaded in that suit. After the ex parte, decree was passed, the property was put to sale and Mandan Singh, purchased a part of it. He had also obtained an order that the...
M. Zahur HussaIn Vs. Chura Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-17-1935
Reported in: AIR1936All366
Harries, J.1. This is a decree-holder's appeal against a decree of the lower appellate Court modifying the decree of the Court of first instance. The Court of first instance disallowed the judgment-debtor's objection but that order was modified very materially in the decree passed by the lower appellate Court. The decree-holder on 23rd August 1932 obtained a decree for arrears of rent against the judgment-debtors. The arrears of rent covered the years 1338 and 1339 Fasli. The decree-holder attempted on a number of occasions to execute his decree but with no success and finally he applied for ejectment of the judgment-debtors from the holding in question under the provisions of Section 79 Agra Tenancy Act. Notice was served upon the judgment-debtors to show cause why they should not be ejected from their holding and to this notice they failed to appear. On 3rd January 1933, the matter came before the execution Court; and on that date the Assistant Collector of Budaun passed an order eje...
(Firm) Sarju Lal-behari Lal Vs. Sukhdeo Prasad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-17-1935
Reported in: AIR1936All378
ORDER1. The applicants in this case are a firm and they sued a certain person on a promissory note and obtained a decree for Rs. 1,900 odd. Thereafter they took out execution and applied for the sale of certain property which had been attached before judgment. An objection under Order 21, Rule 58, Civil P.C., was made by the sons of the judgment-debtor and certain other relatives of his. On the application of the parties the matter was referred to arbitration and in due course an award was submitted to the Court. An objection to the award was made on behalf of the decree-holders, but it was dismissed by the Court and the award was confirmed. Two points have been taken before us by learned Counsel for the applicants. One is that the Court had no jurisdiction to refer the matter to arbitration and acted ultra vires, and the other is that the award is invalid for the reason that the judgment-debtor himself, who had been impleaded in the proceedings under Order 21, Rule 58, Civil P.C., was...
Ganga Ram Sahu Vs. Ram Shankar Tiwari and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-17-1935
Reported in: AIR1936All433; 163Ind.Cas.929
Ganga Nath, J.1. This is a defendant's application in revision against the order of the lower appellate Court under the following circumstances: A pre-emption suit was brought by the plaintiff opposite party on the basis of a sale-deed in which the sale consideration had been entered as Rs. 3,500. The plaintiff brought the suit for pre-emption on the allegation that the real sale consideration was Rs. 1,250. The plaintiff made an application to the trial Court that a compromise had been arrived at between the parties under which it was settled that Rs. 2,000 was the sale price. An inquiry was made by the trial Court and it found that no compromise had been arrived at and rejected the plaintiff's application for recording the compromise and passing a decree in accordance therewith. The plaintiff went up in appeal and the lower appellate Court found that a compromise had been arrived at between the parties and decreed the suit in accordance therewith. Against this order of the lower appe...
M. Zahur HusaIn Vs. Chura Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-17-1935
Reported in: 161Ind.Cas.52
Harries, J.1. This is a decree-Holders appeal against a decree of the lower Appellate Court modifying the decree of the Court of first instance. The Court of first instance disallowed the judgment-debtor's objection but that order was modified very materially in the decree passed by the lower Appellate Court.2. The decree-holder on August 23, 1932, obtained a decree for arrears of rent against the judgment-debtors. The arrears of rent covered the years 1338 and 1339 Fasli. The decree-holder attempted on a number of occasions to execute his decree but with no success and finally he applied for ejectment of the judgment-debtors from the holding in question under the provisions of Section 79 of the Agra Tenancy Act. Notice was served upon the judgment-debtors to show cause why they should not be ejected from their holding and to this notice they failed to appear. On January 3, 1933, the matter came before the execution Court and on that date the Assistant Collector of Budaun passed an ord...
Maiku Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-15-1935
Reported in: AIR1936All149
Sulaiman, C.J.1. This is an application in revision in respect of a pending prosecution. It appears that the accused had a house adjoining an open piece of land belonging to Government under the control of the Municipal Board at Banda. Sometime before 1924 he opened a window (or a small door) in his own wall facing the Government land. The Municipal Board served a notice upon the accused to close the door. On his failure to do so he was prosecuted in 1924, but the complaint filed by the Municipal Board was dismissed for want of prosecution. Presumably the accused was acquitted as laid down in Section 247, Criminal P.C. The Municipal Board remained quiet for about nine years and then in 1933 it again served a fresh notice on the accused in respect of the same window calling upon him to close it. As he failed to close it another complaint was filed against him under Section 307, Municipalities Act. This also was again dismissed for want of prosecution and the accused must have been acqui...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »