Allahabad Court April 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.
Mt. Kishan Dei and ors. Vs. Mangal Sen
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-01-1935
Reported in: AIR1935All927
Allsop, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for restitution of conjugal rights in which a decree was passed in favour of the plaintiff. The parties are both very young. The wife, i.e., the appellant left her husband and instituted proceedings for maintenance under Section 488, Criminal P.C. She obtained, an order from a Magistrate for maintenance at the rate of Rs. 10 a month, on 14th July 1931. An application for revision in the Court of the Sessions Judge was dismissed on 22nd September 1931. In the meanwhile, on the 15th of September the husband had instituted the suit which has given rise to this appeal.2. The only defence to the suit was that the husband had been guilty of cruelty. The learned Judge of the trial Court came to the conclusion that he had been so guilty and dismissed the suit. On the other hand, in the appellate Court it was found that no real cruelty had been established. The learned Judge came to the conclusion that the whole trouble was due to the fact that the ...
L. Bishambhar Nath Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-01-1935
Reported in: 156Ind.Cas.950
ORDERKendall, J.1. This is an application for the revision of an order of the City Magistrate of Shahjahanpur upholding the conviction of the applicant under Section 307 of the Municipalities Act, but reducing the fine from Rs. 100 to Rs. 50. An application for revision of this order has already been made to the learned Sessions Judge, who, however, in his order of August 9,1934, refused to interfere. The circumstances are given sufficiently fully in the judgment of the Courts below. It has been argued in support of the present application that the applicant can at this stage re-open the question of whether the notice issued by the Board was a valid notice, and it has also been suggested that as the Board acquiesced in the existence of the applicant's platform for a number of years and accepted some payments in respect of it, it must be deemed to have compounded this offence, if any, committed by the applicant.2. This last point can be very shortly dealt with. The offence, as the City ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›