Allahabad Court September 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.
Rai Ram Nath Bhargava Bahadur and anr. Vs. Sri Swami Goverdhan Rangach ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-30-1935
Reported in: AIR1936All97; 160Ind.Cas.1091
1. This is an application by two persons interested in the temple of Rangji situate in Brindaban district Muttra, praying for modification of the scheme settled by this Court in First-Appeal No. 355 of 1922 which had arisen out of a suit under Section 92, Civil P.C.2. The application is mainly based on a provision contained in para. 21 of the scheme which reserves powers to the Court to modify it at the instance of any two trustees or any two persons interested in the trust. The application also implies a prayer for certain reliefs, apart from the exercise of the power reserved by the provision already referred to. A preliminary objection is taken by the opposite party that the application is not maintainable. It is contended that the Court becomes functus officio after the termination of the suit under Section 92, Civil P.C., and cannot modify the scheme settled by it and made part of the decree-in the suit and that the provision in the scheme reserving power to the Court to modify it...
(Firm) Danmal Parshotam Dass Vs. (Firm) Babu Ram-chhote Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-26-1935
Reported in: AIR1936All3
Bennet, J.1. This is a civil revision by a plaintiff whose suit has been dismissed by the Small Cause Court on the ground that the suit was brought by an unregistered firm and that Section 1 and Section 69, Partnership Act (Act 9 of 1932) bar the suit. The plaint was headed 'Firm Danmal Parshotam Das, through Sidh Gopal, one of the owners of the said firm. Section 69(2) is as follows:No suit to enforce a right arising from a contract shall be instituted in any Court by or on behalf of a firm against any third party unless, the firm is registered and the persons suing are or have been shown in the Register of firms as partners in the firm.2. The argument for the applicant in revision is that Section 74 of the Act prevents Section 69(2) from applying to the present case, and therefore the present plaint is a valid plaint. In this connexion we may observe that Section 1(3) provides in regard to the Act:It shall come into force on 1st day of October 1932, except Section 69 which shall come...
Mt. Chhatarpali and ors. Vs. Mt. Kalap Dei and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-26-1935
Reported in: AIR1936All50; 160Ind.Cas.617
Niamatullah, J.1. This appeal has arisen from a suit for declaration brought by plaintiff 1, Mt. Chhatarpali, claiming to be the daughter of one Moti Rawat, and her two sons, plaintiffs 2 and 3, challenging certain alienations made by Mt. Kalap Dei, defendant 1. Her alienees, thirty-two in number, are also arrayed as defendants. The lower Court dismissed the suit. The present appeal is by the three plaintiffs. The following-pedigree will explain the position of the parties:Moti Rawat--------------------------------------------| | |Mt. Delwa Mt. Mendha Mt. Kalap Dei,(1st wife) (2nd wife) (3rd wife)| childless. defendant 1,|----------------|-----------------------------| |Mt Ghhatarpali Mt. Dhanpali(disputed) (died childless)plaintiff 1.|----------------|-----------------------------| |Ram Charittar Ram Asareplaintiff 2 (minor)Plaintiff 3.2. Moti Rawat died some time in November 1906 at Ajudhia in the Fyzabad district, where he is said to have gone, not long before his death, accompanied...
Govind Ram and ors. Vs. Kashi Nath and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-26-1935
Reported in: AIR1936All239
Bajpai, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendants. The plaintiff Seth Kashi Nath who was said to be of weak intellect brought a. suit with his mother Mb. Asharfi Kunwar as next friend for a declaration that the property mentioned at the foot of the plaint was owned by the defendants second party and was liable to be attached and sold in satisfaction of the plaintiffs' decree passed in Suit No. 42 of 1930 of the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Aligarh (Seth Kashi Nath v. Roshan Lal and others).2. He impleaded as defendants to the suit Govind Ram and six others who were described as defendants first party and the firm of Phool Chand Roshan Lal situate at Hathras with its various partners who were described as defendants second party. The allegations contained in the plaint were that the firm of Phool Chand roshan Lal was about to become bankrupt in the month of April 1929 and that the partners thereof, with a dishonest intention approached the plaintiff's guardian who was a purdanashin ...
Baijnath Ram Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-23-1935
Reported in: AIR1936All56; 160Ind.Cas.927
ORDER1. This is an application in,, revision by one Baijnath Ram, a resident of Ghazipur, against his conviction by a Magistrate of two separate offences-under Sections 210 and 307, Municipalities Act, (Act 2 of 1916), which has been upheld by the Additional Sessions Judge of Ghazipur. He has been fined Rs. 10 for each offence. The prosecution of the appellant in this case was launched in, rather peculiar circumstances, from which it would appear that the Municipal authorities at Ghazipur did not fully realize their responsibilities in dealing with these civic affairs. The, applicant owned a double storeyed house-abutting on public road running through a market with a drain on each side. The house having been considerably damaged by the earthquake in January 1934, the applicant decided to pull it down and to retract a new one instead. Accordingly, on 15th February 1934, he gave a notice-to the Municipal Board under Section 178,. Municipalities Act, attaching thereto a. plan of the prop...
Haji Amir Ahmad and anr. Vs. Mohammad Ejaz HusaIn and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-19-1935
Reported in: AIR1936All15
Sulaiman, C.J.1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit for recovery of possession of certain lands with trees standing upon them on the allegation that the plaintiffs are mut-wallis under a deed of wakf dated 8th April 1916 executed by one Iftikhar Ud-din and the defendants are trespassers who have taken a sale-deed from the widow of the deceased. The first Court held that the deceased had only occupancy rights in the land and was not the full proprietor of the site and therefore thought that the wakf of the grove was invalid according to the Mahomedan law. On appeal the lower appellate Court has come to the conclusion that although Iftikhar Uddin was originally an occupancy tenant of the site he had acquired the interest of a grove-holder in the grove standing upon the lands which interest was transferable and was of a permanent character. The Court has accordingly held that inasmuch as he had the right to maintain the grove and replace old trees by planting new trees for...
Administrator-general Vs. A.M. Bower
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-19-1935
Reported in: AIR1935All1042; 159Ind.Cas.989
ORDERHarries, J.1. This is a suit brought by the Administrator-General of the United Provinces for a grant of Letters of Administration de bonis non to the estate of James William Twalling, deceased with a copy of the will annexed. The opposite party denies the right of the petitioner to obtain such a grant alleging that the estate of James William Twalling deceased has been completely administered.2. The material facts of the case and all the relevant documents have been admitted on the pleadings or by counsel for both parties before me during the hearing and that being so it was unnecessary to call any evidence on behalf of either of the parties. The issue involved in this case is a purely legal one, viz., the true construction to be given to a devise or bequest of certain real or immovable property contained in the will of James William Twalling deceased.3. James William Twalling a Government Pensioner residing in the Cantonments at Meerut died on 4th September 1893 leaving a will d...
Secy. of State Vs. (Seth) Chand Mal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-18-1935
Reported in: AIR1936All89; 160Ind.Cas.1025
1. This is an appeal by the Secretary of State for India in Council and arises from a suit brought by Seth Chand Mal, plaintiff-respondent, for recovery of Rs. 5,130, alleged to have been embezzled by defendant 2, Bhagwant Kishore Baijal. It appears that a firm styled Kundan Lal Gordhan Das borrowed Rs. 10,000 from the plaintiff, on the security of certain premises situate in Muttra. The aforesaid firm, was adjudged insolvent, and Bhagwant Kishore Baijal, defendant 2, who was the official receiver, was appointed receiver of the estate of the insolvent firm. Under the orders of the Court, the premises hypothecated to the plaintiff were to be sold by the receiver, whose duty it was to pay out of the sale proceeds such amount as was due to the plaintiff. The receiver sold the property for nearly Rs. 14,000, and paid thereout a sum of Rs. 8,000 to the plaintiff. Subsequently the receiver absconded with a large sum of money, including part of the sale proceeds of the property belonging to t...
Nand Kumar Dutt Vs. Ganesh Das and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-18-1935
Reported in: AIR1936All131; 159Ind.Cas.812
1. This is a first appeal by defendant 1, Nand Kumar Dutt against a declaratory decree of the trial Court. The plaintiff Ganesh Dass brought a suit-for a declaration that property consisting; of 'paris' or shares in the offerings of a number of temples in Benares City was liable to attachment and sale in execution of a decree passed in favour of the plaintiff in Suit No. 141 of 1922 against the assets of one Kameshwar Panda in the hands of his daughter, defendant 2, Mt. Betwi. In appeal two grounds have been raised. Firstly that the lower Court was-wrong in holding that the sale deed of 10th September 1919, which was prior to the decree and was in favour of defendant 1 executed by Kameshwar Panda, his brother, was a bogus transaction; and secondly, that the Court below wrongly decided Issue No. 5 in favour of the plaintiff and that the Court should have held that these 'paris' are emoluments attached to an office and that the holder of the office can transfer his right in the office an...
Mt. Anwari Jan Vs. Baldua and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-16-1935
Reported in: AIR1936All218; 159Ind.Cas.190
Bajpai, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff who brought a suit for partition of 7/24th of a certain house. The plaintiff based her title on the fact that she had purchased 7/24th of the house on 20th July 1923, from one Mt. Sharbati. It appears that one Mendua was the owner of a certain house who died leaving a widow Mt. Kaunsila alias Rahiman, a son Baldua and a daughter Mt. Sharbati. The plaintiff alleged that Mendua at the time of his death was a Mahomedan, and as such his daughter Mt. Sharbati inherited seven out of 24 sihams and as the plaintiff has got a sale deed from Mt. Sharbati she is entitled to have the house partitioned. The defence was that Mendua at the time of his death was a Hindu and after his death the house devolved solely on Baldua and the plaintiff was not entitled to obtain a partition on the basis of her sale deed. The defendants to the suit were Baldua and Mt. Kaunsila alias Rahiman.2. It is therefore clear that the sole question for the determination of th...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »