Allahabad Court February 1936 Judgments
Ghungru and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-28-1936
Reported in: AIR1936All360; 163Ind.Cas.301
ORDERAllsop, J.1. This is an application in revision by Ghungru, Madan Lal and Raja Ram who have been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for periods of three years under Sections 365 and 452, I.P.C. The allegation is that they abducted a young woman, Mt. Ram Sukhi, by force with intent to cause her to be secretly and wrongfully confined. It is said that in the course of abducting her they entered into the house where she was residing,, armed with lathis and spears and used force to other inmates. Mt. Ram Sukhi is the daughter of Shyam Sunder and was married about three or four years ago to Sukhdeo Prasad. The husband and wife did not get on well together and they parted company. The girl returned to her father. Sukhdeo Prasad took proceedings under Section 100, Criminal P.C., in an attempt to recover control over his wife but as she preferred to live with her parents the Magistrate refused to send her to her husband. That was in the year 1932. Nothing further happened till 17th April 1...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Ghulam Vs. Bandhu Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-28-1936
Reported in: AIR1936All434; 163Ind.Cas.564
ORDERAllsop, J.1. This is an application in revision against an order passed by the learned Munsif of Chandausi in the course of the proceedings in execution of a decree. The suit which gave rise to these proceedings was instituted on 27 th February 1935. It was a suit for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 1,040 with interest by the sale of property mortgaged by a deed dated 6th May 1927. The defendants to the suit were the heirs of the deceased mortgagor and a subsequent purchaser of the property who is now the opposite party to this application. This subsequent purchaser Bandhu Singh acquired the property by sale in the month of August 1933. He paid a sum of Rs. 3,100 for the property. Out of this sum, Rs. 750 were left in his possession in order that he might redeem the mortgage of 6th May 1927. He did not redeem and it was for this reason that the suit was instituted. The learned Munsif passed a preliminary decree on 27th March 1935 and then Bandhu Singh put in an application that the d...
Tag this Judgment!Ram NaraIn and ors. Vs. Mahmood Hasan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-27-1936
Reported in: AIR1936All450; 163Ind.Cas.537
ORDERAllsop, J.1. This is an application in revision arising out of proceedings under the Agriculturists' Belief Act. The applicant obtained a decree on the basis of a mortgage, dated 16th September 1924. The principal amount secured by the mortgage was Rs. 200 and the stipulated interest was Rs. 1-12-0 per cent per mensem, compound with six-monthly rests. The Court which passed the decree held that the rate of interest was excessive and reduced it under the Usurious Loan, Act to Rs. 1-12-0 per cent per mensem, simple. By the time that the decree-holder came to execute the decree the Agriculturists' Belief Act had become law. The judgment, debtor applied for relief under that Act. The Court below reduced the interest under Section 30 of the Act from Rs. 1-12-0 per cent per mensem to Be. 1 per cent per mensem up to 1st January, 1930, and to Rs. 9-8-0 per cent per annum after 1st January 1930. The Court also directed that the amount due should be paid in instalments.2. The applicant does...
Tag this Judgment!Jasnami and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-27-1936
Reported in: AIR1936All534; 163Ind.Cas.866
Sulaiman, C.J.1. This is an application in revision from an order of the Sessions Judge upholding the conviction of the accused persons under Section 153, I.P.C., and the sentences of fine imposed on them. It appears that the accused are Doms by caste who have recently become Aryasamajists. There has been a practice in some hill villages not to allow marriage processions with palanquins and dandies occupied by the bridegroom and the bride to pass through village sites. The high caste Hindus had on previous occasions objected to such actions. Indeed the present accused took out such a procession on 16th November 1933, which was obstructed and had to be postponed till 22nd December 1933, when the present occurrence took place. The Secretary of the local Depressed Classes Association submitted an application to the Deputy Commissioner stating that on the previous occasion, namely on 16th November 1933, the marriage party had been intercepted and looted on the way by high caste Hindus and ...
Tag this Judgment!Sarjuram Sahu Vs. Mt. Dularna Bibi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-27-1936
Reported in: AIR1936All652
ORDERAllsop, J.1. The applicant had a decree against Jugul Kishore and in execution of that decree put certain property to sale. Jugul Kishore obtained stay of execution by filing two hypothecation bonds by way of security. Eventually the applicant instituted a suit on the basis of these bonds-against Jugul Kishore and his wife-Mt. Dularna Bibi. The latter was in-pleaded because some other property had been gifted to her by Jugul Kishore and she and Jugul Kishore then, as joint; zamindars, had executed permanent leases jointly in respect of certain lands pertaining to the property mortgaged as well as other property. The suit was decreed as-against Jugal Kishore but not against Mt. Dularna Bibi and the latter was awarded her costs. She put in a certificate that she had paid a sum of Rs. 500 to a Barrister in Gorakhpur. There was originally some mistake in the decree, or some alleged mistake, and on an application for amendment the question arose what sum should be allowed to Mt. Dularn...
Tag this Judgment!Firm Baldeo Prasad-balgovind Vs. Musammat Shubratan and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-27-1936
Reported in: 164Ind.Cas.720
Niamat Ullah, J.1. The appellant obtained a simple money decree against one Zahur Muhammad, and in execution thereof attached half of a house situate in Allahabad. Musammat Shubratan, the wife of his brother Wazir Muhammad, objected to the attachment, alleging that she was the owner of the southern half of the house under a deed of gift executed in her favour by Zahur Muhammad's father Suddhu. Her objection was dismissed, and she instituted the suit which has given rise to this appeal. She impleaded the judgment-debtor Zahur Muhammad, her husband Wazir Muhammad and the appellant, who had attached half of the house in execution of his decree. The plaintiff's case, as laid down in her plaint, was that a defined half of the house had been given to her by Suddhu and that Zahur Ahmad and Wazir Muhammad had no interest in that half. In support of her claim she produced a registered deed of gift, dated November 11, 1919, executed by Suddhu. It is not disputed that the house originally belonge...
Tag this Judgment!Sarjuram Sahu Vs. Musammat Dularna Bibi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-27-1936
Reported in: 162Ind.Cas.53
Allsop, J.1. The applicant had a decree against Jugul Kishore and in execution of that decree put certain property to sale. Jugul Kishore obtained stay of execution by filing two hypothecation bonds by way of security. Eventually the applicant instituted a suit on the basis of these bonds against Jugul Kishore and his wife Musammat Dularna Bibi, The latter was impleaded because some other property had been gifted to her by Jugul Kishore and she and Jugul Kishore then, as joint zamindars had executed permanent leases jointly in respect of certain lands pertaining to the property mortgaged as well as other property. The suit was decreed as against Jugal Kishore but not against Musammat Dularna Bibi and the latter was awarded her costs. She put in a certificate that she had paid a sum of Rs. 500 to a Barrister in Gorakhpur. There was originally some mistake in the decree or some alleged mistake, and on an application for amendment, the question arose what sum should be allowed to Musammat...
Tag this Judgment!Mt. Jafri Begam and anr. Vs. Asghar Ali Khan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-26-1936
Reported in: AIR1936All659
ORDERAllsop, J.1. This is an application in revision made by the defendants to a suit which was instituted by one Asghar Ali Khan. In the first instance 11th May 1934, was fixed for the putting in of a written statement by the defendants. The 22nd August 1934 was then fixed for final hearing. The case was adjourned from that date to 20th November 1934 because the Court had no time to deal with it. On 20th November 1934 the presiding officer was on leave and the suit was adjourned to 4th February 1935. On this date the presiding officer was again on leave and the suit was adjourned to 18th April 1935. Before the hearing on 4th February 1935 the plaintiff had put in an application on 24th January 1935 saying that he was in Government service in Baluchistan and that he had to return to duty and that he could not be present on 4th February. He asked that his statement might be recorded, but his application was rejected. However, as I have already mentioned, there was an adjournment on 4th ...
Tag this Judgment!Genda Mal Vs. L. Sukhdarshan Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-25-1936
Reported in: AIR1936All555
Sulaiman, C.J.1. This is a letters Patent appeal arising out of an execution proceeding. An ex parte money decree was obtained, and an execution of its certain properties alleged to belong to the judgment-debtor, Chaman, were attached by an order of the execution Court. An amin went to the spot and made the attachment and handed over the custody of these properties which consisted of cattle and grain to the appellant, Genda Mal, who agreed to take charge of the attached properties as supurdar and executed a supurdnama under which he undertook to restore the properties whenever called upon by the Court or the Court amin. This happened on 4th February 1932. Later an application was filed by the judgment-debtor to have the ex parte decree set aside, and on 20th April 1932 the ex parte decree was set aside, the case was restored to its original number on the file. But on the same date the decree-holder applied for attachment before judgment, and the Court passed an order that the propertie...
Tag this Judgment!John Bros. Vs. Official Liquidator, Agra Spinning and Weaving Mills Co ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-25-1936
Reported in: AIR1936All808; 165Ind.Cas.790
Bennet, J.1. This is a Letters Patent appeal by Messrs. John Bros. of Agra against the order of a learned Company Judge of this Court, dated 8th September 1934. The order is that a sum of Rupees 51,266-2-2 should be deposited by Messrs. John Bros. in the Imperial Bank of India at Agra, in the account of the Agra Spinning and Weaving Mills Co. Ltd., within one week from the date of the order, this being the entire amount due to the Company on account of spinning charges. A copy of the order was sent to the District Judge with the directions that if the amount is not paid within a week from the date of the order, immediate execution of the order must be issued, in the manner of a simple money decree under the Code of Civil Procedure. The grounds of Letters Patent appeal allege that the learned Company Judge-had no jurisdiction to pass a decree and direct its execution, and that the order appealed against was illegal and was passed with material irregularity, and that the official liquida...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »