Allahabad Court September 1936 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.
L. Rathu Mal and ors. Vs. B. Kunj Behari Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-17-1936
Reported in: AIR1937All4; 166Ind.Cas.801
1. This is a second appeal from an order of the Additional District Judge of Meerut which was passed on 21st April 1934, in an insolvency matter. It appears that on 12th March 1929, one Kacheru Mal instituted a suit against Kannu Mal and Jagannath and obtained an injunction to restrain the defendants from alienating their immoveable property; and that injunction was served upon the said Kannu Mal and Jagannath on the 14th of March. On the 15th of March the two debtors executed a mortgage for Rs. 15,000 in favour of one Bhola Nath and executed a sale-deed in respect of seven houses for Rs. 10,000 in favour of one Raghubar Dayal. We are not concerned at present with those transfers, but certain other transfers were effected by the debtors on the 2nd of April and the 5th of April 1929 and these are the transfers with which the present appeal is concerned. On the 2nd of April the debtors assigned two mortgage bonds in favour of Rahtu Mal, a decree in favour of Sheo Singh Rai, a mortgage-bo...
Mir Chittan Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-17-1936
Reported in: AIR1937All13
ORDERAllsop, J.1. This is an application in revision by Mir. Chhittan who has been sentenced to imprisonment for a period of three months under Sections 143 and 298, I.P.C. The charge against him was that he had slaughtered a cow in broad daylight in full view of the houses of Hindus. His defence was that the cow had been slaughtered at night. It has been found as a fact by the Courts below that the cow was slaughtered in the manner alleged by the prosecution, that is in an old ruined house in the village. The argument here is that this act did not amount to an offence under Section 298, I.P.C., because a cow was not an object within the meaning of the section. Two rulings have been brought to my notice, but neither of them is in point because they deal with the meaning of the word 'object' in Section 295, I.P.C. Section 298, I.P.C., is much wider in its scope and includes, I think, any action which is known to wound the religious feelings of others. It is unnecessary to describe the t...
Ajog NaraIn and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-17-1936
Reported in: AIR1937All14; 166Ind.Cas.369
Allsop, J.1. This is an appeal by Ajog Narain and 7 others who have been found guilty of an offence under Section 201, I.P.C., i.e., of concealing evidence of a crime. Ajog Narain has also been convicted of an offence under Section 325, I.P.C., i.e., the offence of voluntarily causing grievous hurt. He has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years under that section. All the appellants have been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year under Section 201, I.P.C. The sentences passed upon Ajog Narain are to be concurrent. The case for the prosecution is that Ajog Narain hit a man called Sudma Chamar with a lathi because he refused to go to plough Ajog Narain's field, that Sudma died as the result of the attack made upon him and that the appellants took his body to the burning ghat and cremated it so as to prevent the crime from coming to light. The trial under Section 201, I.P.C., was with the aid of a jury which found the appellants guilty. T...
A.P. Bagchi Vs. Mrs. F. Morgan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-17-1936
Reported in: AIR1937All36; 166Ind.Cas.897
1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit for ejectment and arrears of rent from the defendant who occupied the plaintiff's house at No. 10 Albert Road. Admittedly the monthly rent fixed was Rs. 75. The plaintiff's case was that the defendant in spite of repeated notices to vacate the premises stuck to the place and did not deliver possession to the plaintiff. The main defence consisted of two pleas, namely : (1) That there was a contract of tenancy between the parties under which it was agreed that so long as the defendant continued to pay rent regularly and complied with the other conditions, the plaintiff would not be entitled to give him notice to quit; and (2) that 15 days' notice given on the 15th of a month by either party was essential. The trial Court decreed the claim, but on appeal the lower appellate Court has dismissed the claim. The findings of the lower appellate Court are that the plaintiff had never accepted the condition set up by the defendant regarding h...
P, a Pleader, Bansi Vs. Judges of the High Court of Allahabad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-17-1936
Reported in: AIR1937All167
ORDER1. This is an application for leave to appeal to His Majesty in Council from an order of a Bench of this Court striking off the name of the applicant who is a pleader from the roll of the pleaders on the ground of misconduct. Although the Calcutta and Patna High Courts have taken a different view, it has been the practice in this Court to treat such orders as falling under Section 109(c), Civil P.C. The case in Asbarfi Lal v. Judges of Allahabad High Court A.I.R. 1930 P.C. 60 was a case of a pleader who had been suspended from practice for four years. Leave to appeal to His Majesty in Council was allowed and no objection was taken before their Lordships that the order allowing such leave was illegal. Indeed their Lordships actually accepted the appeal and set aside the order of the High Court in that case. Again in T.C.A. Anandalawan v. Judges of Madras High Court , a vakil had been struck off the roll of vakils. Their Lordships accepted the appeal and set aside the order of the H...
Abdul Karim Khan and ors. Vs. Managing Committee, George High School
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-17-1936
Reported in: AIR1936All879; 166Ind.Cas.211
1. This is a Letters Patent Appeal by the plaintiffs whose suit has been dismissed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in second appeal. The plaintiffs prayed for a perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the flow of water over the land in the possession of the defendants. The plaintiffs and defendants have portions of land in the municipal area of the city of Azamgarh. The portion of land held by the defendants was acquired by Government under the Land Acquisition Act and a school has been built upon it, the George High School, which is in the possession of the defendants. The case as argued on Letters Patent appeal first of all was that the plaintiffs' drain amounted to a customary right under Section 2(b), Easements Act and did not amount to an easement under Section 4 of that Act. In Section 2(b) the words used are:Any customary or other right (not being a license) in or over immoveable property which the Government, the public, or any person may p...
P., a Pleader Vs. Judges of the High Court of Allahabad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-17-1936
Reported in: 167Ind.Cas.666
ORDER1. This is an application for leave to appeal to His Majesty in Council from an order of a Bench of this Court striking off the name of the applicant who is a Pleader from the roll of the Pleaders on the ground of misconduct. Although the Calcutta and Patna High Courts have taken a different view, it his been the practice in this Court to treat such orders as falling under Section, 109(e), Civil Procedure Code. The case in Asharfi Lai v. Judges of Allahabad High Court (1930) A.L.J. 134 : 122 Ind. Cas. 4 : A.I.R. 1930 P.C. 60 : 31 Cr. L.J. 337 : 31 L.W. 298 : 34 C.W.N. 432 : 32 Bom. L.R. 556 : 7 O.W.n. 264 : 51 C.L.J. 417 : (1930) Cr. Cas. 205 : 58 M.L.J. 483 : Ind. Ral. (1930) P.C. 88 (P.C.) was a case of a Pleader who had been suspended from practice, for four years. Leave to appeal to His Majesty in Council was allowed and No. Objection was taken before their Lordships that the order allowing such leave was illegal. Indeed their Lordships actually accepted the appeal and set asi...
Mir Chhittan Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-17-1936
Reported in: 166Ind.Cas.373
ORDERAllsop, J.1. This is an application revision by Mir Chhittan who has been sentenced to imprisonment for a period of three months under Sections 143 and 298, Indian Penal Code. The charge against him was that he had slaughtered a cow in broad daylight in full view of the houses of Hindus. His defence was that the cow had been slaughtered at night. It has been found as a fact by the Courts below that the cow was slaughtered in the manner alleged by the prosecution, that is, in an old ruined house in the village. The argument here is that this act did not amount to an offence under Section 298 Indian Penal Code, because a cow was not an object within the meaning of the section. Two rulings have been brought to my notice, but neither of them is in point because they deal with the meaning of the word ''object' in Section 295, Indian Penal Code. Section 298, Indian Penal Code, is much wider in its scope and includes, I think, any action which is known to wound the religious feelings of ...
Mt. Bibbo Vs. Rai Saheb Gokaran Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-16-1936
Reported in: AIR1937All101; 166Ind.Cas.919
1. This is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of a suit on a promissory note of 1922, the limitation according to the plaintiff being saved on account of certain payments and acknowledgments made by the defendant from time to time. The last acknowledgment relied upon by the plain, tiff was paper No. 53-C which the Court below has refused to admit on the ground that it was insufficiently stamped. The learned advocate for the plaintiff contends before us that although the document so far as it purported to be a promissory note was insufficiently stamped, the earlier portion of it which contained an acknowledgment of liability should be treated as such and should be admitted in evidence. Unfortunately for the plaintiff there is no evidence on the record to show that the original promissory note, which was not produced in this case, had even a one anna stamp affixed to it. Only a copy of it has been produced in this case which does not show that the original bore any stamp. We may however fo...
Emperor Vs. Bishwanath
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-16-1936
Reported in: AIR1936All850; 166Ind.Cas.176
ORDER1. This is an application on behalf of the Crown for enhancement of sentence passed on Bishwanath by the learned Assistant Sessions Judge of Allahabad in a case in which Bishwanath was committed to his Court to take his trial for an offence under Section 19(f), Arms Act. The trial was held with the aid of jury, who returned a unanimous verdict of guilty. The police received information to the effect that Bishwanath would be passing on an ekka' on a certain day on the Canning Road. They took the precaution of securing the presence of two Magistrates, one stipendiary and the other honorary, at the time when Bishwanath was expected to drive on the Canning Road. Accordingly a party consisting of two police officers and two Magistrates lay in wait at a convenient spot on the Canning Road. Bishwanath was noticed approaching on an 'ekka,' which was stopped by the police, and a search of his person was made in the presence of the Magistrates. A revolver and a few cartridges were found con...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »