Allahabad Court January 1937 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.
Raghunandan Singh Vs. Bhupal Gir and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-21-1937
Reported in: AIR1937All399
1. This is an appeal from an order of the District Judge, Bulandshahr, in an insolvency proceeding, refusing to permit the applicant to execute his decree for recovery of arrears of rent by ejectment of the insolvent tenant. The land- holder himself applied to the Court for such permission, because his suit in the revenue Court had been dismissed on the ground that the receiver had not been impleaded. The Court below has held that the landholder should get his decretal money entered in the schedule and has refused to permit him to proceed with the execution of his decree.2. It is quite clear that under Section 28(2) the property of the insolvent vests in the receiver, and no creditor is allowed to have any remedy against such property, except with the leave of the Court; but under Sub-section (5) the property of the insolvent does not include any property which, by any enactment for the time being in force, is free from liability to attachment and sale in execution of a decree. The ins...
L. Murli Dhar Vs. Har Sarup and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-21-1937
Reported in: AIR1937All451
1. This is a Letters Patent appeal arising out of a suit for damages brought by the plaintiff who was an attaching creditor of the crops of a tenant against the contesting defendant who was the land-holder. The tenant was previously a proprietor but his proprietary interests were sold with the result that ha became an exproprietary tenant of about 23 bighas. Before any proceedings were taken to get the land in which he acquired exproprietary tenancy specified and rent fixed under Section 36, Land Revenue Act, the present plaintiff attached the sugarcane crops standing on two bighas out of these lands. The land-holder alleging that there was an agreement between the exproprietary tenant and himself for payment of Rs. 200 as rent for the entire holding, distrained the crops and a data was fixed by the sale officer for the sale of the orops. The attaching creditor applied to the Tahsildar for stay of proceedings as his execution case was pending in the civil Court but the Tahsildar refuse...
Jafar HusaIn Vs. Bishambhar Nath
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-21-1937
Reported in: AIR1937All442
1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of final decree proceedings in a mortgage suit. The plaintiff obtained a preliminary decree on the basis of a mortgage deed on the 15th March 1933 and in due course applied for the preparation of a final decree when the defendant took certain objections. We are concerned with only one of them in this appeal. The defendant claimed that under the terms of the preliminary decree, the plaintiff was not entitled to the total interest claimed by him. This objection was disallowed by the Court below, and it was ordered that a final decree be prepared. The defendant has now come up in appeal to this Court and the only point which we have to decide is whether the defendant is entitled to a reduction in the interest granted by the Court below under the terms of the final decree. In Jagannath Prasad v. Surajmal Jalal , their Lordships of the Privy Council held that:On a preliminary decree for foreclosure or sale under Order 34, Rules 2, 4, Civil P.C. 19...
Emperor Vs. Jagannath Gir and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-20-1937
Reported in: AIR1937All353
1. There were five cases before the Sessions Judge of Ballia, all connected with each other and all relating to a girl named Mi. Bhagmania. The result of the trials was as follows: Mt. Sugia, Bairagi Singh, Sattan and Balli, who were charged in the alternative under Section 366 or Section 366-A or Section 498, I.P.C., were convicted under Section 366-A and were sentenced to 18 months' rigorous imprisonment. Balli was further convicted under Section 497, I.P.C., and sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment. Gobind Sharma and Bishnath were convicted in the alternative under Section 366 or Section 366-A or Section 498, I.P.C., and were sentenced to 18 months' rigorous imprisonment. Jagannath Manjokhi, Sheodhari and Mt. Jumratan were acquitted. The convicted persons have appealed to this Court and there is an application on behalf of the Local Government for enhancement of the sentences which have been inflicted upon Gobind Sharma and Bishnath. There is also an appeal by the Local Gov...
K.S. Moulvi Mohammad Hasan Vs. B. Gajadhar Prasad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-20-1937
Reported in: AIR1937All313
ORDERSulaiman, C.J.1. A preliminary objection was taken to the reference that the whole case ought to have been referred to the Pull Bench. For some years a practice had undoubtedly grown up in this Court to refer questions of law to a Full Bench as distinct from the whole case. This practice was obviously based on convenience so that the authoritative opinion of the Full Bench might be ascertained on the difficult questions of law and the time of the Full Bench might not be occupied by other questions of fact or other questions of law of lesser importance.Santhanand Gir v. Basudevanand Gir : AIR1930All225 two questions of law were referred to a Full Bench of seven Judges, who delivered their opinions and answered the two questions. The case was then disposed of by the referring Judges. Again, in Udeypal Singh v. Lakshmi Chand : AIR1935All946 , the Full Bench expressed the opinion on the question of law, on which there was a conflict of opinion, leaving other matters to be decided by t...
Banu Mal Vs. Ratan Deo
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-20-1937
Reported in: AIR1937All370
ORDERNiamatullah, J.1. This is an application for revision under Section 25, Small Cause Courts Act, by the plaintiff whose suit has been dismissed by the lower Court. The plaintiff claimed Rs. 594 on foot of a promissory note executed by the defendant Ratan Deo and his deceased brother Sudama. The defence was that the promissory note had been executed in consideration of the plaintiff stifling a prosecution of the defendant for criminal breach of trust and that for this reason the promissory note is not enforceable. It is common ground that the defendant was in the service of the plaintiff and was alleged to have embezzled a large sum of money for which he was being prosecuted for an offence-under Section 408, I.P.C. While the criminal proceedings were pending the promissory note in suit was executed. The promissory note itself recites the fact of the pending prosecution. It also recites that a sum of Rs. 5,000 had been embezzled by the defendant but that the plaintiff had remitted th...
Dr. Bhawani Shanker Vs. B. Raghubar Dayal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-20-1937
Reported in: AIR1937All417
Niamatullah, J.1. This is an appeal from an order of remand passed by the learned civil Judge of Agra in an appeal from the decree of a Munsif of that district. The suit, which has given rise to the appeal was brought by the plaintiff-respondent for damages for malicious prosecution. Parties are neighbours and reside at Ferozabad, district Agra. They were complainants and accused in two cross cases in the criminal Court. Both the cases were dismissed. The defendant had prosecuted the plaintiff under Section 325, I.P.C. His story was that during his absence the plaintiff had so constructed a wall as to obstruct the flow of water from his (the defendant's) roof through certain spouts and that, on his return, he went to inspect his roof in the morning of 3rd March 1933 and was assaulted by the plaintiff. The plaintiff pleaded alibi, alleging that he was at Agra that morning and could not have caused any injury to the defendant. The trial Court correctly allocated the burden of proof and h...
Kishan Lal and anr. Vs. Lachmi Chand and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-20-1937
Reported in: AIR1937All456
1. This is a plaintiff's first appeal arising out of a suit for a declaration and for the completion of a deed of partition in accordance with the terms agreed upon between the parties. The facts of the case which have given rise to this appeal may briefly be stated as follows : One Tota Ram had three sons, Piare Lal, Atma Ram and Lachmi Chand. Mt. Sarsuti is the widow of Piare Lal. Kishan Lal and Debi Prakash are the sons of Atma Ram. Piare Lal died in. 1918. Tota Ram died on 21st October 1927. Tota Ram and his sons admittedly were members of a joint Hindu family. The family owned extensive properties in the District of Dehra Dun. The present suit was instituted by Atma Ram but he died during the pendency of the suit and thereupon his sons named above were brought on the record as his legal representatives.2. The plaintiffs allege that Atma Ram, and Lachmi Chand, defendant 1, made a partition of the properties owned by the joint family privately and each of them got possession over th...
Kunwar Jagdamba Singh and anr. Vs. Ram Sarup and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-19-1937
Reported in: AIR1937All415
ORDERNiamatullah, J.1. This is an application for revision under Section 115, Civil P.C., by the plaintiffs against an order passed by the learned District Judge, Mainpuri, upholding an order of a Munsif of that district returning the plaint for presentation to the revenue Court, which, according to the Munsif, is the proper Court to take cognizance of the suit. The plaintiff-applicants are some of the zamindars of the village in which the land in dispute lies. They took ejectment proceedings against a tenant and ejected him. Defendants 4 and 5, who are co-sharers of the plaintiffs, then granted a lease to defendants 1-3. The plaintiffs do not recognize these defendants as their tenants and seek to eject them as trespassers. The defendants, however, maintain that the lease granted by defendants 4 and 5 is valid having been granted by them with the concurrence of the plaintiffs. A preliminary question was raised in the trial Court as to whether the civil Court has jurisdiction to entert...
Jai Prakash Vs. Bhagwan Das and Co.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-18-1937
Reported in: AIR1937All453
1. This is a defendant's first appeal against a decree of the learned Civil Judge of Dehra Dun decreeing the plaintiffs' suit for the recovery of Rupees 10,478-6-9 due upon a cash credit bond hypothecating certain property. The suit was to enforce this hypothecation bond or mortgage executed by defendant 1 in favour of the plaintiffs which was dated 18th August 1924. By that bond or mortgage certain property in Mussoorie was made security for the money advanced, viz. : Rs. 10,000 and in this suit the plain, tiffs claimed to enforce their rights against such property. Defendant 2 who is the present appellant is the minor son of defendant 1. Defendant 2 who alone filed a written statement raised the usual defences to this kind of suit. He alleged that the property which had been mortgaged by his father, defendant 1, was ancestral property and that the mortgage was not binding upon the property as it had not been executed for legal necessity; on the other hand the plaintiffs alleged in th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »