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.
inamullah Vs. Babu Ram
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-15-1937
Reported in: AIR1937All360
ORDER1. The question on which the opinion of this Court is invited by the learned Judge of the Court below is as follows:Should the execution proceedings taken by the decree-holder against the surety Kanhai Lal, be stayed because two of the principal judgment-debtors have applied under Section 4, Encumbered Estates Act of 1934?2. The brief history of the litigation between the parties is this : Sheikh Inam Ullah, decree-holder, obtained a decree under the provisions of Rule 6 of Order 34, Civil P.C., against Babu Ram, Makkhan Lal and Raghunath Dass and against the assets of Mul Chand in the hands of Mt. Hira Kuar, on the 8th November 1930, for a sum of Rs. 5,410-8-0 together with future interest at Rs. 6 per cent. There was an appeal against that decree, but it was dismissed by this Court on the 19th December 1934. The judgment-debtors made an application for the amendment of the decree under the provisions of the TJ. P. Agriculturists' Belief Act of 1934, and the amendment prayed for ...
Adjai Coal Co. Vs. Lakhi NaraIn and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-15-1937
Reported in: AIR1937All396
ORDER1. The question referred by the learned Additional Civil Judge is in the following terms:Can executing Court grant relief under the Agriculturists' Relief Act in a decree transferred] to it by another Court situated in or outside the United Provinces?2. This question of law has arisen in connexion with the execution of a decree obtained by the Adjai Coal Co., Ltd., against Lakhi Narain Ram in the Court of Asansol in Bengal. When the decree-was transferred to the Court of the Additional Civil Judge of Ballia for execution the judgment-debtor applied for an instalment decree under Section 5, Agriculturists' Relief Act of 1934. Section 5 of the Act relates to the granting of an instalment decree. The section is in the following terms:(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the Court shall, unless for reasons to be recorded it directs otherwise, at any time, on the application of the judgment-debtor and after notice to the decree-holder, direct tha...
Bindraban Vs. Sri Godamji Maharani Birajman Mandir Sri Rangji Maharaj
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-15-1937
Reported in: AIR1937All394
1. This is a Letters Patent appeal arising out of a suit for recovery of possession brought by the plaintiff as trustee of the trust property against the defendant appellant who also claimed to be the trustee. One Brij Lal was the original owner of these properties and on 17th November 1914 he made a gift of these properties in favour of Sri Godamaji Maharani installed in a certain temple and by that deed declared that he himself would remain the manager of the properties during his lifetime, but after his death the trustees of that temple would manage the properties also. Later, on 1st February 1915, he executed another document in the form of a will under which he directed that after his death the management of the dedicated properties should pass to the present appellant, Bindraban. On Brij Lai's death Bindraban obtained possession as the trustee which gave occasion for the suit by the trustee of the temple. In the deed Brij Lal had not reserved to himself the right of changing the ...
Sheikh Hafeez UddIn Vs. Ram Chander Das
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-13-1937
Reported in: AIR1937All397
Niamatullah, J.1. This is a decree-holder's appeal from an order passed by the Subordinate Judge of Muzaffarnagar in appeal from the order passed by the Munsif of that district dismissing the appellant's application for execution as time-barred. The appellant had sued for recovery of Rs. 615 in a Court situated in Delhi, impleading three defendants, namely, (1) Firm Ram Chand Atma Ram (2) Atma Ram, minor, under the guardinship of his father, and (3) Rahtu Mai. The suit was dismissed against Atma Ram but was decreed against the other two defendants. The decree-holder applied, on 15th February 1930, for transfer of the decree to Muzaffarnagar. A certificate was granted on 1st March 1930. No further action was taken by him on that certificate but on 28th February 1933, he again applied to the Court passing the decree for a certificate of transfer of his decree. The certificate was granted on 9th May 1933. This was followed by an application, dated 23rd February 1934, made in the Court at ...
Thakur Gopal Singh Vs. Mutual Indemnity and Finance Corporation (India ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-13-1937
Reported in: AIR1937All535
Sulaiman, C.J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of a suit for recovery of damages on the basis of an insurance policy for damage done by fire to a motor lorry run by the plaintiff. The motor vehicle had been purchased on 20th January 1931, by Indar Lal Sah and was insured with the Insurance Company, defendant 2. The proposal form of that date is not on the record. Indar Lal Sah had taken this motor lorry on a hire purchase system from defendant 1, The Mutual Indemnity and Finance Corporation Ltd. The Corporation later on transferred this motor lorry to the present plaintiff, Gopal Singh, and on an application made to the Insurance Company, the insurance policy also was transferred by the Insurance Company to the plaintiff. A fresh proposal form was taken on this occasion which is dated 9th March 1931 (pp. 32 to 33). Against the description 'Owner's name' it was stated 'Gopal Singh and/or M.I.F.C.I.'. This proposal form was filled up by the director of the Corporation and was ...
Mt. Aisha Bibi Vs. Divandar Prasad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-12-1937
Reported in: AIR1937All350
ORDERNiamatullah, J.1. This is an application for revision under Section 253, Agra Tenancy Act. A preliminary objection has been taken by learned Counsel for the opposite party that no revision lies. It is however necessary to state all the facts of the case before the preliminary objection can be decided, and as after hearing counsel I am of opinion that it cannot be sustained, I shall deal with it in the course of the judgment on the merits. The applicant is a tenant, other than a permanent, tenure-holder or a fixed rate tenant, of the opposite party at a certain annual rent. The latter instituted a suit for recovery of arrears of rent for certain years, and obtained a decree. The opposite party then made an application under Section 79, Agra Tenancy Act, praying that the decree be executed by the ejectment of the applicant. The Court issued a notice to her and on her appearance granted time for payment 'up to 1st March 1935'. The case was taken up on that date in the forenoon and, a...
Brij Mohan Lal and anr. Vs. L. Monmohan Das
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-08-1937
Reported in: AIR1937All351
1. This appeal arises out of execution proceedings. The appellants are the legal representatives of Shiam Sunder who died during the pendency of the proceedings in the lower Court. In this judgment we shall consider the rights of Shiam Sunder as if he is still alive. It appears that one, Govind Prasad obtained a decree against Baldeo Narain and Mata Prasad for a certain sum of money in 1925. Baldeo Narain obtained a decree for a certain sum of money against Man Mohan Das and three others in 1926. On 25th January 1927, Govind Prasad assigned his rights to Man Mohann Das. On 15th December 1932, Baldeo Narain assigned his rights to Shiam Sunder. The latter applied for execution of his decree against his judgment-debtors including Man Mohan Das. Man Mohan Das claimed a set-off of the decretal amount due under the decree assigned to him by Govind Prasad against the decretal amount claimed by Shiam Sunder. The lower Court allowed such set-off. The legal representatives of Shiam Sunder have p...
Amir UddIn and anr. Vs. Panchaiti Akhara Bara Udasi Nanak Shahi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-08-1937
Reported in: AIR1937All389
Bennet, J.1. This is an execution first appeal by the judgment-debtors against an order of the execution Court appointing a receiver. The circumstances are that the appellants originally owned a zamindari share and certain occupancy holdings and their Jamindari share was mortgaged and the opposite party, the mortgagee, brought a suit for sale on a simple mortgage and obtained a decree and put the property up for sale and bought the property himself and is now owner of the zamindari property and is one co-sharer out of several co-sharers. In connexion with that transaction of sale an exproprietary tenancy arose which is held by the appellants in addition to their occupancy holdings. As the decree was not fully satisfied, a personal decree was prepared under Order 34, Rule 6 and in execution of that decree an application was made for the appointment of a receiver to take possession of the occupancy tenancies and the exproprietary tenancies. The Court below has granted the application. It...
AmiruddIn and anr. Vs. Panchaiti Akhara Bar a Udasi Nanak Shahi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-08-1937
Reported in: 169Ind.Cas.181
Bennet, J.1. This is an execution first appeal by the judgment-debtors against an order of the execution Court appointing a Receiver. The circumstances are that the appellants originally owned a zamindari share and certain occupancy holdings and their zamindari share was mortgaged and the opposite party, the mortgagee, brought a suit for sale on a simple mortgage and obtained a decree and put the property up for sale and bought the property himself and is now owner of the zamindari property and is one co-sharer out of several co-sharers. In connection with that transaction of sale an exproprietary tenancy arose which is held by the appellants in addition to their occupancy holdings. As the decree was not fully satisfied, a personal decree was prepared under Order XXXIV, Rule 6, and in execution of that decree an application was made for the appointment of a Receiver to take possession of the occupancy tenancies and the ex-proprietary tenancies. The Court below has granted the applicati...
Arjun Arora Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-07-1937
Reported in: AIR1937All295
Ganga Nath, J.1. This is an appeal by Arjun Arora against his conviction and sentence under Section 124-A, Penal Code. The charge against him was that by two speeches made by him at the same meeting on the evening of 13th September 1936 in the Tilak Hall, Cawnpore, he brought or attempted to bring into hatred and contempt and excited of attempted to excite disaffection towards the Government established by law in British India. He has been sentenced to six months' rigorous imprisonment.2. The essence of the crime of sedition consists in the intention with which the language is used. But this intention must be judged primarily by the language itself. It is, therefore, necessary to ascertain what was the intention of the appellant when he made the two speeches. The workers of Atherton West Mills had gone on strike. A meeting was held in the Tilak Hall on 13th September 1936 to pass a resolution of sympathy with the strike. The appellant moved an amendment to the resolution. The resolutio...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »