Allahabad Court September 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.
Ganga Prasad Singh Vs. Thakur Bindeshwari Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-21-1937
Reported in: AIR1938All46
Allsop, J.1. This is an application in revision under Section 115, Civil P.C. The applicant Ganga Prasad Singh instituted a suit in the Revenue Court for the eject-merit of the opposite party Thakur Bindeshwari Singh upon the allegation that the latter was his tenant. The defence was that Thakur Bindeshwari Singh was a mortgagee with possession. While the suit was pending in the Revenue Court, the parties went to arbitration without the intervention of any Court. One of the terms of their agreement was that the award would be effective whatever might be the decision of the Be venue Court in the ejectment suit. The arbitrators joaade an award that Thakur Bindeshwari Singh was a mortgagee in possession. An application was made to the Civil Court that the award should be filed. An objection was taken that the Court had no jurisdiction but that objection was overruled and an order was passed that the award should be filed. Thereafter a decree was passed on the basis of the award.2. The app...
Bhagat Raj Vs. Mt. Gurai Dulaiya and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-21-1937
Reported in: AIR1938All49; 173Ind.Cas.669
Allsop, J.1. This is a second appeal arising out of a suit for damages for malicious prosecution. The suit was dismissed by the Court which tried it. There was an appeal to the lower Appellate Court which went only into the preliminary question whether the suit was barred by limitation. It held that the suit was so barred and dismissed the appeal under the provisions of Order 41, Rule 11, Civil P.C. In order to understand the question at issue it is necessary to know that the suit was instituted because a complaint had been made against the plaintiff under Section 107, Criminal P.C., on 20th August 1932. The learned Magistrate made an inquiry and came to the conclusion that there was no sufficient ground to bind the plaintiff over. He therefore passed an order on 12th November 1932 that the accused should be 'acquitted'. The person making the complaint then filed an application in revision in the Court of the Sessions Judge and this was dismissed on 9th January 1933. The suit which has...
B. Girwar Singh Vs. Har Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-20-1937
Reported in: AIR1938All52; 173Ind.Cas.897
Allsop, J.1. This second appeal arises out of a suit for the recovery of a sum of money on the basis of a promissory note. The defendant pleaded that he was an agriculturist within the meaning of the Agriculturists' Relief Act and urged that a decree should he passed for payment by instalments. The trial Court gave a decree directing that the amount due should be paid in half yearly instalments of Rs 150 each. The principal sum decreed was Rs. 3,740 with interest at the rate of 3 1/2 per cent, per annum. There was an appeal to the learned Subordinate Judge of Bijnor. It was urged before him that the defendant respondent was entitled under the Agriculturists' Relief Act to instalments only over a period of 4 years because he was an agriculturist to whom Ch. 3 applied. The learned Judge accepted this contention but upheld the decree of the Court below upon the general ground that he was entitled to grant a decree for payment by instalments under the provisions of Order 20, Rule 11, Civil...
Sheikh Nazim HussaIn Vs. Pt. Ram Nath Dubey
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-17-1937
Reported in: AIR1938All35
Thom, Ag. C.J.1. This is an appeal under Section 10, Letters Patent, against the decision of a learned single Judge of this Court. The appeal arises out of a suit on the basis of a simple mortgage. The plaintiff obtained a decree on the footing of the simple mortgage, which was executed by the appellant on 26th July 1922. Under this mortgage, the mortgagor mortgaged certain rights which he had purchased on 4th December 1898 from a lessee under a deed of perpetual lease executed on 18th December 1888. On that date one Maulvi Tafazzul Husain executed a perpetual lease. Under the terms of the lease the lessee was given full power to transfer his rights and it was further provided that the lessee's rights should be heritable and that in no circumstances could the lessee be ejected. Objection was taken to an application for the preparation of a final decree in the mortgage suit. It was contended that the rights of the defendant were not transferable by auction-sale on the ground that the ju...
Mir Umrao Ali Vs. Subedar Rup Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-16-1937
Reported in: AIR1938All26
Harries, J.1. This is a decree-holder's application for revision of an order of the learned Civil Judge of Pithoragarh dated 25th May 1936 read with a decree dated 25th February 1936. The facts of the case can be shortly stated as follows : On 4th January 1936 the present applicant obtained a mortgage decree against the respondent for a sum of Rs. 3,091-4-9. The defendant-respondent had claimed a reduction of interest under the provisions of the Agriculturists' Relief Act, 1934 but the interest does not appear to have been reduced. On 3rd February 1936 the learned Judge passed an order suo motu that the decree should be amended in the light of recent legislation and he issued notice to the parties summoning them before him. On 25th February 193fi the parties duly appeared and after hearing them, the learned Civil Judge reduced the interest payable on this loan in accordance with Section 30, Agriculturists' Belief Act, which brought the decretal amount down to Rs. 2,749-4-0. He further ...
Jokhu Vs. Municipal Board and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-16-1937
Reported in: AIR1938All66; 173Ind.Cas.868
Mohammad Ismail, J.1. The facts that have given rise to this litigation are not in dispute. The plaintiff is the owner of a house No. 25/60 within the limits of the Benares Municipality. It is alleged that the house, is not within a radius of 600 feet from the nearest standpipe nor has it got any waterpipe connexion. Some time in 1929 this house was assessed to water tax. On the receipt of notice, the plaintiff filed an objection under Section 143 of the Act praying exemption from water tax as his house was beyond the prescribed radius. It appears that the Municipal Board took no action on this objection and it remained pending, when on 19th May 1934 a distress warrant was issued against the plaintiff and the officer deputed by the Board, namely defendant 2, attached the plaintiff's cattle and other moveable properties. The plaintiff immediately made representations to the Municipal authorities and deposited the full amount together with. costs in the Municipal Treasury. His property w...
Mirza Mohammad Hasan Vs. Buddhu
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-15-1937
Reported in: AIR1938All32
Mohammad Ismail, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of a suit for ejectment and recovery of arrears of rent. The plaintiff came to Court on the allegation that he was the proprietor of a kothri No. 49 (old number) situate in ahata No. 3 (corresponding to old No. 2) in mohalla Badshahi Mandi, Allahabad; that the defendant's father Kanhai was given this kothri on lease dated 6th February 1890, which was executed by Kanhai in favour of Mirza Hasan Ali, the father of the plaintiff, on a rent of Re. 1 per annum; that it was one of the stipulations in the aforesaid lease that the lessee will be liable to ejectment on 15 days notice; that Kanhai remained in possession of this kothri as a lessee till his death and thereafter the defendant succeeded his father; that the defendant had withheld the payment of the annual rent since February 1927, and that he now denies the title of the plaintiff to the property in suit. Hence the suit for the ejectment of the defendant from the kothri d...
B. Durga Prasad Seth and anr. Vs. Om Prakash and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-15-1937
Reported in: AIR1938All39
Mohammad Ismail, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal from a decree of the learned Civil Judge of Bareilly dated 18th September 1935, which reversed a decree dated 26th March 1935 of the Haveli Munsif, Bareilly. The facts that have given rise to this litigation are as follows: One Laobhman Prasad, along with his sons, mortgaged certain zamindary property in mauza Raipura Girdhari Lal in favour of the plaintiffs Durga Prasad and Madan Mohan. On 20th August 1923, Lachhman Prasad, father of defendants 2 to 4, executed a permanent lease of certain plots which constituted his khudkasht cultivation, in favour of his own nephew Om Prakash, defendant 1. A few days later, on 30th August 1923, Lachhman Prasad applied for insolvency and was ultimately declared an insolvent. His entire property was taken possession of by the Official Receiver who sold it to the plaintiffs on 20th October 1932. The plaintiffs now come to Court with the allegation that Lachhman Prasad fictitiously executed the patta me...
Ram NaraIn Singh and ors. Vs. Shripat Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-14-1937
Reported in: AIR1938All20; 173Ind.Cas.140
Bajpai, J.1. This is an appeal by Ram Narain Singh and others, defendants, and it arises out of a suit brought by Shripat Singh and others, plaintiffs, for possession of a strip of land and for removal of certain constructions built on the same. Their allegation was that this strip of land belonged originally to one Deo Saran who utilised it as a sehan darwaza and that after Deo Saran's death long ago the plaintiffs entered into possession of the same and the defendants started making certain constructions some time prior to the year 1925 when the plaintiffs instituted the suit but subsequently withdrew it and now the defendants have again made certain new constructions and the plaintiffs want their demolition. The defence was that the defendants were the heirs of Deo Saran and were in possession of the plot of land mentioned in the plaint ever since the death of Deo Saran. Before I proceed to discuss the various points that arise in the case, and the arguments that have been advanced ...
Sri Ram Vs. Jai Kishan Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-13-1937
Reported in: AIR1938All37
Niamatullah, J.1. This is a second appeal by the plaintiff and arises out of a suit brought by him for recovery of the defendants' share of revenue alleged to have been paid by the plaintiff. The suit was one under Section 222, Agra Tenancy Act, and was brought before an Assistant Collector. The defendants pleaded that the plaintiff's father who was lambardar died in the year 1337-F, when the plaintiff alleges to have paid the revenue in question, that the plaintiff's father was bound to make collections diligently on behalf of all the co-sharers including the defendants, that in consequence of his negligence arrears were not collected from the tenants and that the plaintiff as representing his father was liable to pay to the defendants the tatter's share of the profits of 1337-F, and finally that the revenue paid by the plaintiff cannot be considered to have been paid on behalf of the defendants who had defaulted in paying their share. It was not made clear by the defendants that the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »