Allahabad Court July 1938 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.
Rama Kant Malaviya and anr. Vs. Satya NaraIn Malaviya
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-30-1938
Reported in: AIR1938All552
Bennet, Ag. C.J.1. This is a second appeal brought by two persons, Pt. Rama Kant Malaviya, Advocate, and Pt. Krishna Deo Chaube against a decree of the lower Appellate Court in a proceeding under Section 144, Civil P.C., for restitution. The matter in which this proceeding arose is as follows. The opposite party respondent, Pt. Satya Narain Malaviya, brought a suit for damages for defamation against 12 persons including the two appellants before us and the proceedings which followed were as follows:7-11-27 - Decree for damages. Rs. 300 for defamation and Rs. 72 costs against twelve persons.7-12-27 - Ten of these persons including appellants appealed and two persons Mahadeo Vyas and Thakur Prasad did not appeal.13-1-28 - Application by plaintiff for execution against defendant 2, Brij Mohan Dube; defendants, Pt. Krishna Deo Chaube, appellant; defendant 4, Bechu Ram, and defendant 9 Parsotam Dube. This actual application is not against Pt. Rama Kant.23-1-28 - An application to the Court ...
Ram NaraIn Vs. Municipal Board
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-29-1938
Reported in: AIR1938All540
Harries, J.1. This is a plaintiff's second appeal against concurrent decrees of the Courts below dismissing his claim for certain moneys due under a contract entered into between him and the Municipal Board of Muttra. The plaintiff is a contractor and performed certain work for the defendant Board under a contract entered into between the parties. After the work was completed, a dispute arose and the defendant Board refused to pay a sum of Rs. 3019 which the plaintiff alleged was due to him upon the contract. Eventually the plaintiff brought this suit claiming a sum of Rs. 3847 being this alleged sum of Rs. 3019 alleged to be due to him under the contract together with certain security money and interest. The defendant Board raised a number of defences and eventually the plaintiff's claim was dismissed by the Court of first instance. On appeal to the learned Civil Judge the decision of the learned Munsif was upheld upon the ground that the plaintiff had failed to serve a notice upon th...
Firm Haji Faizullah Ebad Ullah Vs. Badruzzaman and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-29-1938
Reported in: AIR1938All587
Verma, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff firm Haji Faizullah Ebadullah and arises out of a suit for demolition of certain constructions put up by the defendants first party, namely Badruzzaman and Muhammad Ayub, on a piece of land in village Kopaganj which the plaintiff described in the plaint as his 'sehan darwaza' (courtyard), and for a perpetual injunction to those defendants restraining them from doing in future any act which may create any difficulty in the use of the courtyard by the plaintiff or which may bring about his dispossession. The allegations in the plaint are that the plaintiff is the owner of a house facing south, that in front of that house there is a chabutra and beyond that chabutra there is open land extending up to the public road, that this open land has been in possession of the plaintiff and its predecessors as the open space in front of their door ('sehan darwaza'), that in that house the business of commission agency and selling grain and sugar, etc. h...
Badrul Zaman and anr. Vs. Firm Haji Faiz Ullah Abdullah
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-29-1938
Reported in: AIR1938All635
Bennet, Ag. C.J.1. This is a civil revision by two plaintiffs, Badrul Zaman and Mohammad Ayub, against a decree of the Munsif of Mohammadabad Gohna, District Azamgarh, dismissing their suit for possession under Section 9, Specific Belief Act. The suit was brought against Firm Haji Faizullah Ebadullah. The facts of the case are contained in the judgment of the Letters Patent Appeal No. 80 of 1935 which has been delivered by this Bench to-day and the judgment of the learned single Judge of this Court which dismissed the suit of this firm has been upheld. That suit was brought in 1931 by the firm claiming a plot of land 57 cubits long and 15 cubits wide in the town of Kopaganj on the ground that the firm had a right over this piece of ground for the purpose of carts going to the firm and standing on this piece of ground. Objection was taken to the action of Badrul Zaman and Mohammad Ayub defendants in that suit on the ground that they had obtained permission from the zamindar Bani Dandei ...
Chimman Lal and ors. Vs. Syed Zahur Uddin
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-28-1938
Reported in: AIR1938All548
Bennet, Ag. C.J.1. This is a Letters Patent Appeal by Chimman Lal and certain other Hindus of Bareilly City, plaintiffs, whose suit has been dismissed by a learned single Judge of this Court. The plaintiffs brought a suit on the allegations in para. 10 of the plaint that there was a pucca well known as 'Chah Sheran' and pucca steps and some land on the four sides of the well appurtenant thereto and some trees in Bareilly City entered in the village papers of Qasba Hafizpur as a public wakf property, and that the Hindus had acquired rights of easement in the property, asking that an injunction should be issued against the defendant to restrain him from interfering with the general public taking water from this well and the general public using the land appurtenant to the well as a resting place at certain Hindu and Mahomedan fairs. The defence was that the Municipal Board of Bareilly had been in possession of the well and land for more than 50 years and had made a sale deed of the prope...
Agrenath Misir Vs. Ram Ratan Pandey and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-27-1938
Reported in: AIR1938All544
Mohammad Ismail, J.1. The facts that have given rise to this appeal are very simple. The plaintiffs Ram Ratan Pande and Durbasa Pande separately lent some money to Ram Ratan, deceased, on the security of two bonds. Ram Ratan then executed a sale deed In favour of defendant 1 and left part of the sale consideration in the hands of the vendee to be paid to the plaintiffs in liquidation of the debt due by Ram Ratan in favour of the plaintiffs. Some time after the execution of the sale deed, Ram Ratan died and was succeeded by his widow Mt. Ramsaki. Each of the plaintiffs brought a separate suit for recovery of the money due under the bond executed by Ram Ratan, deceased. In these suits, apart from the widow Mt. Ramsaki, the appellant Agrenath Misir was also impleaded. The suit against the widow was decreed but for obvious reasons the vendee was exempted as there was no privity of contract between the plaintiffs and the vendee. After the termination of this litigation, the widow executed a...
Mt. Guda Kueri and anr. Vs. Adnath Pande and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-26-1938
Reported in: AIR1938All546
Bajpai, J.1. Reference may be made to my order dated 14th September 1937 by which I remitted one issue to the lower Appellate Court, because a definite finding was necessary and originally the lower Appellate Court had not recorded such a definite finding. There was yet another matter on which the lower Appellate Court in the first instance had not said anything and I made it clear that it would be necessary for the Court to decide that matter as well. After remand, definite findings have been reached by the lower Appellate Court, and on those findings the rival contentions of the parties are that the appeal ought to be decided in their favour.2. Although the facts are stated in the judgments of the Courts below and in my previous order also, yet it might be necessary to recapitulate them shortly and state the findings of fact which are now binding. A pedigree is given in the judgment of the lower Appellate Court after remand and that pedigree is admitted. The property in dispute belon...
Babu Govind Das and anr. Vs. Mt. Indrawati and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-25-1938
Reported in: AIR1938All557
Bennet, Ag. C.J.1. In this civil revision an issue has been referred to the Full Bench as follows:Can the Court be considered to have decided a case within the meaning of Section 115, Civil P.C., where it has set aside the award and superseded the arbitration pending a suit which is consequently to be tried by the Court?2. The facts of the case in which this issue arose may be briefly noted. In the Court of the Additional Civil Judge at Muttra the parties in O.S. No. 33 of 1931 agreed that the suit should be submitted to arbitration under Schedule 2, Civil P.C., to arbitrators agreed on by the parties, but the provisions of Para. 4 were not carried out and no provision was made for a difference of opinion among the arbitrators either by the appointment of an umpire or by declaring that the decision of the majority should prevail. The arbitrators differed and two filed an award in favour of the other party. Both parties made objections and the Court held that the awards were not accordi...
Munnoo Lal Vs. P.K. Banerji, Official Receiver
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-25-1938
Reported in: AIR1938All555
Mohammad Ismail, J.1. This is a second appeal from order arising out of an insolvency matter. It appears that one Tulshi Ram had a mortgagee right in a mortgage. Tulshi Ram obtained a preliminary decree in the enforcement of the mortgage in his favour on 31st July 1931, from the Court of the learned Munsif of Hardoi. On 29th September 1931 Tulshi Ram transferred his rights under the decree in favour of the appellant Munnu Lal. The transferee thereupon applied to the Munsif for a final decree. During the pendency of the above mentioned suit, Tulshi Ram applied to the Insolvency Judge, Cawnpore, to be adjudged an insolvent. The learned Insolvency Judge declared him an insolvent on 15th January 1932. An Official Receiver was appointed by the Insolvency Court and he made an objection to the application of Munnu Lal for the passing of the final decree on the ground that the transfer in favour of Munnu Lal was fraudulent and without consideration. The learned Munsif framed several issues and...
W.K. Wesley Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-19-1938
Reported in: AIR1938All571
ORDERBennet, J.1. This is a reference by the learned Sessions Judge of Allahabad recommending that the conviction of Mr. W.K. Wesley, an Indian Christian Professor in the Agricultural Institute of Allahabad, who has been convicted under Sections 279 and 337, Penal Code, and under Section 16, Motor Vehicles Act, and who has been fined Rs. 75, Rs. 35, and Rs. 15, should be set aside. The case was tried by Mr. A.D. Pandit, I.C.S., City Magistrate of Allahabad and was tried summarily, but certain statements of the witnesses have been recorded. The points taken by the learned Sessions Judge are that the evidence does not establish that the accused was driving his motor car rashly or negligently or that he failed to comply with the rules under Section 16, Motor Vehicles Act. The small map will illustrate the scene of the accident:| || |_____________________| |_____________________Club Road o Club Gate_____________________ ______________________P.W. Mr. Lalta | |Prasad | |____________________...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »