Allahabad Court January 1940 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.
Mohan Lal Vs. Gopal Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-19-1940
Reported in: AIR1940All347
Bennet, J.1. This second appeal is filed by the plaintiff, Mohan Lal, whose suit for possession as a reversioner was decreed by the trial Court but was dismissed by the lower Appellate Court. The appellant plaintiff set up the following pedigree:2. (for pedigree see p. 348)3. The plaintiff and his cousin, Bans Gopal who was alive at the time of the plaint were the two nearest reversioners of the deceased, Babu Ram, son of Debi Din. This man is not to be confused with another Babu Ram appearing in the same pedigree. As Bans Gopal did not join in the suit, the plaintiff claimed one-half share of the property. Against the claim of the plaintiff the defendant Gopal Lal set up a registered will executed on 1st December 1902 by Babu Ram. The trial Court held that defendant had no interest under that will and the lower Appellate Court has held to the contrary. The will sets out as follows:I, therefore, in order to keep my name as also that of my forefathers alive make the following will while...
Asharfi Singh Vs. Chandrika Prasad Kuari
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-19-1940
Reported in: AIR1940All389
1. The questions of law that arise for decision in the present appeal are: (1) Whether a landholder is entitled to a mandatory injunction restraining a fixed-rate tenant from doing any act or omission detrimental to the land in his holding or inconsistent with the purpose for which it was let; and (2) Whether such a suit, if maintainable, is cognizable by the Civil or by the Revenue Court? There is no longer any dispute about the facts which have given rise to these questions. The facts are as follows: B. Asharfi Singh, plaintiff-appellant, is the proprietor of plot No. 2519 which was the fixed-rate tenancy of one Sarju. This plot is now included within the municipal limits of Benares. On Sarju's death the plot was inherited by his widow Mt. Ganeshi who sold the same to Shreemati Rajmata Chandrika Prasad Kunwari, defendant-respondent, on 22nd December 1916. The defendant, with a view to build a temple, laid foundation which has come to the plinth. The suit giving rise to the present ap...
Hakim Mohd. Bashirullah Khan Vs. Collector, Shahjahanpur, as Manager C ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-18-1940
Reported in: AIR1940All245
Ganga Nath, J.1. This is an appeal by a decree-holder and arises out of execution proceedings of a decree for costs against the respondent. The respondent has made an application under the Encumbered Estates Act. An objection was taken by him that the decree-holder was not entitled to execute his decree. The learned Civil Judge upheld the objection. Against that order the decree-holder has come up here in appeal. It was contended for the appellant that the decree which is sought to be executed was passed by this Court on 8th September 1937, some time after the order had been passed by the Collector on the application of the opposite party under the Encumbered Estates Act. This Court confirmed the decrees of the lower Courts. The decrees of the lower Courts awarding costs to the appellant had been passed long before the application under the Encumbered Estates Act was made by the opposite party. The High Court's decree in respect of the costs which were incurred in the High Court was, n...
Dwarika Halwai Vs. Sitla Prasad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-18-1940
Reported in: AIR1940All256
Bennet, J.1. This is an appeal by Dwarka Halwai, defendant, originally an auction-purchaser, against a decree in favour of the plaintiff. The present decree of the trial Court is that the decree in O.S. No. 188 of 1924 dated 24th September 1924 of the Court of the Munsif, Syed Ali Akbar v. Sitla Prasad and others, is null and void and is not binding on the plaintiff and the plaintiff shall receive possession over the house in dispute. Syed Ali Akbar brought a suit, No. 16 of 1922, and obtained a decree on a promissory note against Maksudan Das. Syed Ali Akbar attached a house in Shahganj, district Jaunpur, in execution of this decree. Mt. Ram Pati, the wife of Maksudan Das, judgment-debtor, objected under Order 21, Rule 58, Civil P.C., that her mother Mt. Shiam Kunwar had built this house and that the house belonged to her on the death of her mother and that Maksudan Das had no interest in the house. Mt. Ram Pati then died and the present plaintiff Sitla Prasad, a minor, was substitute...
Rameshwar Dayal and ors. Vs. Hari Kishen
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-17-1940
Reported in: AIR1940All351
Bennet, J.1. This is a second appeal by the defendants against a decree of the lower Appellate Court in favour of the plaintiff. The facts are that in 1929 Inderjit and his son, Ram Chandar, executed a simple mortgage deed of zamindari for Rs. 540 in favour of Mewa Ram. On 1st December 1930 the mortgagors sold their equity of redemption to defendants 1 to 3 for Rs. 3000, of which Rs. 928-8-0 was left to pay to Mewa Ram. In 1936 the vendees defendants tendered payment under the terms of the Agricultrists' Relief Act and learned Counsel refers to Section 12 of that Act although this Section is not mentioned in the judgments of the Courts below. The amount of interest was reduced under that Act and the debt was discharged by payment of Rs. 732-13-0 and therefore there was a difference of Rs. 195-11-0. Indarjit died and Ram Chandar sold to the plaintiff the right to recover the balance of Rs. 195-11-0 from the vendees. One defence in the trial Court was that the sale deed was spurious but ...
Firm Lachhman Das Chhiddu Lal Vs. L. Babu Lal Surety and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-15-1940
Reported in: AIR1940All304
Verma, J.1. This is an appeal by the decree-holder and arises out of proceedings for the execution of a decree, which is one for money. The judgment-debtor was arrested and was brought before the Court on 6th February 1933 when he made an application under Section 55, Civil P.C., that he intended to file a petition for adjudication as an insolvent. He was directed to file a security bond in accordance with that Section and the respondent, Babu Lal, executed a security bond which was filed, and the judgment-debtor was released. The judgment-debtor did apply to the Insolvency Court and an order for adjudication was actually passed in his favour. The present appellant appealed against that order and the District Court allowed his appeal and dismissed the application for adjudication on 28th March 1935. Thereafter, the decree-holder on 25th July 1935 filed the application which has given rise to this appeal. By this application the decree-holder prayed that the surety be required to produc...
Faiyaz Ahmad and anr. Vs. Jamal Uddin
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-12-1940
Reported in: AIR1940All337
Iqbal Ahmad, J. 1. This appeal, though filed as an appeal against a decree, is really an appeal against an order of remand passed by the District Judge of Agra in a suit filed by Jamaluddin plaintiff-respondent under Section 33, U.P. Agriculturists' Relief Act (Act 27 of 1934). The facts that led to the suit are as follows: In the year 1934 Jamaluddin executed two simple mortgage deeds in favour of the defendant-appellants mortgaging three items of properties. After the execution of the mortgage deeds, Jamaluddin transferred two items of the mortgaged properties to Hameed Bano, his mother-in-law and Hameed Bano undertook the liability to pay the amount due on the basis of the two mortgages. Hameed Bano was and is admittedly a non-agriculturist. Jamaluddin then filed the suit under Section 33 of the Act for account. Ha impleaded only the mortgagees as defendants to the suit and did not implead Hameed Bano. The mortgagee defendants contested the suit on two grounds. Firstly they maintain...
Badri Lonia and ors. Vs. Pandit Dwarka Prasad Ram Shukla
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-11-1940
Reported in: AIR1940All240
Thom, C.J.1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit in which the plaintiff who is a zamindar seeks an order for the demolition of a house which has been erected upon parti land in front of the defendant's house. The main defence to the suit was that the house had been erected by the defendant with the implied permission of the zamindar who had acquiesced in the construction. This defence has not been sustained in the lower Appellate Court. Upon a consideration of the evidence the learned Civil Judge has reached the conclusion that far from acquiescing in the construction of the house the plaintiff took active steps to prevent the construction being completed.2. It was contended in appeal however that under the provisions of the Tenancy Act of 1939 a defendant who is a ryot in the village in which his house is situated was entitled to build a residential house upon the parti land in front of the existing house. In support of this contention learned Counsel for the appellant ...
Shanti Lal Vs. Mt. Jamni Kuer
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-11-1940
Reported in: AIR1940All331
Bennet, J.1. This is an execution first appeal by a judgment-debtor Shanti Lal who has made an objection which has been disallowed by the Court below. The facts are that Shanti Lal brought a suit No. 128 of 1926 and his suit was dismissed by the Subordinate Judge of Budaun on 26th February 1927 and a decree was granted against him for costs in favour of defendant 2 Sheo Debi and defendant 3 Mt. Jamni Kunwar. Shanti Lal appealed to the High Court and the High Court dismissed his appeal with costs on 11th December 1930. On 4th December 1933 the holder of the decree for costs applied to the Subordinate Judge of Budaun to transfer the decree to the Munsif of Khurja for execution. This was granted. It is this application which it is claimed saves limitation. On 8th January 1934 an application was made to the Munsif of Khurja for execution. On 1st February 1934 that application was struck off, and it was infructuous. On 8th January 1936 Mt. Jamni Kunwar, one of the holders of the decree for ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Indra Sen Raizada
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-10-1940
Reported in: AIR1940All154
ORDERIqbal Ahmad and Bajpai JJ.1. The questions that arise for decision in the present case, which is a reference by the Income-tax Commissioner under Section 66(2), Income-tax Act, are of such general importance and are beset with such difficulties that we consider it desirable that they be decided by a Full Bench. Lala Inder Sen Raizada, the assessee, is a money-lender and deals in precious stones. He also owns some horses, keeps a stable and runs the horses in races. He also bets in races on his horses and other horses. An account styled as the 'racing account' is maintained by the assessee in his account books. That account shows that in the 'previous year,' which was the accounting year, the assessee suffered a total loss of Rs. 8064. Out of this amount, the loss incurred in betting was Rs. 7454 and the loss in running horses at the races was Rs. 610. It may here be mentioned that out of this sum of Rs. 610, Rs. 185 were spent in purchasing a stop-watch, and it is agreed on all ha...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »