Allahabad Court November 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.
Pandit Sushil Chander Chaturvedi Vs. Wali Ullah and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-28-1940
Reported in: AIR1941All158
Dar, J.1. The plaintiff-appellant Pandit Shushil Chander Chaturvedi is the proprietor of a business known as Hanuman Glass Works at Firozabad in the district of Agra. The defendants are a Mahomedan family resident of Armara close to Mrozabad in Agra district. Defendants 1 and 2, Wali Ullah and Niamat Ullah, are own brothers and defendants 3 to 6 are their nephews being sons of their deceased brother Abdul Hamid. There was a fourth brother Said also who died before the institution of the suit out of which this appeal has arisen. According to the plaintiff the defendants are partners in three firms called Md. Said Abdul Hamid, Naimat Ullah Farid Uddin and Zahiruddin Gulam Ahmad. In the year 1930 on various dates these firms purchased certain glassware from the plaintiff and in the year 1931 a small sum of Rs. 5-8-0 was advanced by the plaintiff to these firms. In 1933, according to the plaintiff, accounts were made up of what was due to the plaintiff from these firms and it was found tha...
District Board Vs. Babu Ram
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-28-1940
Reported in: AIR1941All152
ORDERMulla, J.1. These are two applications in revision by the District Board, Dehra Dun, which raise the same question of law for consideration. In each case the District Board brought a suit for realizing a certain amount as tax on circumstances and property for the period 1934-35. The suit in each case was brought more than three years after the date on which the tax was payable. Both suits have been dismissed by the same learned Small Cause Court Judge on the ground that they being suits for recovery of money were subject to the three years rule of limitation and were consequently barred by time. The only question, for consideration in these cases is whether this view of the law of limitation taken by the learned Small Cause Court Judge is correct. Having considered the relevant provisions of the Limitation Act, I am clearly of the opinion that the learned Small Cause Court Judge was wrong in holding that the three years rule of limitation applied to these suits. They are not reall...
Shanti Sarup Das Vs. Asharfi Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-26-1940
Reported in: AIR1941All61
Collister, J.1. This is a defendant's second appeal arising out of a suit for the demolition of a building and for a permanent injunction to restrain the defendant from making any construction in future upon the plot in suit. There was a fixed-rate holding of 16 bighas belonging to one Jangi within the municipal limits of Benares. After Jangi's death the holding passed to his widow, Mt. Phulani. On 15th June 1936 Mt. Phu-lani sold 2 biswas of this holding to the defendant. We shall have occasion later on to particularise the main allegations in the plaint, but for the present it will suffice to say that in brief the plaintiff's case was that the defendant was unlawfully constructing a building on this plot of 2 biswas. He accordingly instituted this suit for a mandatory and for a prohibitory injunction. The defence, so far as it is necessary to state it for the purpose of this appeal, was that the defendant had committed no act which was detrimental to cultivation, that he had not in a...
Pearey Lal and anr. Vs. Kunwar Rani M.L. Hira Devi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-26-1940
Reported in: AIR1941All150
Dar, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment and decree dated 11th September 1937 of the Civil Judge of Bijnor by which he reversed the judgment and decree dated 16th February 1937 of the Munsif of Nagina in a suit to enforce a mortgage. The respondent Rani Hira Devi is the proprietor of two villages Fattuwallah and Jogiawallah in the district of Bijnor. On 17th August 1928 she executed a theka of these two villages in favour of Piarey Lal and Babu Ram, the appellants in this appeal. The theka was for a period of 7 years from 1336 F to 1342 F and the rent reserved under the theka was Rupees 3000 for the year 1336 F and Rs. 3350 for subsequent years. To secure the due payment of the lease money, on 17th August 1928 a hypothecation bond, was executed by Piarey Lal and Babu Ram in favour of Rani Hira Devi. On or about 7th April 1930 an arrangement took place between Piarey Lal and Babu Ram on one side and Ani Hira Devi on the other as a result of which Piarey Lal and Babu Ram agreed t...
Maha Ram and anr. Vs. Harbans
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-22-1940
Reported in: AIR1941All101
Thom, C.J.1. This is a defendants' appeal arising out of a suit under Section 44, Agra Tenancy Act. The plaintiff sought to eject the defendants from certain plots of land. The defendants in their defence pleaded that they were proprietors of these plots and not tenants. In these circumstances the revenue Court in which the suit was instituted referred an issue on the question of proprietary title to the civil Court under Section 271, Agra Tenancy Act. The record of the suit was submitted to the civil Court as directed by Section 271, Agra Tenancy Act. The parties thereupon presented a joint application to the Munsif in which they prayed that the matter in issue be referred to arbitration. The issue was referred to arbitration and in accordance with the provisions of Schedule 2, Civil P.C., arbitrators were appointed and award was pronounced. Objections to the award which was against the defendants were dismissed by the learned Munsif who accepted the award, decided the issue submitted...
Bansi Lal and anr. Vs. Chairman, Town Area Committee
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-22-1940
Reported in: AIR1941All144
ORDERCollister, J.1. This is a plaintiff's application in revision under Section 115, Civil P.C. The suit out of which the application arises was instituted by the plaintiff for (1) a declaration that he was not carrying on business within the limits of the Town Area Committee of Saidpur in the district of Ghazipur and was therefore not liable to pay tax, (2) for the refund of a sum of Rs. 143-14-0 illegally realised from the plaintiff by the Town Area Committee on account of tax, plus Rs. 35 as interest, and (3) for release of the goods belonging to the plaintiff which had been attached by means of a distress warrant. The suit was dismissed by the trial Court. The plaintiff - the applicant before me - appealed, but on the date of hearing neither he nor his counsel was present and the Court dismissed the appeal.2. The plea taken before me by learned Counsel for the applicant is that the learned Judge of the appellate Court dismissed the appeal on merits and thereby acted without jurisd...
Ujagar Lal and ors. Vs. Bahadur Lokendra Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-22-1940
Reported in: AIR1941All169
Braund, J.1. This is a first appeal arising out of a mortgage suit of a quite simple character. The suit was by certain plaintiffs suing as mortgagees to enforce their security against two defendants, who were mortgagors. The result of the suit was that the plaintiffs were given the usual preliminary mortgage decree for sale, and the only contest in this appeal is whether, instead of having a preliminary decree for sale, they are entitled to have as they desire, a decree for foreclosure. I find that this very simple suit has been pending for over seven years. The mortgagees started this endeavour to get this money back by instituting this suit on 7th September 1033, and they paid, as the price of the justice that they hoped to get, a not inconsiderable court, fee of Rs. 1470. They obtained their decree for sale on 3rd February 1935, and it has taken till now a period of nearly six years for the, matter to come in first appeal to this Court. The facts are that, on 31st August 1925, the ...
Himmat Sahai Vs. Sheikh Mohd. MoIn and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-21-1940
Reported in: AIR1941All200
Braund, J.1. This is a first appeal from a decree of the second subordinate Judge of Gorakhpur delivered on 19th of July 1935, rather over five years ago. The suit was a mortgage suit and the circumstances are a trifle complicated. On 26th March 1913, Lala Batuk Sahai, who is defendant 1 to the suit, executed a mortgage of two one-anna shares in a certain property in the village of Madhopur in favour of one Sheikh Muhammad Husain, to secure a principal sum of Rs. 2000 and interest thereon. I do not know why the mortgage was taken in the name of Sheikh Muhammad Husain as the mortgagee, but it is admitted for the purpose of the present suit that the real mortgagee was one Maulvi Muhammad Mohsin Sahib, the brother of Muhammad Husain. The next event in order of date is that on 15th June 1914 the same mortgagor, Lala Batuk Sahai, executed a second mortgage of the same two one-anna shares in favour of the present appellant, Lala Himmat Sahai, who is defendant 4 to the suit. It covered all th...
Emperor Vs. Afaq HusaIn Jauhar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-20-1940
Reported in: AIR1941All70
1. This is an appeal by the Local Government against the acquittal of the respondent, Afaq Husain Jauhar. The respondent is the editor, printer and publisher of the Urdu newspaper 'Khaiyat', Cawnpore. On 17th March 1939, an order was issued by the learned District Magistrate, Cawnpore, under Section 144, Criminal P.C. prohibiting the public living in the areas administered by the Cawnpore Municipality, the Cawnpore Cantonment Authority and the Juhi Notified Area Committee from printing or publishing in any way any article, leaflet or pamphlet, etc. likely to increase communal tension or to excite inter-communal feeling and lead to a breach of the public peace. The respondent published an article under the headline 'Sanginon ke saye men Kailash Hotel men baja', (i.e. 'music in the Kailash Hotel under the protection of bayonets'), on 3rd April 1939 in his paper in disobedience of the order. He was prosecuted under Section 188, I.P.C. for this publication and was convicted and sentenced t...
Jaggo Bai Vs. Harihar Prasad Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-18-1940
Reported in: AIR1941All66
Thom, C.J.1. This is a defendant-appellant's application for leave to appeal to the Privy Council. The suit against the defendant was one for specific performance of a deed of assignment of certain mortgagee rights. The defendant along with others agreed to sell certain mortgagee rights to the plaintiff for a sum of Rs. 52,000 on 16tb December 1928. Upon that date the plaintiff paid half the purchase price, namely Rs. 26,000. For reasons which it is unnecessary to mention in disposing of this application the deed of assignment was never completed. The plaintiff in his plaint prayed for an order against the defendant to execute the deed of assignment and in the alternative for a refund of the amount paid with interest. At a late stage in the proceedings in the trial Court, the plaintiff withdrew his prayer for an order for specific performance. In the result the trial Court decreed the suit for Rs. 26,000 plus interest at the rate of 6 per cent. The defendant appealed. This Court affirm...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »