Allahabad Court February 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.
Mazhar Ali Khan Vs. Mt. Kulsum Begam
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-07-1940
Reported in: AIR1940All315
Allsop, J.1. This is an appeal against an order of the learned District Judge of Shahjahanpur rejecting an application by the appellant, Mazhar Ali Khan, to be appointed guardian of the person and property of his niece, Mt. Riyazi Begam, a minor girl, aged 13 years in 1937. The minor was in the custody of her mother, Mt. Kulsum. The applicant alleged that Mt. Kulsum had been ill-treating the minor, had not educated her and had an interest adverse to hers in respect of property inherited from the minor's father. The learned Judge has disbelieved the evidence of ill-treatment. He thinks that want of education is no sufficient reason to take the girl out of the custody of her mother and on that point I agree with him. The allegation that the interests of the minor and her mother were adverse was based upon the fact that the mother had instituted a suit for recovery of her dower debt and had obtained a decree. The minor was naturally a necessary party to such a suit. So, I suppose, was the...
In Re: Prem Narain, Advocate
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-05-1940
Reported in: AIR1940All289
Thom, C.J.1. On 23rd April 1937 one Mazhar Alim filed a complaint against Babu Prem Narain, a legal practitioner practising in the Civil Courts of Agra. His complaint was referred to the Bar Council which framed the following charge against Babu Prem Narain:That you Babu Prem Narain being the counsel for the complainant Mr, Mazhar Alim in Civil Suits Nos. 217 and 218 of 1929 in the Court of the Munsif of Agra and appeals therefrom, and having determined to be counsel after the decision of the appeals, realized out of Court costs from the respondents, awarded to the complainant, without his consent, knowledge and instructions and failed to account for the same to the said complainant or to certify it in Court and thereby committed an act of professional misconduct.2. It will be observed that although one charge only was framed against Babu Prem Narain that charge really comprises two: firstly a charge of having realized money due under a decree in favour of his client and having failed ...
Ramanuj Das Vs. Ram Samukh Das and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-05-1940
Reported in: AIR1940All393
Allsop, J.1. This second appeal arises out of a suit for the recovery of revenue. The plaintiff-appellant is the assignee of the revenue from the Government and the defendant-respondent is a person in the position of the zamindar who is liable to pay the revenue. One of the defences was that the plaintiff had borrowed some money from the defendant and had entered into a specific agreement that his debt should be repaid by setting it off against the revenue as the revenue fell due. The defendant alleged on the basis of the agreement that his liability for the payment of revenue had been discharged. His contention was upheld by the Courts below. Two arguments have been addressed to me. One is that the learned Assistant Collector, who tried the suit, relied upon the evidence of the defendant's account books which were produced only on the date when the other evidence in the case was produced. The suggestion is that the plaintiff-appellant had no sufficient opportunity to meet this evidenc...
Kunwar Jaswant Singh Vs. Executive Officer, Municipal Board
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-02-1940
Reported in: AIR1940All346
Thom, C.J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal against an order of a learned Judge of this Court. The appeal arises out of a suit for the recovery of Rs. 48. Briefly the relevant facts are as follows: On 4th and 6th September 1934 the licensing inspector of the Municipal Board of Meerut stopped two thelas, the property of the plaintiff, and demanded a licensing fee of Rs. 12 in respect of each thelas. The thelas were taken to the Municipal Office and detained there. The thelawallas were allowed to return with their buffaloes and report to their employer. The plaintiff thereupon under protest paid the licensing fee demanded. In the suit out of which this appeal arises the plaintiff claimed a refund of Rs. 24 and further Rs. 24 in name of damages.2. The learned Munsif granted decree for the refund of the Rs. 24 and for Re. 1 in name of damages. The defendant appealed and in the lower Appellate Court the learned Civil Judge dismissed the suit on the finding that the Court had no jurisdiction t...
Chaube Mahendra Rao and ors. Vs. Lala Bishambhar Nath and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-01-1940
Reported in: AIR1940All270
Bajpai, J.1. This is an execution first appeal by the judgment-debtors. It came for hearing before a Division Bench on 10th May 1939 when that Bench came to the conclusion that the matter was of great importance and merited a reference to a Full Bench. Certain questions of fact had not been determined satisfactorily by the trial Court and therefore an issue was remitted to the Court below. The Court below returned its findings on the said issue and when the matter came again before the Division Bench on 6th November 1939 the papers were directed to be laid before the Hon'ble Chief Justice for the constitution of a Full Bench. The case has now come before us and we have come to the conclusion that the appeal ought to be dismissed. When the execution matter was before the Court below and when the appeal came for hearing before the Division Bench there was the authority of the Full Bench decision of this Court reported in Gobardhan Das v. Dau Dayal : AIR1932All273 and learned Counsel for ...
Ganga Bashi and ors. Vs. Jamna and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-01-1940
Reported in: AIR1940All343
Bennet, J.1. This is a second appeal by the defendants who are sweepers of a village called Karanbas against a declaration which has been granted by the lower Appellate Court. The plaintiffs are sweepers of Mauza Debai and they sue for a declaration that they were entitled to the exclusion of the defendants to take the coffins and ornaments of corpses of Hindus who lived in Mauza Debai and whose bodies were buried or cremated at the burning ghat in Karanbas. The defendants, on the other hand, alleged in a written statement that inasmuch as the cremation ghats at Karanbas fell in their circle therefore they were entitled to the coffins, etc. of the dead bodies of Hindus of Mauza Debai which were burnt at those cremation ghats. Both parties therefore set up an exclusive custom. The trial Court dismissed the suit holding that the custom was not proved and the lower Appellate Court has decreed it for a modified declaration to the effectthat the sweepers of Debai are entitled to take the co...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›