Allahabad Court August 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.
Hrishikesh Sanyal Vs. A.P. Bagchi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-09-1940
Reported in: AIR1940All497
Collister, J.1. Upon an application by one Hrishikesh Sanyal notice was issued to A.P. Bagchi, a practising lawyer of Allahabad, to show cause why he should not be committed for contempt of Court. The notice has been duly served, and we have beard counsel for both parties. It is necessary to state a few preliminary facts. The parties are related to each other by marriage. The opposite party's younger brother-who died in 1928-had married the applicant's sister, and there are five children of that union, all minors. The mother-who had been appointed guardian of the minors after the death of her husband, died on 24th December 1939. The applicant lives at Benares and the opposite party at Allahabad. On 2nd January 1940, the opposite party applied to the District Judge of Allahabad praying for his appointment as guardian of the minors. He also prayed that he be appointed ad interim guardian and that an inventory of the property in the hands of the applicant be taken. Notice was issued and v...
Sahib Nasib Khan and anr. Vs. Mt. Kutbunnisa and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-06-1940
Reported in: AIR1941All18
Iqbal Ahmad, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for the partition of a bungalow within the municipal limits of the town of Roorkee in the district of Saharanpur. Before stating the questions that arise for decision in the present appeal, it would be convenient to set forth, as briefly as possible, the facts that have given rise to those questions. The bungalow in dispute along with other house properties belonged to one Kale Khan who died leaving four sons and two daughters. The family tree of Kale Khan is as follows: KALE KHAN | __________________________________________________________________________________ | | | | | | Ismail Khan Mehtab Khan Sahib Nasib Khan Yakub Khan Mt. Qutab-un-nisa Mt. Majid- deft. 1 deft. 2 pltff. 1 | daughtger; pltff.2 un-nisa dau- | ghter defendants 6 to 11 | Mt. Zahur Fatima dauther pltiff. 3 | ____________________________________________________________________| | | | M. Said Khan, son deft. 3 Mt. Masooda Begum daughter deft 4. Mt. Nazir Patima daught...
R.M. Jassawala Vs. Amulya Chandra Dutta
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-06-1940
Reported in: AIR1940All494
Braund, J.1. The facts of this second appeal are very simple, but they give rise to a nice point of construction of the proviso to Section 78, Provincial Insolvency Act. On 2nd April 1931, the appellant obtained a decree for three thousand rupees odd against the respondent. On 14th May 1931, the respondent filed an insolvency petition under the Provincial Insolvency Act and on 14th August 1931, an order of adjudication was made against him. Almost four years then elapsed and on 5th July 1935 an application was made to the Court for amendment of the adjudication under Section 35 of the Act. On 11th July the appellant, by his agent, submitted a proof of his debt under the decree but the only step the Court took was to give the appellant until 22nd July to file the power of attorney under which his agent had sworn the affidavit in support of the proof. On or before 22nd July, this power of attorney was duly lodged in Court and an order was made by the Court to the effect that the 'proof' ...
Kr. Digbijya Singh and anr. Vs. Budh Sen and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-06-1940
Reported in: AIR1940All520
Verma, J.1. This is a plaintiffs' appeal and arises out of a suit under Section 33, U.P. Agriculturists' Relief Act (Local Act, 27 of 1934). The Court below has dismissed the suit. The transaction in respect of which the suit was brought is a usufructuary mortgage made on 11th March 1905 the principal mortgage money being Rs. 30,000. It appears that the mortgagee was put in possession of certain property which was mortgaged to him, with the stipulation that he was to enjoy the profits in lieu of interest on the mortgage money. It further appears that during the currency of the mortgage certain leases were executed by the mortgagee in favour of the mortgagor Kr. Digbijya Singh who alone by a partition in the mortgagor's family remained interested in the transaction as a mortgagor. One of these leases was executed on 29th June 1915 and Digbijya Singh agreed to pay to the mortgagee a sum of Rs. 1725 per annum on account of the profits of the property. When the term fixed in this lease exp...
Ramchandra and anr. Vs. Ram Lal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-02-1940
Reported in: AIR1940All500
Bajpai, J.1. This appeal is connected in a sense with First Appeal No. 164 of 1938. First Appeal No. 38 of 1937 was filed in this Court against the decision of the Civil Judge of Fatehgarh dated 17th November 1936. Appeal No. 164 of 1938 was filed in the Court of the District Judge of Farrukhabad against the same decision of the Civil Judge. Presumably, the appellants were in doubt as to whether the appeal lay to this Court or to the Court of the District Judge and that is why they filed two appeals, but later they moved this Court that the appeal pending in the Court of the District Judge be transferred to this Court and be connected with the first appeal pending in this Court. This prayer was granted and that is why we have two first appeals before us, but both of them, as we said before, are against the same decision. One judgment therefore will govern both the first appeals; as a matter of fact, there is necessity of delivering only one judgment in the appeal pending in this Court,...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›