Allahabad Court October 1942 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.
Mt. Sobadra and ors. Vs. Shri Thakur Behari Ji Maharaj Through Moti La ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-08-1942
Reported in: AIR1943All87
Dar J.1. This is an appeal against a judgment and decree, dated 3rd April 1939, of the Civil Judge of Aligarh by which he reversed a judgment and decree, dated 18th July 1938, of the Munsif of Hathras in a suit for possession of immovable property and of its mesne profits. The property in suit which consists of a house and two shops at Hathras is the estate of a Hindu named Hetram, son of Radhe Lal, who died some time ago in the city of Hathras without leaving any issue. On his death his mother Mt. Renuka, widow of Radhe Lal, succeeded to his estate and shortly before her death on 26th May 1936, Mt. Renuka made a gift of the said property in favour of a Hindu idol Shri Thakur Behariji Maharaj. On 30th September 1937, Mt. Sahodra, who is a daughter of Naunidh Ram the brother of Radhe Lal and Mt. Sahodra's three sons, Gokal Chand, Moolchand and Bhagwandas, raised an action in the Court of the Munsif of Hathras against the idol Shri Thakur Behariji Maharaj and against its manager Hotilal ...
Roshan Lal Vs. Babu Lal Alias Babu Bam
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-02-1942
Reported in: AIR1943All84
Bajpai, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendant Roshan Lal. The suit of the plaintiff was dismissed by the trial Court but it was decreed by the lower appellate Court and hence the defendant, has made this second appeal. The lower appellate Court set aside the decree of the trial Court, decreed the plaintiff's claim for possession and for recovery of Rs. 87-8-0 as mesne profits. The facts giving rise to the present litigation might be briefly stated: It appears that one Bhopal was the occupancy tenant of a certain holding. He died in December 1932. The patwari seven days after reported that Bhopal had died and one Roshan was his collateral and as Roshan had shared in cultivation with Bhopal, Roshan's name might be entered as an occupancy tenant in the revenue papers. The usual proclamation under Section 197, U. P. Land Revenue Act, was issued and two persons Mul Chand and Bhup Singh who were zamindars of the village objected to the entry of Roshan's name as an occupancy tenant. They co...
Babu Ram Vs. Mohd. Hasan Khan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-02-1942
Reported in: AIR1943All241
Yorke, J.1. This is a second appeal in a suit for possession of materials of an ahata. The plaintiff alleged that he was the owner as zamindar of the ahata in question and that one Mohar Singh son of Prom Sukh had been residing in it as a raiyat, that on 30th March 1939 Mohar Singh made a gift to defendant 1 both of the materials of the ahata and of the right of residence without any right and without any consent of the plaintiff, and it was said that the plaintiff was entitled to recover proprietary possession over the materials and it was said that defendant 1 was in possession over these as a trespasser. The defence put forward was that Mohar Singh was a zamindar in the village and was in possession over the ahata not as a raiyat but as a zamindar. The ownership of the plaintiff was therefore denied and it was said that the ahata belonged originally to Prem Sukh whose heirs were Mohar Singh and defendant 1 who had been all along in possession and that defendant 1 was the heir of Moh...
iqbal Ahmad and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-01-1942
Reported in: AIR1943All49
Yorke, J.1. This is an appeal by Iqbal Ahmad, Afzal Ahmad, Laiq Ahmad and 13 others who have been convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge of Allahabad, of offences under Sections 324, 325, 452 and 426, Penal Code (all these sections are to be read with Section 149, Penal Code) and sentenced all of them under Section 452, Penal Code to undergo three years' rigorous imprisonment and also to pay a fine of Rs. 100 each with two months' further rigorous imprisonment in default and under Section 426, Penal Code, to undergo each of them to one month's rigorous imprisonment. Under Section 324, Penal Code, the first three appellants have been sentenced each to undergo 21/2 years' rigorous imprisonment while the remaining appellants are sentenced to 11/2 years' rigorous imprisonment. Under Section 325 the first three appellants are sentenced to 41/2 years' rigorous imprisonment each with a fine of Rs. 150 or in default three months' rigorous imprisonment. The remaining appellants are sentence...
Kunai Singh Vs. Lakshmi Prasad Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-01-1942
Reported in: AIR1943All111
Hamilton, J.1. This is a second appeal by a defendant against a decision of the Additional Civil Judge of Jaunpur. The suit from which this appeal arises was brought in the Court of the Additional Munsif of Jaunpur by Lachmi Prasad Singh and Debi Prasad Singh. Lachmi Prasad Singh was apparently 20 years of age in 1941 when the decree of the appellate Court was passed and Debi Prasad Singh was apparently 7 years of age then, though it is possible that these ages were copied from some entry in the original suit which was filed in 1938. In any case Lachmi Prasad Singh was not born before 1918 and Debi Prasad Singh is 13 years younger. The suit was for a declaration that the plaintiffs' rights as reversioners were not affected by a certain compromise on which Suit No. 92 of 1916 was decreed. The first Court dismissed the suit on the ground that the plaintiffs were bound by that compromise but the lower appellate Court granted a decree declaring that the compromise decree No. 92 of 1916 of ...
Debi Das and anr. Vs. Mukat Behari Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-01-1942
Reported in: AIR1943All177
Dar, J.1. This is an appeal against a judgment and decree, dated 24th August 1936 of the Subordinate Judge of Bareilly in a suit for possession of immovable property and for recovery of its mesne profits. The property in suit which consists of certain villages in Bareilly District is alleged to be the estate of a Hindu named Chhote Lal, who died in or about the year 1914 leaving two widows, Mt. Janki Kuer and Mt. Sunder Kuer. The last surviving widow died on 12th August 1933 and on 2lst May 1935 the plaintiffs, Debi Das and Beni Ram, who are two own brothers, raised an action in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Bareilly for recovery of possession of the said estate with its mesne profits against 16 persons who were alleged to hold the said estate under various transfers from the said widows of Chhote Lal. The plaintiffs claimed that they were the reversionary heirs of the said Chhote Lal and on the death of the last widow without any issue they were entitled to the said estate. Th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›