Allahabad Court August 1942 Judgments
District Board Vs. Sri Nawas
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-31-1942
Reported in: AIR1943All10
Dar, J. 1. This is an appeal and a cross-objection against a judgment and decree, dated 20th April 1936, of the Subordinate Judge of Budaun, in a suit for recovery of money as damages. The plaintiff, Sri Nawas, is the owner of certain buses which ply for hire in the district of Budaun. The defendant the District Board, Budaun, is a statutory body in which the public highways in the district of Budaun are vested and which manages them. On 26th November 1984, one of the buses of the plaintiff left Budaun station for Asafpur. As it reached the spot between miles Nos. 20 and 21 close to the village Kamalpur, it met with an accident and was burnt. The bus had a capacity of 29 seats. It was driven by a driver named Azhar Husain. At the place where the accident occurred, the road is partly metalled and partly kachcha. The central portion of the road which is about 12 feet wide is metalled. On both sides of the metalled road, there are patris and these patris vary in width at various places. O...
Tag this Judgment!Lalji and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-27-1942
Reported in: AIR1943All18
ORDERAllsop, J.1. This is an application in revision by five men who had been sentenced to three fines each under three sections of the Penal Code, the aggregate in each case amounting to Rs. 40. They appealed to the learned Sessions Judge who held that no appeal lay because there was a sentence of fine only of an amount less than Rs. 50. Learned Counsel argues before me that three different sentences of fine in each case amounted to a sentence under Section 415, Criminal P. C., by which two or more punishments were combined and that an appeal consequently lay. He relies upon Makrand Singh v. Ganga . The Chief Court at Oudh is the only Court apparently which takes the view that two sentences of fine passed under different sections amount to a combined sentence which gives rise to a right of appeal. The contrary view has been taken in Ali Haji v. Joinab Bibi : AIR1932Cal551 , in In re Venkataramayya : AIR1940Mad111 and in Provincial Government v. Bhivram Nanhya . The argument of the lea...
Tag this Judgment!Lachman Prasad Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-25-1942
Reported in: AIR1943All23
ORDERAllsop, J.1. This is an application in revision on behalf of one Lachman Prasad who has been bound over under Section 110, Criminal P. C. Learned Counsel has not stressed the merits of the case, but I have glanced through the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge and it certainly appears that he was rightly bound over. Learned Counsel has taken the point that his client was prejudiced because he was denied the right of a second cross-examination under the provisions of Section 256, Criminal P. C. He has referred me to Trilok v. Emperor : AIR1927All660 and Chandan v. Emperor : AIR1930All274 . A learned single Judge of this Court said in the first of these cases that a person whose conduct is under enquiry under the provisions of Section 117, Criminal P. C., should be given a second right to cross-examine witnesses produced against him in accordance with the provisions of Section 256, Criminal P. C. In the second case there was a passing reference to the same point. That was a case...
Tag this Judgment!Muktanath Tewari and anr. Vs. Vidyashanker Dube and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-24-1942
Reported in: AIR1943All67
ORDERBajpai, J.1. This is an application by the defendants and arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiffs for certain reliefs in the shape of a perpetual injunction and partition and possession. The suit was partially decreed by the trial Court. Then there was an appeal by the defendants and during the pendency of the appeal an application was made on behalf of the plaintiffs seeking permission to withdraw the suit with liberty to file a fresh suit. This application was granted by the lower appellate Court, It is against that order that the present application in revision has been filed, and it is contended that there is no such formal defect as is contemplated by Order 23, B. 1, Civil P. C., and the lower appellate Court has acted illegally and with material irregularity in the exercise of its jurisdiction in giving the permission to the plaintiffs. It appears that the plaintiffs based their title upon a certain deed of gift executed by their maternal grandmother, Mt. Bela. The ca...
Tag this Judgment!Hardwar Singh and anr. Vs. Hari Parshad Rai
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-21-1942
Reported in: AIR1943All24
Bajpai, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiffs whose suit for the recovery of Rs. 984-11-0 was dismissed by the Courts below. The facts are that the plaintiffs in the very first para. of their plaint said that on 7th Sawan Sudi Sambat 1992, corresponding to 6th August 1935, the defendant took Rs. 720 from the plaintiffs for legal necessities and executed a sarkhat, the basis of the suit, in favour of the plaintiffs and the promise was that the entire debt would be paid with interest at 1 per cent. per mensem. Along with the plaint they filed a document which in the district of Ballia and adjoining districts is called a sarkhat. Such a transaction in the eastern districts of these provinces is a well known mercantile transaction. The original date on the sarkhat was 7th sawan Badi, corresponding to 22nd July 1935, but the document, as it was tendered in Court, bore the date 7th sawan sudi, sambat 1992, corresponding to 6th August 1935. The defence with which we are concerned is that t...
Tag this Judgment!Pt. Gobardhan Vs. Pt. Prem Ballabh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-20-1942
Reported in: AIR1943All21
Collister, J.1. These are two second appeals by a defendant. The respondent is admittedly related to the appellant as an uncle. In 1934 a grant of nayabad land was made to the parties; but they did not reclaim it, and accordingly in September 1936 the patwari made a report recommending that the land be resumed. Notice was issued to the parties and they appeared and asked for an extension of time; and this was granted. The respondent's case is that he thereafter reclaim-ed the land at a cost of Rs. 273 and he instituted this suit for recovery of the appellant's half share of this amount together with interest. The defence was that a considerable area of the land granted to the parties was reclaimed by an outsider, a lady named Miss Lucy Wheeler, who was ultimately compelled by the Court to vacate the land when proceedings were taken against her under Section 145, Criminal P. C. It was further alleged in the written statement that the appellant had himself reclaimed such area of the land...
Tag this Judgment!Mt. Tulsha Devi Vs. Shah Chironju Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-18-1942
Reported in: AIR1943All1
Iqbal Ahmad, C.J.1. This is a judgment-debtor's appeal and arises under the following circumstances : The judgment-debtor appellant is a widow of the family of the respondents. There was a partition amongst the male members of the family of the. respondents sometime back and, in order to provide for the maintenance of the appellant, a village called Bijauli was given to her for her lifetime. It was farther agreed that the respondents will defray the expenses of the marriage of the daughters of the appellant. The respondents, however, committed a breach of this agreement and did not meet the expenses of the marriage of the daughters of the appellant. The appellant then brought a suit against the respondents for Rs. 18,000 on account of the expenses of her daughters' marriage and a decree for Rs. 7000 was passed in her favour by the trial Court. The respondents deposited the decretal amount in the Court below and filed an appeal in this Court. During the pendency of the appeal in this Co...
Tag this Judgment!Radha Swami Sat Sang Sabha Vs. Raj Narain
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-1942
Reported in: AIR1943All218
Bajpai, J.1. This is a reference under Section 61(1), Stamp Act, by an Inspector of Stamps who has been invested with the powers of a Collector under a Government notification. The facts which have led to this reference may be briefly stated. Suit No. 23 of 1938 was filed in the Court of the Judge, Small Cause Court, Agra, and one of the papers on which reliance was placed by a party was paper No. 93A. This document purports to be an agreement entered into between the Radha Swami Sat Sang Sabha, Dayalbagh Agra, who were the plaintiffs in the suit and Raj Narain, son of Lala Janki Das, resident of Dayalbagh Agra, who was a defendant in the suit. The Inspector of Stamps in the course of his inspection came across this document and he was of the opinion that the document was a bond and he, therefore, requested the learned Small Cause Court Judge to impound the document and realise the deficiency in stamp and penalty. He was of the view that the document ought t6 have borne a stamp duty of...
Tag this Judgment!Har Prasad and ors. Vs. Mohammad Usman Husain
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-12-1942
Reported in: AIR1943All2
Verma, J.1. This appeal has arisen out of proceedings under the U. P. Encumbered Estates Act (25 of 1934). The respondent, Sheikh Mohammad Usman Husain, is the landlord. He filed an application under Section 4 of the Act on 25th July 1935. In this application he stated that he had only one creditor to whom he owed about Rs. 24,000 and gave the name of that creditor as Rai Bahadur Sahu Har Prasad. He further stated in the application that he was the owner of two items of zamindari property, namely, a five biswas asli out of 20 biswas in village Ballia in the District of Pilibhit and a half share of village Lauwa in the District of Budaun. He alleged that the former share was worth Rs. 20,000, that the latter was worth Rupees 30,000 and that thus the total value of these two items of property was Rs. 50,000. In due course he filed a written statement under Section 8 of the Act. In this document he stated that the creditor had filed a suit against him for the recovery of Rs. 26,085-4-6. H...
Tag this Judgment!Subedar Singh Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-12-1942
Reported in: AIR1943All272
Collister, J.1. Since there is a disagreement between us as regards one of the appellants, namely Subedar Singh, this case must be referred to a third Judge under Section 429, Criminal P. C. It is only the case of this particular appellant which need be referred; not the whole case. In Sarat Chandra Mitra v. Emperor ('11) 38 Cal. 202. Mookerjee J. observed :I am not now concerned with the question of the trial of two prisoners with regard to one of whom the Judges composing the Court of appeal may be agreed in their opinion while as regards the other the Judges may be equally divided in opinion. In such a contingency it is quite possible to maintain the view that, upon a reasonable interpretation of the term 'case' what has to be laid before another Judge is the ease of the prisoner as to whom the Judges are equally divided in opinion.2. This view was followed by the High Court at Lahore in Ahmad Sher v. Emperor ('31) 18 A. I. R. 1931 Lah. 313. At p. 520 Addison J. says :Mookerjee J., ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »