Allahabad Court September 1943 Judgments
Mt. Badrulnisa Bibi Vs. Syed Mohammad Yusuf
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-23-1943
Reported in: AIR1944All23
1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff, Mt. Badrulnisa Bibi, who brought a suit against her husband Syed Mohammad Yusuf under the provisions of Act 8 of 1989 for the dissolution of her marriage, for the recovery of her prompt dower and for the recovery of the goods specified at the foot of the plaint or Rs. 200 on account of the price thereof. The Court below was of the opinion that the dower of the plaintiff was fixed at Rs. 15,000 and she was, therefore, entitled to recover the prompt portion of the dower which would be Rs. 7500. The Court below further gave her a decree for Rs. 200 being the price of the articles left by the plaintiff at the defendant's place. No decree for dissolution of marriage, however, was granted by the Court below, and the question that we have got to decide is whether on the facts established the plaintiff is entitled to a dissolution of the marriage under Act 8 of 1939.2. The plaintiff-appellant did not get her evidence printed, but at the request of Dr. Far...
Tag this Judgment!Ratan Sen Alias Ratan Lal Vs. Suraj Bhan and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-22-1943
Reported in: AIR1944All1
Allsop, J.1. This is a first appeal arising out of a suit in which the plaintiffs, a father and son, alleged that the land in suit was the property of a trust or wakf which had been created in favour of a shivala and dharamshala. Defendant 1 was alleged to be the trustee, defendant 2 to be in possession under an alleged mortgage executed by defendant 1 and defendant 3 to be claiming the property as a grove-holder. Defendant 3 is the father of defendant 2. All three defendants set up a plea that there was no trust and that defendant 1 was the owner of the property. The reliefs were : (a) that defendant 1 might be removed from the office of trustee and manager of the wakf property and that another trustee or other trustees should be appointed, (b) that the new trustee or trustees should be put in possession of the wakf property and that the rights of all the defendants should be extinguished and (e) that the defendants should be required to render an account of the income and expenses an...
Tag this Judgment!Kedar and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-22-1943
Reported in: AIR1944All94
Iqbal Ahmad, C.J.1. This is an appeal by Kedar Nath and Lachhman Das against their conviction by Dr. L.D. Joshi, Special Judge, Meerut, under Sections 3 and 4(b), Explosive Substances Act, 6 of 1908. The learned Judge sentenced each of the appellants to ten years' rigorous imprisonment under the former and, to seven years' rigorous imprisonment under the latter section. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. On the promulgation of Ordinance 19 of 1943 numerous appeals against the decisions of Special Judges and Special Magistrates were filed in this Court and, as in most of the appeals the validity of the Ordinance was assailed, the hearing of the appeals was deferred till the decision of the question by a Pull Bench A Pall Bench of this Court recently held that the Ordinance was valid. The consideration of the present appeal must, therefore, be approached on the assumption that the trial of the appellants, which culminated in the sentences passed by the Special Judge, had b...
Tag this Judgment!Mohammad Rafi Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-20-1943
Reported in: AIR1943All369
ORDERPlowden, J.1. This is an application from the judgment of the Sessions Judge of Meerut, dated 12th May 1943. I have dealt with Section 109(a), Criminal P. C., in Criminal Rev. No. Abdul Ghafoor v. Emperor : AIR1943All367 . Rather a difficult and unusual point remains as in this case where the applicant is said to have been accompanied in Meerut city by another man, named Abid Husain about midnight and both ran away on hearing the police coming and concealed themselves behind an abachak. On being caught, the applicant was found with an implement of house breaking. Can it be said that he was taking precautions to conceal himself with a view to committing an offence or merely to escape arrest? It is certain that if nothing had been found on him he could not have been ordered to give security under Section 109(a). A person cannot be bound down under this clause merely because he is afraid of arrest or because he is making a nuisance of himself e. g., shouting or singing and conceals h...
Tag this Judgment!Niranjan Lal Mittal Vs. Emperor Through Chandra Shekhar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-20-1943
Reported in: AIR1944All40
ORDERPlowden, J.1. This is an application from a complaint made by the Sessions Judge of Aligarh on 18th October 1942. The order allowing this complaint to be made is dated 23rd January 1942, nearly ten months, previously. I do not know why the learned Sessions Judge waited for ten months to draft a regular complaint which consists of half a page of typewritten matter. Proceedings under Section 107, Criminal P.C., were started in the Court of the S.D.M. at the beginning of 1939 and on 8th August 1940, the S.D.M. came to the conclusion that there was no likelihood of the breach of the peace. He, therefore, dismissed the application and discharged the accused. On 30th September 1940, an application was made by Chandra Shekhar against three persons that proceedings should be taken against them under Section 476, Criminal P.C. Nearly a year later on 10th July 1941, this application was dismissed in default owing to the absence of Chandra Shekhar. On 6th August 1941, an appeal was filed aga...
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Latif Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-15-1943
Reported in: AIR1943All368
ORDERPlowden, J.1. This is an application in revision from the appellate judgment of the Sessions Judge of Cawnpore, dated 25th February 1943. The Magistrate's order under Section 109(b), Criminal P. C., was passed on 16th December 1942. The case against the applicant, Abdul Latif is that on 22nd June 1942 the Circle Inspector of Cawnpore was informed that an armed gang of dacoits had purchased railway tickets Nos. 817 to 825 and would be likely to alight at Pokhrayan railway station. The Circle Inspector reached the station between 8 and 9 P.M. and the S. P., A. S. P. and D. S. P. with two lorry loads of police arrived shortly afterwards and surrounded the station. The train arrived about 10 P.M. and the passengers proceeded towards the exit of the platform. Five or six men gathered close to the exit. After the train left the station the police arrived on the platform and surrounded all the passengers who had alighted from the train. Abdul Latif was found to be in possession of railwa...
Tag this Judgment!Ramu Vs. Kashi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-08-1943
Reported in: AIR1944All5
Yorke, J.1. This is a first appeal by the defendant in a suit for recovery of. possession of certain property described in the plaint. The parties describe themselves as Doms Ghota Khor and the property in suit consisted of a grove and certain houses in Benares City besides some other miscellaneous property including turns at certain burning ghats situated in Masan Mankarnika Ghat and Harish Chandra Ghat, Benares City, as also at Rameshwar in the same district and certain ghats in the Ghazipur district, the whole property being valued at Rs. 48,000. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendant Ramu was in possession of this property as a trespasser and claimed that they were the next reversioners of the last owner Sital, who had died childless in July 1934, upon the death of Sital's widow who died on 18th May 1935. The suit was instituted on 5th September 1935, the plaintiffs founding their claim upon the following pedigree:MOHAN|--------------------------| |Dhuman Gulab = Mt. Janki| |Umr...
Tag this Judgment!Mashkur Ahmad and anr. Vs. Mt. Zahur-ul-nissa and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-08-1943
Reported in: AIR1944All79
Allsop, J.1. This is an appeal against a preliminary decree in a suit for partition. The plaintiff is the widow of Muhammad Ahmad Khan and claims her share in his property. There is no doubt that she would have a share under the Mahomedan law. The defence was that there was a custom in the family by which women were excluded if there were any sons in existence. The learned Judge found against the custom and passed a decree in favour of the plaintiff.2. It is argued in appeal that the custom was established. Learned Counsel bases his argument upon the fact that this family migrated from the Nabha State to Saharanpur about the year 1880 and that they were Rajput Mussalmans who, according to him, were governed by the custom prevailing in the Punjab among the agricultural tribes. It seems to us that it is not necessary to go with any detail into the question whether there was a custom, governing the tribe of which this family were members, by which females were excluded. The matter is of n...
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Ghafoor and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-07-1943
Reported in: AIR1943All367
ORDERPlowden, J.1. The applicants have been bound down on 22nd January 1943 to be of good behaviour for one year. The order is not a severe one. It is argued that the arrest of the applicants attempting to escape from a police raid in a mohalla does not render them liable to give security under Section 109, Criminal P. C., and I was referred to a Pull Bench ruling of this Court, Emperor v. Bishambhar : AIR1928All476 , where the facts are similar in this respect that the accused was also attempting to escape, but there is this great difference that in the present case the accused were caught in the middle of the night with lathis and house-breaking implements in a city, whereas in the other case, the accused was arrested coming out of a sugarcane field. It is difficult to prove that a man had taken refuge in a sugarcane field with a view to committing an offence. It is true that there is a ruling of this Court, Emperor v. Bhairon : AIR1927All50 , according to which the present order wou...
Tag this Judgment!Firm Kishore Chand Shiva Charan Lal Through Raghunath Prasad Tandon an ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-07-1943
Reported in: AIR1944All66
Bajpai, J.1. This is an appeal against a judgment and decree, dated 8th March 1940, of the Civil Judge of Budaun by which the plaintiffs' claim for execution of the sale deed of an undertaking was dismissed. Defendant 1, heareafter called the company, is an electric supply company for the supply of electricity within the Municipality of Budaun, and defendant 2 is its managing agents. By an order of the Government, the company was required to sell its undertaking to the plaintiffs and by an award of the arbitrator appointed by the Government the sale price of the undertaking was determined to be Rs. 1,71,084-3-6. The plaintiffs alleging that they had been working the undertaking under the orders of the Government and that they were entitled to set off against the sale price the amount due to them for debentures of the company of rupees two lacs held by them raised an action in the Court of the Civil Judge of Budaun for an order against defendant 1to execute the sale deed of the entire E...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »