Allahabad Court September 1943 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.
Lala Nand Lal Vs. Sunder Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-06-1943
Reported in: AIR1944All17
Yorke, J.1. This is a first appeal by the plaintiff Nand Lal whose suit for possession of a house and a shop in the town of Etawah has been dismissed. The property in Suit admittedly belonged originally to one Mangal Sen. A short pedigree showing the relationship of the plaintiff and defendants 1 to 4 will be useful:(2) Mt. Mithani = MANGAL SEN = (1) Mt. Rani 1_________________________|| |Chhedi Lal (1) Mt. Janki=Jagannath=Mt. X| | Thakur Prasad Babu Ram|Nand Lal (plaintiff)KASHI RAM__________________|_________________| | Sundar Lal (deft. 1) Mt. Meria_________|____________________________________| | |Mahabir Prasad Mahadeo Prasad Mathura Prasad (deft. 2) (deft. 3) (deft. 4).It will be noted that the plaintiff is the daughter's grandson of Mangal Sen, deceased, while defendants 1 to 4 are the brother and nephews of Mt. Meria widow of Chhedi Lal, son of Mangal Sen, who admittedly predeceased his father. The remaining defendants are Mt. Chimna Kunwar to whom Sundar Lal is said to have so...
Mt. Parbati Devi Vs. Bansi Dhar and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-02-1943
Reported in: AIR1943All360
Collister, J.1. This is an appeal under the Letters Patent from a decision of a learned Judge of this Court. There was a joint Hindu family consisting of three brothers, their mother and their sister. The name of the mother is Mt. Parwati Devi and she is the appellant before us. The two surviving brothers are Banwari Lal and Shiam Lal The third brother--now deceased -- was Gluzari Lal. Gulzari Lal instituted a suit for partition of the joint family property against his two brothers, his sister and his mother, and in that suit a man named Bansidhar, who held some of the property under a mortgage executed by Banwari Lal and Shiam Lal, was also impleaded as a defendant. During the pendency of the suit Gulzari Lal--who was unmarried -- died, and on his death his mother, Mt. Parwati Devi, the appellant before us, was at her request substituted as plaintiff to the suit. The trial Court passed a preliminary decree in favour of the appellant, holding that she was entitled to a one-fourth share...
Chhadamrai and ors. Vs. Ram Naresh Misir and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-01-1943
Reported in: AIR1943All337
Collister, J.1. This is a plaintiffs' appeal under the Letters Patent from a decision of a learned Judge of this Court. On 24th June 1918 a man named Ganpat executed a bond in favour of two brothers, Meghu Rai and Rekha Rai, for a sum of Rs. 399-15-9 with interest at 9 annas per cent, per mensem. Under the terms of the bond the executants covenanted that he would regularly pay the interest, amounting to Rs. 27 a year, and it was agreed that in default of any payment of interest the obligee would be entitled to take possession of four specified plots and enjoy their usufruct in lieu of interest. These plots were Nos. 28/3, 10, 5/3 and 137. It was further provided that, if at any time the executant paid the money which had been advanced, he would be entitled to resume possession of the aforesaid four plots. I shall have occasion to consider the terms of the bond in greater detail at a later stage, for the appeal depends entirely upon the interpretation of this document.2. On 30th May 192...
Lalit Kishore Vs. Ram Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-01-1943
Reported in: AIR1943All362
Allsop, J.1. This is an appeal under our Letters Patent against a judgment of learned single Judge of the Court. The appeal arises out of a suit which was instituted by the respondent, Ram Prasad, against the appellant, Lalit Kishore, in order to obtain an injunction that the latter should not interfere with certain alleged rights of easement claimed by the former over a plot of land lying between his house and the public road. The plaintiff claimed a right to maintain a latrine upon the land in suit, to discharge water from his roof upon it, to carry the water away by means of a drain across it and to exercise a right of way over it. The plaintiff had instituted a similar suit in the year 1932. He then sought an injunction upon the ground that he had acquired a title to the land by adverse possession. His immediate cause of action was that the defendant had cut down a tree growing upon the land but he also alleged that he had a latrine on, and water spouts over, the land. The defence ...
Lala Sarju Prasad Vs. Re.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-01-1943
Reported in: [1943]11ITR525(All)
In compliance with our order dated the of February 11, 1942 the Commissioner of Income-tax, Central and United Provinces, has stated a case and referred a question of law for our decision. We indicated that question of law in our order, and the same question has been referred to us for decision by the learned Commissioner. The question is as follows :-'Whether the Assistant Commissioner had jurisdiction in appeal to substitute a different method of computation for the method which had been adopted by the Income-tax Officer ?'Under the provisions of Section 66(3) of the Act if the Commissioner has refused to state a case on the ground that no question of law arises and the assessee makes an application to this Court, then if we are satisfied that a question of law does arise (it may be substantial question of law or otherwise) we can require the Commissioner to state a case and to refer the question of law that does arise for our decision.It was under these circumstances that we directe...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›