Allahabad Court December 1944 Judgments
Hira Singh and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-21-1944
Reported in: AIR1946All457
Verma, J.1. There are twenty five appellants in this case. The first two, Hira Singh and Mahipat, have been convicted under Section 302, read with Section 149, Penal Code, and have been sentenced to death. They have also been convicted under Section 147 and sentenced to eighteen months' rigorous imprisonment, with the direction that, if the death sentences are not confirmed, the sentences under Section 147 would run concurrently with the sentences passed by the High Court on these men under Section 302. Appellants 4, 5 and 6, Gorey Lal, Ram Charan and Chhadami, have also been convicted under the same sections as appellants 1 and 2, but they have been sentenced to transportation for life under Section 302/149 and the sentence under Section 147 passed on them is the same as that passed on appellants 1 and 2. Appellants 7 to 25-Zulman, Har Charan, Dulla Ahir, Gurbila, Kamla, Rati Ram, Pearey Lal, Ganga Prasad, Pancha, Munnun, Charna, Dhooram, Balloo, Ghasita, Sabdal, Tunda, Paragi Lal, Ra...
Tag this Judgment!Jawahir Vs. Emperor Through Behari Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-21-1944
Reported in: AIR1945All206
ORDERBennett, J.1. This is a reference by the District Magistrate of Etawah on an application in revision. Three men named Behari Singh, Surat Singh and Sundar Singh were prosecuted for an offence under Section 25, Northern India Ferries Act (18 of 1878), that is, for not paying the proper toll at a ferry. The Magistrate's writing is not very legible, but I understand that the finding is that no part of the toll due was paid by them. They said that they paid a certain amount and that there was some dispute about the change. This explanation was not accepted and the Magistrate found them guilty. As, however, the offence was in his opinion trifling and no previous conviction was proved against them he released them after due admonition under Section 3, First Offenders' Probation Act. The result of this order was that they escaped payment altogether. The District Magistrate has referred the case because he doubts whether an order may be passed under Section 3, First Offenders' Probation A...
Tag this Judgment!Brijnandan Prosad Vs. Emperor Through Municipal Board
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-15-1944
Reported in: AIR1945All232
ORDERBennett, J. 1. This is an application in revision by one Brijnandan Prasad who was convicted under Section 210, Municipalities Act, and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 50. Although the Sessions Judge did not agree that an offence under Section 210 had been established, holding that the Magistrate had committed an error in convicting the applicant under this section, nevertheless he maintained the conviction. The trial was a summary one. The record shows that the offence complained of was under Section 185 read with Section 210. Section 185 refers to the illegal erection or alteration of a building; Section 209 refers to the giving of sanction by the board to projections over streets and drains; Section 210 provides the penalty for such constructions made without permission.2. The case against the applicant proceeded rather on the assumption that the offence complained of was one under Section 185 than one under Section 210. It has, however, been submitted in this application that t...
Tag this Judgment!Sher Singh Vs. Kishori Lal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-15-1944
Reported in: AIR1945All237
Iqbal Ahmad, C.J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of a pre-emption suit. On 9th August 1939, one Jagdish Prasad sold 8 bighas 14 biswas and 5 biswansis of village Koshanpur Sadiq to Kishori Lal for a consideration of Rs. 400. Sher Singh plaintiff-appellant filed a suit to pre-emption the sale on the last day of limitation, viz., on 9th August 1940. Sher Singh was a cosharer. in the mahal whereas Kishori Lal was a total stranger to that mahal on the date of the execution of the sale deed. It has been found by the lower appellate Court that out of the property sold 1 bigha 16 biswas and 19 biswansis was situated within the limits of the Nagina Municipality and the rest of the area sold was outside those limits. Kishori Lal contested the suit inter alia on the ground that the Agra Pre-emption Act had no application to the portion of the area that was within municipal limits and as Sher Singh was not entitled to a decree for pre-emption with respect to that area, Kishori Lal had...
Tag this Judgment!Abdulla Jan Khan and anr. Vs. B. Parbati Nath and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-1944
Reported in: AIR1945All213
Sinha, J.1. This is an application in revision under Section 75, Provincial Insolvency Act, against an order of the learned District Judge of Moradabad whereby he set aside the order of the insolvency Judge dated 21st March 1941. The facts briefly are these:One Mr. Gregory borrowed a sum of Rupees 6000 from a man named Mohammad Wali Khan on the basis of a promissory note. Gregory was declared an insolvent and Mohammad Wali Khan went to the receiver for the recognition of his claim. His nephew Abdulla Jan was produced as a witness to prove the claim. The latter claimed himself to be the true obligee and represented his uncle as benamidar. He, however, proved the due execution and consideration. On this evidence, the receiver rejected the claim of Mohammad Wali Khan. This order was challenged in appeal before the learned insolvency Judge. The learned Judge allowed the appeal and directed the receiver to dispose of the claim on the merits. The receiver preferred an appeal against this ord...
Tag this Judgment!Deokinandan and anr. Vs. Badri Prasad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-1944
Reported in: AIR1945All141
Mulla, J.1. This second appeal arises out of a proceeding under the Encumbered Estates Act. An application under Section 4 of that Act was made by the respondents in this Court and it was in due course sent to the Special Judge, Orai. The respondents stated in their application the various debts to which they were liable and one of those debts was a usufructuary mortgage deed, dated 22nd February 1910, for Rs. 3500 which had been executed by Girdhari Lal, the maternal grandfather of the first two respondents, Badri Prasad and Phuljari Lal. In their written statement under Section 8 the applicants gave details of certain zamindari properties belonging to them and one of these properties was zamindari property comprising 124.16 acres, bearing a jama of Rs. 273-12-0 with Rs. 27-6-0, thok Shiva Ram, mauza Hardoi. It is with this property alone that we are concerned in the present appeal. With regard to this property a claim was lodged by the appellants, Seth Deokinandan and Mt. Phul Kunwar...
Tag this Judgment!Pyare Lal and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-11-1944
Reported in: AIR1945All135
ORDERBraund, J.1. This is a curious, but possibly-important, little point in connection with the United Provinces Cotton Cloth and Yarn Control Order, 1943 (hereinafter called the Order). The facts are simple. It appears from the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge that under the order it became an offence for any person, other than a manufacturer or selling agent, wholesale dealer, commission agent, retailer or hawker registered under the order, to 'sell' cotton cloth or yarn after a certain date. In this case the applicants had, prior to that date, made certain contracts for the delivery of a small number of bales of cotton. There is nothing to suggest that the contracts were not bona fide contracts and, indeed, some of the bales contracted for were actually delivered and paid for before the date when the order came into, force. There were, however, four bales which remained to be delivered after the date when the order came into force, and these were, in fact, delivered and paid ...
Tag this Judgment!The Collector of Meerut in Charge, Court of Wards and Special Manager ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-11-1944
Reported in: AIR1945All156
Iqbal Ahmad, C.J.1. This appeal must prevail and the objection filed by the appellant under Section 11, Encumbered Estates Act, must be ' allowed. There is ample authority in support of the view that, even though a person may be disqualified to enter into a contract, such disqualification does not debar that person from being transferee under a conveyance. The reason for this view is that totally different considerations apply when a matter passes from the domain of contract into that of a conveyance. It is on this ground that it has been held that even though a minor is incompetent to enter into a contract, no such disability attaches to him in the matter of transfer of property, and a sale deed executed in his favour is valid and enforceable. In the present case we are concerned with a person who was a ward of the Court. Section 37, Court of Wards Act, enacts thata ward shall not be competent to transfer or create any charge on, or interest in, any part of his property which is under...
Tag this Judgment!Firm Gulabrai NaraIn Das Through L. Shiam Sundar Lal Vs. Firm Ilahi Bu ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-08-1944
Reported in: AIR1945All185
Sinha, J.1. This is a plaintiffs' appeal and arises out of a suit for recovery of Rs. 1200 with interest at 9 per cent. per annum. The plaintiffs are commission agents and their case is that the defendant firm used to purchase cloth and metal wares from them. In 1931, the story further proceeds, the parties adjusted their accounts and a small sum was found due to the plaintiffs. On 29th October 1931, the dealings between them re-started and continued upto 28th April 1937. The plaintiffs supplied goods and the defendants also made payments from time to time, but a stage was never reached when the entire sum due to the plaintiffs was discharged. The present suit Was instituted on 28th August 1939. The plaintiffs took their stand on three payments made on different dates. The first was a payment of Rs. 500 on 23rd August 1934, the second of a sum of Rs. 1000 on 4th September 1935, and the last of Rs. 400 on 3rd November 1936. The learned Munsif decreed the suit. The lower appellate Court ...
Tag this Judgment!District Board Through Chairman Vs. Lala Gyan Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-08-1944
Reported in: AIR1945All307
Wali Ullah, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal. It arises out of a suit for declaration that the defendant District Board was not entitled to make bye-law No. 16 under Section 174, District Boards Act of 1922, in respect of the plaintiff's groves standing over plots Nos. 4376 and 4229 and that the plaintiff was entitled to let out his groves without any interference from the District Board. The defence set up by the District Board inter alia was that the bye-law in question was validly made under the powers conferred by Section 174, District Boards Act, and that it was applicable to the groves of the plaintiff. The Court of first instance held that the bye-law in question was within the competence of the District Board and that it was applicable to the groves in dispute. The suit was accordingly dismissed with costs. On appeal the lower appellate Court has recorded these findings:(1) That the groves of the plaintiff lie adjacent to the land over which the Nauchandi fair is held and (2) ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »