Allahabad Court October 1945 Judgments
B. Manmohan Lal and ors. Vs. B. Raj Kumar Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-31-1945
Reported in: AIR1946All89
Iqbal Ahmad, C.J.1. This application in revision is directed against an order passed by the Munsif of Jaunpur City directing the amendment of a decree in accordance with the provisions of Section 8, Debt Redemption Act (13 [XIII] of 1940). The facts are not in controversy and are as follows : On 31st January 1933, B. Manmohan Lal and others, the applicants, obtained against Raj Kumar Lal and others, opposite parties, a preliminary decree for sale on the basis of a simple mortgage. The opposite parties on 17th September 1935, filed an application under Section 4 Encumbered Estates Act (25 [xxv] of 1934) and the application was in due course, in pursuance of the provisions of Section 6 of the Act, forwarded by the Collector to a Special Judge. After the presentation of the application under the Encumbered Estates Act, before the Collector the applicants on 19th October 1935, filed an application for the preparation of a final decree for sale and further proceedings on this application we...
Tag this Judgment!L. Basant Lal Vs. Lalta Prasad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-31-1945
Reported in: AIR1946All304
Braund, J.1. This is an appeal under the Court-fees Act against a decision of the learned District Judge of Agra. The proceedings arose out of a mortgage of 1894 under which in due course the mortgagor brought redemption proceedings under Section 12, U.P. Agriculturists' Relief Act. The Court under that Act held that the entire principal had been paid off out of the rents and profits of the property - the mortgage, of course, being a usufructuary mortgage. The original amount of the principal secured by the mortgage had been three thousand and two hundred rupees.2. Against this decision the mortgagee appealed by a memorandum of appeal dated 26th March 1943, and it is relevant for the purpose of what follows to see exactly what it was that he claimed in his appeal. In the memorandum of appeal he alleged that for sundry reasons the decision of the Munsif under Section 12, Agriculturists'Relief Act, had been wrong and he finally made this prayer which we will set out verbatim:To decree th...
Tag this Judgment!Bachan Singh Vs. Ram Buksh Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-31-1945
Reported in: AIR1946All287
Iqbal Ahmad, C.J.1. This and the two connected Letters Patent Appeals Nos. 1 and 2 of 1944 arise out of three suits instituted in the revenue Court on 26th August 1939, by Earn Buksh plaintiff-respondent against three different persons Bechan Singh, Nawab Singh and Munshi Singh under Section 44, Agra Tenancy Act (III of 1926). The plaintiff alleged that he was the occupancy tenant of plot No. 385 and that the defendant in each suit had wrongfully taken possession of different portion of the plot in question, and as such, the defendant in each suit was liable to ejectment in accordance with the provisions of Section 44. The defendant in each suit pleaded that he was one of several cosharers in the patti in which the plot in dispute was situated and accordingly the suits did not fall within the purview of Section 44. They also contended that suits were barred by limitation. An issue on the question of proprietary title raised by the defendants was referred by the Assistant Collector to t...
Tag this Judgment!Sardar Singh Vs. Swami Chakrapani Acharya
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-29-1945
Reported in: AIR1946All357
Braund, J.1. This is an appeal from an order of the District Judge of Agra refusing to entertain an application for the revocation of a grant of probate. The facts are that a certain Mt. Sumitra Devi died on 6th March 1939 leaving a will which we shall set out:My name is Sumitra Devi. I am a disciple of Chakrapani Maharaj of Brindaban. I regard him as God. I have got some money and ornaments. There is no certainty of human life. I wish that after my death my Guru Chakrapani Ji shall take all my properties and spend the same in good religious works which may be for my spiritual benefit. He may take the advice of my gurubhai Thacoor Phulan Singh and Krishna Behari Lal Sharma. My guru shall pay to my beti Draupadi five hundred rupees if she does sheba to me and remains obedient.2. In form, therefore, that is a testamentary disposition disposing of her property, to put it in general terms, by bequeathing the whole of it to her guru, Chakrapani, for the purpose of religious and charitable w...
Tag this Judgment!Mt. Suraj Bahu and After Her Death Mt. Mangal Bahu and ors. Vs. Jaitly ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-26-1945
Reported in: AIR1946All372
Bennett, J.1. This appeal, preferred in 1940, has arisen out of a suit filed by one Joshi Parahotamji of Benares on 22nd July 1937, to recover from a number of defendants the sum of Rs. 38,474-71 It was also prayed that certain shares which had been pledged with the plaintiff as security for the debt might be sold in pro tanto satisfaction of the decree for this sum. Joshi Parshotamji died on 25th November 1938, and his widow, Mt. Suraj Bahu, was substituted for him. She preferred the appeal, but died during its pendency, and substitution of the present appellants for her was made on 25th November 1911. There were originally nine defendants. Of these eight were members of a joint Hindu family which has for many years done business under the name of P.L. Jaitly and Co. The business was started by one Murlidhar, who died in the year 1934. He had three sons, Parshotam Lai, Narotam Lai and Keaari Narain. Though Murlidhar was the formal head of the family the business from 1929-30 was manag...
Tag this Judgment!Sita Ram and anr. Vs. Kanchhed Mal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-25-1945
Reported in: AIR1946All414
Sinha, J.1. This is a judgment-debtors' appeal whose application for amendment of a decree under Sections 8 and 9, U.P. Debt Redemption Act, was allowed by the learned Munsif, but rejected by the learned Additional Civil Judge of Bulandshahr. The appellants claimed the benefits of this Act on the ground that they were agriculturists. The decree-holders contended in reply that they had made a declaration necessary under Section 4, U.P. Debt Redemption Act, and that the appellants were, therefore, not entitled to those benefits. The judgment-debtors, however, contended in rejoinder that the declaration made by the decree-holders referred to a well which was a part of their holding and it was, therefore, not an effective declaration. The learned Munsif held that the well in dispute was used for irrigating agricultural land, and was situate in an occupancy holding and the land did not, therefore, cease to be 'land' within the meaning of Section 2, Clause 8, U.P. Debt Redemption Act, which ...
Tag this Judgment!Bishuwanath and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-22-1945
Reported in: AIR1946All153
Mulla, J.1. This is an appeal by four persons - Bishunath Tewari, Brij Bhukan, Lochan and Harakh Narain Tewari - who have been convicted by the learned Second Additional Sessions Judge at Gorakhpur of two offences, one under Section 304 read with Section 34 and the other under Section 323, Penal Code. The charge framed against the appellants by the learned Committing Magistrate ran as follows:That you on or about the 14th day of June 1944 in the afternoon in village Subedar Pur in P.C. Maharaj Ganj to the south of the Chhaoni committed culpable homicide not amounting to murder by causing the death of Balai Ahir deceased by voluntarily causing injuries with lathis on his head and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 304, Penal Code.When the case came up for trial in the Court of Session, this charge was amended by the addition of the following words at the end, that is, after the word 'head,' namely,which were likely to cause his death and caused simple hurt to Day a Ra...
Tag this Judgment!Samandar Lal Vs. Prakash Chand and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-22-1945
Reported in: AIR1946All444
Braund, J.1. This is a civil revision raising a point under the Provincial Insolvency Act which is not free from difficulty. The insolvent was adjudicated on 21st September 1939 and obtained his discharge on 18th October 1940. In May 1941 an order was made by the Insolvency Judge that the insolvent's property, which, of course, remained vested in the Receiver notwithstanding his discharge, should be sold by public auction. The only property which at that time remained in the hands of the Official Receiver was a fruit garden at Saharanpur, in respect of which there was a liability to pay Government revenue. The insolvent immediately applied to the Court that this property should not be sold on the ground that, since he was an agriculturist paying less than Rs. 250 in Government revenue, the land was protected from sale by Section 17(1)(a), U.P. Debt Redemption Act (Act 13[XIII] of 1940). On 11th April 1942, the Civil Judge of Saharanpur came to the conclusion that the property was so pr...
Tag this Judgment!Sunni Central Board of Wakfs Vs. Sardar Khan and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-12-1945
Reported in: AIR1946All256
Bennett, J.1. This is an application under Section 115, Civil P.C., challenging an order passed by the learned District Judge of Aligarh relating to the removal of a committee of management of a certain waqf. There is a Muslim shrine in Jalesar called Dargah Ibrahim Sahab Sahid. It was held in 1928 that the property with which the shrine was endowed for the purpose of upkeep constituted a public waqf, and a committee of Musalmans of Jalesar was appointed for the purpose of management and a scheme was drawn up. This scheme was sanctioned by the Additional District Judge on 7th September 1929. An amendment was made in it by an order of the District Judge dated 18th September 1941, but the character of the waqf was not changed. It remained a public waqf and the management was left to a committee elected by the people of Jalesar, the final order to this effect being passed on 2nd December 1941. As regards the personnel of the committee, five persons whose names are given in the order of th...
Tag this Judgment!Vishnu Ram Vs. Bank of Bihar Through Babu Baij Nath
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-12-1945
Reported in: AIR1946All291
Bennett, J.1. This revision application raises a legal question which has in various forms been the subject of controversy in numerous cases, chiefly of the Bombay and Madras High Courts. The applicant, Vishnu Earn, and the opposite party, the Bank of Bihar, obtained decrees against the same judgment-debtors, the applicant's decree being for some amount exceeding Rs. 1200, the exact figure is not given in the paper before us and that of the opposite party for Rs. 7000 odd. Execution proceedings on Vishnu Eam's decree were taken in the Court of the City Munsif, Benares, and on the other decree in the Court of the Additional Civil Judge, Benares. Vishnu Earn attached a house in execution of his decree on 9th February 1942, and purchased it himself for Rs. 1200 on 12th November 1942. The sale was confirmed on 1st February 1943. The Munsif permitted him to set off the purchase money against the amount due under the decree in accordance with the provisions of Rule 72(2) of Order 21, Civil P...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »