Allahabad Court April 1945 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.
Babu Kailash Chandra JaIn Vs. Mt. Jhamola Kunwar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-16-1945
Reported in: AIR1945All431
Allsop, J. 1. We have two appeals before us, one No. 343 of 1941 arising out of a suit instituted by Mt. Jhamola Kunwar to recover a sum of Rs. 22,000 from Kailash Chand on account of arrears of maintenance for the period from 1st January 19,33 to 3lst July 1937 at the rate of Rs. 400 per mensem and the other No. 342 of 1941 arising out of a suit instituted by Kailash Chand against Mt. Jhamola Kunwar in order to obtain a decree that the latter's allowance should be reduced from Rs. 400 per mensem to Rs. 200 per mensem. Mt. Jhamola Kunwar obtained her decree from the learned Civil Judge of Allahabad and Kailash Chand's suit was dismissed. Kailash Chand is the appellant in both appeals and Mt. Jhamola Kunwar is the respondent. The parties are Jains.2. Mt. Jhamola Kunwar when she was a widow entered into an agreement on 14th February 1917 with Kedar Nath, the natural father of Kailash Chand, that she would adopt the latter as her son on certain conditions, namely, (1) that the deeds of gi...
Debi Das and ors. Vs. Keshava Deo
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-13-1945
Reported in: AIR1945All423
Sinha, J. 1. These are two applications in revision against an order of the learned Civil Judge of Aligarh by which he repelled certain objections to an arbitration award and passed a decree in terms thereof. One Bhawani Das had three sons, Debi Das, Dhori Mal and Kishori Lal. Bhawani Das and his sons made a mortgage of their residential house in favour of the opposite party, Keshav Deo, for a sum of Rs. 2000. This mortgage was granted on 22nd December 1933, and on 19th December 1939, the mortgagee put his mortgage in suit against the sons and grandsons of the deceased Bhawani Das, for a sum of Rs. 3,391-12-0. The defence, in the main, was that full consideration did not pass and, at all events, the debt was not justified by legal necessity. On 25th February 1941, the learned Munsif decreed the suit for Rs. 1500, principal, and the balance on account of interest, total Rs. 2543. He held that, out of the sum of Rs. 2000, Rs. 500 left in the hands of the mortgagee to discharge the debt, ...
Digbijai Nath Vs. Tirbeni Nath Tewari
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-12-1945
Reported in: AIR1946All12
Bennett, J.1. This is an appeal by a defendant, Mahanth Digbijai Nath, who was sued by the respondent, Tirbeni Nath Tewari for a sum of Rs. 4001 with damages amounting to Rs. 1200 or in the alternative a sum of Rs. 611 by way of interest on the sum of Rs. dOOl. The parties reside in Gorakhpur. The plaintiff respondent is a contractor and the appellant is the owner of certain forest property at Sonari. It is common ground that on 5th July 1940, the parties entered into an agreement whereby the plaintiff undertook to pay the defendant a sum of Rs. 27,250 for certain rights of extraction from this forest. It is also common ground that a sum of Rs. 1001 was paid by the plaintiff as earnest money to the defendant on that date, and that a further sum of Rs. 3000 was paid by the plaintiff to the defendant on 9th July 1940. After that it is said that a difference of opinion occurred between the parties in regard to the terms of the contract and no further action was taken in pursuance of it. T...
Bahori Lal and anr. Vs. Sri Ram and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-12-1945
Reported in: AIR1946All139
Wali Ullah, J.1. These are two connected appeals, one by Bahori Lal plaintiff and the other by Chhidda plaintiff arising out of two suits filed by them for damages. Both the suits were partly decreed by the Court of first instance but on appeal the learned Civil Judge has dismissed both of them with costs. The two suits were consolidated in the Court of the learned Munsif and they were disposed of by a common judgment dated 29th February 1940. Similarly, the appeals arising out of the two suits were disposed of by the learned Civil Judge by a common judgment dated 31st July 1941. It will, therefore, be convenient to dispose of both these appeals to this Court by one common judgment.2. The relevant facts necessary for purpose of these appeals are briefly these: Sri Ram and Joti Prasad, defendant-respondents, presented an application to the Court of the Insolvency Judge at Agra on 22nd November 1937 against Bahori Lal and Chhidda, plaintiff-appellants and one Sundar Lal It was alleged th...
M. Liaqat HusaIn Vs. Vinay Prakash and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-12-1945
Reported in: AIR1946All156
Sinha, J.1. This is an application under Section 115, Civil P.C., against an order of the learned Additional District Judge of Moradabad affirming in substance the complaint made by the learned Munsif under Section 193, Penal Code. The facts cover a long period and are somewhat involved. Briefly they are these : On 15th August 1931 Shiam Sunder and Ram Chander executed a promissory note in favour of a man named Bhagwan Chand. Bhagwan Chand died and his two sons, Vinay Prakash and Krishna Prakash, brought a suit on its basis on 8th August; 1939. It was alleged that the promissory note had been kept alive by certain acknowledgments. The claim was made for a sum of Rs. 2140 after giving credit for Rs. 203. For 13th September 1939 the hearing of the case was fixed and on that day, at the request of the defendant, the case was adjourned conditional on his payment of a sum of Rs. 21. 26th September 1939 was fixed for filing the written statement and 10th October was fixed for the settlement ...
Sheo Prasad Sahu Vs. Ram Chandar Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-11-1945
Reported in: AIR1946All362
Allsop, J.1. One Mathura Prasad of the town of Mohammadabad Gohna executed a deed of wakf in the year 1908 by which he transferred certain property to an idol, that is, Sri Ram Janki or Sri Earn Chander Ji and appointed one Hanuman Prasad to manage the property and expend the proceeds for the benefit of the idol and for certain charitable purposes. There was a provision in this deed that Hanuman Prasad might appoint a successor when he wished to do so. Hanuman Prasad himself transferred his own property to the idol in the year 1921. In exercise of his power of appointment he appointed or is alleged to have appointed another Mathura Prasad, Darbari Lal and Sheo Prasad, the plaintiff-appellant, as managers for the idol. Darbari Lal died in the year 1934. He executed a will in which he appointed Ram Chander Prasad, the defendant-respondent, as manager of the property.2. Sheo Prasad instituted the suit which has given rise to this appeal in order to obtain a declaration that Ram Chander Pr...
Bhagmal and anr. (Minors) Through Mt. Parmeshwari Vs. District Board T ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-09-1945
Reported in: AIR1945All428
Sinha, J.1. This is a plaintiffs' appeal and arises out of a suit for a declaration that the property in dispute was not liable to attachment and sale. On 18th August 1936, the District Board of Bulandshahr granted a contract to five persons, including one Khacheru, to run a ferry at Anupshahr and Achrukalan in the district of Bulandshahr. The lease was not signed by Khacheru, but by his cousin- at one place I find him described as a cousin and another as a nephew-Nain Singh. Part of the lease money fell into arrears and the District Board of Bulandshahr requested the Collector of Meerut to attach and sell the property of Khacheru, who lived in Meerut. Not satisfied with this, the District Board also started criminal proceedings against Khacheru and Nain Singh. Nain Singh was sentenced to a term of imprisonment; death intervened to save Khacheru. The present suit was instituted by Khacheru for the declaration mentioned above. He died during the pendeney of the suit and the proceedings ...
Bidya Ram and anr. Vs. B. Jagdamba Prasad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-06-1945
Reported in: AIR1946All189
Sinha, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiffs in a suit for possession and injunction restraining the defendants from securing mutation with respect to the property in dispute. On 19th December 1932, the defendants granted a usufructuary mortgage of the property to the plaintiffs. In 1930 the mortgagor applied under Section 4, Encumbered Estates Act. In the schedule the property in this suit was described. The plaintiffs' case was that they were kept from the knowledge of these proceedings and also by reason of a certain agreement between them and the defendants, they did not prefer any claim. The usual decrees under Sections 11 and 14 followed and then the proceedings were transmitted to the Collector who took the liquidation proceedings under Section 33 of the Act. The plaintiffs have brought the present suit principally on the ground that it was only the equity of redemption which was described in the Schedule of property appended to the application under Section 4 and that the Co...
Kamta Chaudhary Vs. Lal Chandra Mool Pratap Bahadur Pal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-05-1945
Reported in: AIR1945All284
ORDERAllsop, J.1. This is an application in revision under Section 25, Small Cause Courts Act. The plaintiff sued the defendant upon the ground that he had paid a certain sum of money into the Government treasury at the defendant's request in order to discharge the defendant's liability for payment of land revenue. He claimed the amount as a debt due from the defendant. The learned Judge of the Court of Small Causes in the first instance passed a decree in favour of the plaintiff having held that the money had in fact been paid by the plaintiff at the defendant's request. His attention was drawn to the provisions of Section 39, Agriculturists' Relief Act, which require that a loan to an agriculturist must be evidenced by a written document, but he held that the defendant was not an agriculturist because he paid over a thousand rupees a year by way of land revenue. The defendant put in an application for review of judgment upon the ground that the learned Judge had been guilty of an obv...
Raghubar Dayal Vs. Bibi Kulsumunnissa
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-05-1945
Reported in: AIR1945All392
Allsop, J. 1. The plaintiff-respondent, Bibi Kulsumunnissa, instituted a suit against Ram Chander and Lachhman Prasad for possession over a plot of land in the town of Danpur on the ground that she was the zamindar and that they as trespassers were building upon it. Ram Chander and Lachhman Prasad pleaded that the buildings were being erected by their cousin, Dambar Lal, who was consequently impleaded. The defence of Dambar Lal was that the plot of land was the ancestral property of himself and his family but it was held between the parties that he was a trespasser and liable to ejectment. When Mt. Kulsumunnissa sought to execute the decree against Dambar Lal, his nephew, Raghubar Dayal, offered resistance which gave rise to proceedings under Order 21, Rule 97. It was ultimately held that Raghubar Dayal could not be ejected in pursuance of that decree. The plaintiff then instituted a suit for possession against him and the question arose whether the decisions in the previous suit again...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »