Allahabad Court October 1947 Judgments
NaraIn Singh Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-30-1947
Reported in: AIR1948All287
Sinha, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 476-B, Criminal P.C., against an order of the learned District Judge of Moradabad, directing that 'a complaint be drafted under Sections 193, 196,465, 467 and 471, Penal Code, against the appellant and forwarded to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Moradabad, for disposal.' The facts which have led to this order are briefly these:2. One Suraj Singh, son of Narain Singh, was fined Rs. 11,260, although the maximum; amount of fine, which could be imposed under Section 45, Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, was Rs. 500. Certain property, alleged to belong to Surajj Singh, was attached in execution of an order for the realisation of the fine. Narain Singh took exception to the attachment on the ground that the property had passed to him. In support of his objection, Narain Singh produced, in the Court, a receipt. One Abdul Ghani made a statement on 3rd February 1945 in support of Narain Singh's version. The receipt was sent to the Master Security Printin...
Tag this Judgment!Municipal Board Vs. Mumtaz Khan and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-30-1947
Reported in: AIR1948All309
Sinha, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal and arises out of a suit for a declaration that the property in dispute, which is a plot of land in Koil in the district of Aligarh, belongs to it. According to the plaint, the plot is a part of a public street No. 71 and is vested in it. It granted a lease of this land on 14-8-1937 to one Bunyad Ali for 30 years. The defendants first party prevented it from raising any constructions and a criminal complaint was filed against them in which, however, they succeeded. It was on these allegations that the present suit for the reliefs mentioned above, was brought.2. The defendants denied the plaintiff's title and claimed a title in themselves. The plaintiff produced a large number of documents, including Exs. 8 and 9 the former is a khasra of 1921 prepared under the order of the Government dated 16 3-1921, the latter is an extract from the register of immovable property of 1931 kept by the Municipal Board under a Government Order of 1931.3. The learn...
Tag this Judgment!Moti Lal Vs. Mt. Sharda Devi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-29-1947
Reported in: AIR1948All222
Sinha, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 39, Arbitration Act (x of 1940) against the order of the leaned Civil and Sessions Judge of Cawnpore. The facts are briefly these:2. A lease was granted on 4th June 1925, by Mt. Sharda Debi in favour of the appellant, Motilal. The latter executed a qubuliat in her favour. Motilal was allowed to keep the house for five years on a rent of Rs. 40 a month. He was permitted to make certain constructions according to his choice. There were other stipulations in the qabuliat as to how the constructions were to be made.3. Mt. Sharda Debi brought a suit for recovery of Rs. 5400 on account of arrears of rent and damages. She furnished certain particulars with which it is not necessary to deal.4. The defence, inter alia, was that Motilal had raised substantial constructions of the value of Rs. 5611 of which he must be given credit.5. The parties entered into an agreement of arbitration and one Mr. Sridhar Bajpai, an advocate of Cawnpore, was appointed a...
Tag this Judgment!Kailash Nath Vs. Joti Prasad and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-27-1947
Reported in: AIR1948All307
Sinha, J.1. This is a first appeal against an order of the learned Civil and Sessions Judge, Cawnpore by which he allowed an appeal preferred against an order of the learned Munsif. The facts are briefly these : On 2nd November 1939, one Hulli sold certain property to the appellant, Pandit Kailash Nath, for a sum of Rs. 3,000/-and left Rs. 1,400/- in his hands. The precise purpose of the deposit must be mentioned here. Hulli's brother had made certain alienations and one of them was the alienation by which the property, Hulli conveyed to Kailash Nath, had been sold. In his attempt to recover it, Kailash Nath had assisted him. This sum of Rs. 1,400 was left in the hands of the vendee for recovery of other items of property wrongfully sold by Hulli's brother.2. One Joti Prasad had a decree against Hulli and he attached this sum of Rs. 1,400. Exception was taken to the attachment under Order 21, Rule 181, Civil P.C. on the allegation that he had already paid the sum to the vendor and the ...
Tag this Judgment!Mt. Sakina Begam Vs. Malka Ara Begum
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-20-1947
Reported in: AIR1948All198
Sinha, J.1. This is an appeal against an order of the learned District Judge of Moradabad by which he dismissed the application of the appellant, Mt. Sakina Begum, for her appointment as a certificated guardian of the persons of her: minor daughters named Naima Begum and Amina Begum.2. The two minors are aged a year and a half and four years, respectively. The rival in the field was their father. The learned Judge thought that the father had a preferential claim both with regard to the guardianship and the custody of the minors.3. Mt. Sakina Begum has come in appeal and her learned Counsel argues that the mother has the preferential claim under the Hanafi law. In support of this contention reliance is placed upon Mt. Haidari Begum v. jawwad Ali Shah : AIR1934All722 . There, the contest lay between the mother, who was living in Lucknow, and the father, who was living in Gorakhpur and who had, at the time of the contest, the custody of the child. It might also be noted that the child the...
Tag this Judgment!Dhaja Rai and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-20-1947
Reported in: AIR1948All241
Wali Ullah, J.1. Dhaja Rai and Jitan Ahir appeal against their conviction of an offence under Section 395, Penal Code, and the sentence of seven years rigorous imprisonment passed upon each of them by the leaned Sessions Judge of Ghazipur at Ballia. (After stating the facts his Lordship proceeded:)2. The evidence against these appellants consists entirely of the testimony of identifying witnesses. No property taken away by the dacoits appears to have been recovered from the possession of any of the two appellants. Therefore the case against the appellants rests entirely on the testimony of these witnesses. Each one of the appellants has been identified as mentioned above by five witnesses. If these witnesses are not believed, it necessarily follows that the case against them will fail.3. The leaned Sessions Judge has written a very careful and elaborate judgment discussing the evidence of each one of the witnesses. He has, further considered the various points urged by the defence and ...
Tag this Judgment!Swadeshi Bima Co. Ltd. Vs. B. Shiv Charan Das
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-17-1947
Reported in: AIR1948All315
Sinha, J.1. This is an application in revision against an order of the learned Civil Judge of Agra passed on 19th January 1946, restoring a suit which had, in the past, been dismissed for default several times.2. The facts of this case, which hardly reflect any credit upon the plaintiff, are briefly these:3. On 19th September 1916, Dr. Asthana granted a mortgage for Rs. 15,000 in favour of one Murli Dhar. The period of payment was five years. In 1940 the mortgagor sold his interest to the Swadeshi Bima Company Ltd. On 21st October 1942, a suit for recovery of Rs. 41,325 was brought on the basis of the mortgage. Rupees 15,000 represented the' principal and the balance was alleged to have been due on account of interest. The suit was, prima facie, barred by limitation, but the plaintiff relied upon certain payments and upon certain acknowledgments.4. The Munsarim reported a deficiency of Rs. 1,602-8-0. Time was taken on several occasions for making good the deficiency, but it was never m...
Tag this Judgment!Mrs. Merle Noreen Vs. Mr. Henry Donald Nott
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-17-1947
Reported in: AIR1948All326
Moothan, J.1. The question is whether a husband, the respondent in a suit for judicial separation, can include in his written statement a claim for damages against the alleged adulterer of his wife. That he can do so in England is clear from the case in (1913) L.R. 1913 P. 75.2. Mr. Man Singh relies on Section 15, Indian Divorce Act, which, he says, excludes by implication the filing of any sort of counter-claim save in suits for dissolution of marriage. In (1913) L.R. 1913 P. 75 the President reached the conclusion that a husband may, in answer to his wife's petition for judicial separation, claim damages against an alleged adulterer after a consideration inter alia of the effect of Section 2, Matrimonial Causes Act, 1856. Now this section (which has been replaced by Section 180, Supreme Court of Judicature (Consolidation) Act, 1925) was the basis of Section 15 of the Indian Act, and the to sections are to the same effect; in consequence it appears to me to follow that the existence i...
Tag this Judgment!Bodhan and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-15-1947
Reported in: AIR1948All223
Wali Ullah, J.1. This is an appeal by Bhura and his two sons, Bodhan and Manrakhan, Lohars of village Biharwan, district Banda, against their conviction under Sections 304(ii) and 323, Penal Code, and various sentences of imprisonment passed upon them by the leaned Sessions Judge.2. On 28th August 1945, about two Gharis after sunrise, she buffaloes belonging to the appellants when let loose began to fight with the cattle of Ram Prasad and his relations. In consequence of this, admittedly, Ram Prasad and his two nephews, Sheo Ghulam and Ram Ghulam on the one side and Bhura and his two sons on the other, indulged in exchange of abuses. It led to a scuffle and a lathi fight ensued with the result that Ram Prasad received some injuries as the result of which his skull was fractured and he succumbed to his injuries at his house on the same evening, about 8 P.M. Sheo Ghulam and Ram Ghulam are also said to have received injuries. Sheo Ghulam's injuries were examined by the Doctor whose report...
Tag this Judgment!Mt. Chandeshwari Kuer Vs. Vireshwar Banerji and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-10-1947
Reported in: AIR1948All317
Sinha, J.1. This is an application in revision under Section 115, Civil P.C., against an order of the learned Civil Judge of Ghazipur. The facts, which have led up to this application, are these : One Rai Bahadur Sada Nand Pande died leaving him surviving, a widow, Mt. Chandeshwari Kuer, and two sons, Ishwar Dayal Pande and Prem Dayal Pande, and considerable fortune. Under an agreement arrived at between the parties, the two sons were entitled to get six annas each and the lady a four anna share in the estate. Prem Dayal Pande sold his six annas to one Panchanan Banerji and Mt. Chandeshwari Kuer, by a usufructuary mortgage, dated 23rd January 1929, conveyed her four anna share to him.2. In 1932 the mortgagee brought a suit for arrears of rent against certain tenants. Mt. Chandeshwari Kuer applied to be made a party. She was made a party. The suit was dismissed and the decision was affirmed, on appeal.3. The suit, which has given rise to this application in revision, was brought by the ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »