Allahabad Court January 1948 Judgments
L. Shyam Behari Lal Vs. Ramesh Chand and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-28-1948
Reported in: AIR1948All334
ORDERHarish Chandra, J.1. These three civil revisions arise out of three similar orders passed by an Assistant Collector of the first class in three similar cases between the same parties under Section 230, U.P. Tenancy Act, 1939. The suits were for profits, instituted by Ramesh Chandra opposite party against Sukhbasilal. After the death of Sukhbasilal, his widow, Mt. Mahadevi, and his son, Shyam Behari Lal were substituted in his place. An application was made on behalf of the applicant that an issue arising out of his contention that the plaintiff was not the proprietor of the land in suit be framed and remitted to the civil Court for a finding. These applications were rejected by the learned Assistant Collector on 28-2-1947, and Shyam Behari Lal has come up in revision from these orders passed by the Assistant Collector. He prays that the orders passed by the Assistant Collector be set aside and his request that an issue be framed and remitted to the civil Court for a finding be all...
Tag this Judgment!R.R. Chari Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-26-1948
Reported in: AIR1948All238
ORDERWanchoo, J.1. This is an application by R.R. Chari for reduction of the amount of bail on which he has been released. It appears that the applicant was wanted in connection with certain offences under various sections of the Indian Penal Code said to have been committed by him while he was posted on Government service in Kanpur. He was arrested in Madras on 28-10-1947 in pursuance of a bailable warrant issued by the District Magistrate of Kanpur. The warrant specified that he should be released on bail on his executing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 and two sureties each of Rs. 50,000. After his arrest he was so released by the Commissioner of police at Madras and was directed to appear before the District Magistrate of Kanpur at 11 A.M. on 26-11-1947. He did appear before the District Magistrate on that date. The District Magistrate then decided to re-arrest him and sent him to jail. A point has been raised that this action of the District Magistrate was not proper and that the ap...
Tag this Judgment!Ramadhar Rai and ors. Vs. Dudh Nath Rai and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-20-1948
Reported in: AIR1948All308
ORDERSapru, J.1. This is a defendants' application in revision arising out of a suit brought by the plaintiffs opposite party under Section 12, U.P. Agriculturists' Relief Act, for redemption of a certain mortgage. The defence to the suit was that the defendants were not mortgagees at the time of the suit but were, in point of fact, occupancy tenants of the mortgaged plots. The trial Court dismissed the suit on a finding that the defendants were tenants of the mortgaged plots and that they were not mortgagees. Thereupon there was an appeal by the plaintiffs to the lower appellate Court. That Court has set aside the finding of the learned Assistant Collector and-has held that the defendants are mortgagees and not tenants. It has further remanded the case for disposal of the issue whether the amount had been paid or not. It is against this order of remand that the present application in revision has been filed by the defendants.2. Admittedly no appeal against the order passed lies to thi...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Bharosey and ors. Vs. Bishwanath Rao Peshwa
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-14-1948
Reported in: AIR1948All301
ORDERRaghubar Dayal, J.1. Ram Bharosey, his brother Misrilal and their mother Mt. Bhoori appealed to the District Judge of Bareilly against the decree for possession passed in favour of Raja Bishwanath Rao Peshwa, opposite party. The appellants applied to be allowed to appeal as paupers. This application was opposed by the opposite party and by the Collector. On the date of hearing, however the Government pleader did not contest the application and the Disirict Judge permitted the appellants to appeal as paupers and also ordered, the applicants to file security for costs in both the Courts. Ram Bharosey and other appellants took time to. furnish security. Their last application for further time was not granted and the appeal was ordered to have stood rejected in default. Against this last order Civil Revn. No. 340 of 1944 was filed.2. Another Civil Revn. No. 701 of 1945 wag filed on 26th October 1945, against the original order requiring Ram Bharosey and others to file security. It was...
Tag this Judgment!Mool Chand and ors. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-12-1948
Reported in: AIR1948All281
ORDERWanchoo, J.1. This is an application by Moot Chand and others under Section Criminal P.C. These 29 persons were arrested at Roorkee in the district of Saharanpur between 23rd and 25th of November 1947. The arrests started in. this manner. An explosion is said to have taken-place in Roorkee in which one Dasoundhi is a said to have been injured. It is also said that Mool Chand applicant was arrested at or near the spot immediately after the explosion on suspicion of having been concerned in it. Dasaundhi took Mool Chand to the thana on 23rd November 1947 and made a report under Section 307, Penal Code, and Sections 3 and 4, Ex-plosive Substances Act, 6 [vi] of 1908. Then began an investigation into those specific offences. It is said that Mool Chand made certain disclosures to the police. In consequence of those disclosures and of the investigation by the police into this report of Dasaundhi, the remaining 28 applicants were arrested between the dates given by me above. Two of these...
Tag this Judgment!Mohd. Yusuf and anr. Vs. Abdul Wahid
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-05-1948
Reported in: AIR1948All296
ORDERBind Basni Prasad, J.1. This is a petition in revision filed by the plaintiffs against an order dated 9th February 1946 passed by Mr. Mohammad Jalil, Civil Judge of Saharanpur. It arises out of a suit for the recovery of rent of a shop. The suit was based on a rent note of 1926 purporting to have been executed by Ali Ahmad, father of the defendant and also by Abdul Wahid the defendant.2. The defence was that the defendant was a minor in 1926 and the rent note is, therefore, void. It was also alleged that the defendant was an occupant of the shop in his own right and not as a tenant from the plaintiff.3. The suit was decreed by the learned Munsif who held that the defendant's plea of minority was barred by res judicata and that on the date of the execution of the rent note he was not a minor. According to him the defendant was born in 1907. The defendant went up in appeal and certain additional documents were produced before the learned Civil Judge which related to a guardianship p...
Tag this Judgment!Chief Inspector of Stamps Vs. Himmat Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-05-1948
Reported in: AIR1948All300
ORDERBind Bansi Prasad, J.1. This is a petition in revision by the Chief Inspector of Stamps under Section 6B, Court-fees Act, as amended in this Province. The facts are as follows:2. The plaintiffs opposite party applied to the Civil Judge of Agra under Section 12, U.P. Agriculturists' Relief Act, for the redemption of a usufructuary mortgage which was for a sum of Rs. 9000. It was contended that the entire mortgage-money had been paid up from the usufruct of the property. The claim was, therefore, for the possession of the property by redemption, without payment of any mortgage-money. The Chief Inspector of Stamps inspected the office of the learned Civil Judge and made the following report:This is a suit which has been filed under Sections 7, 8 and 9, U.P. Debt Redemption Act, and Section 12, Agriculturists' Relief Act. The following reliefs have been prayed for:(1) On proof of the fact the property in dispute may be redeemed in favour of the plaintiff and he may be put in possessio...
Tag this Judgment!Birbhan Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-02-1948
Reported in: AIR1948All242
ORDERMoothan, J.1. This is an application for the transfer of. certain criminal proceedings, now pending against one Birbhan in the Court of a Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Farrukhabad, to a Court in some other district.2. The applicant is a Sadh, and it is an unfortunate fact that for many years the Sadh community of Farrukhabad has been divided into two factions, known as the First and Second Parties, which are bitterly antagonistic. There has in particular been a long standing dispute between these rival parties over their respective rights to hold an annual bhandara in the common place of worship of the Sadh community in Farrukhabad known as the Chauki Sadan, and this dispute has led to much litigation between the two parties. The position at present is that each party is entitled to hold a bhandara in the Chauki Sadan, and on 18-8-1947, the date fixed by the District Magistrate of Farrukhabad, the First Party exercised its right. What actually occurred on that occasion is in disput...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›