Allahabad Court February 1948 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.
Mt. Pancham Koer Vs. Ranbir Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-25-1948
Reported in: AIR1948All336
Malik, C.J.1. This appeal has been filed by the legal representative of the landlord applicant. One Chaudhari Sheo Baran Singh applied under Section 4, Encumbered Estates Act before the Collector of Agra. The Collector sent the papers to the learned Special Judge in due course. After the papers had reached the Court of the learned Special Judge, Ch. Sheo Baran Singh applied for amendment of a decree, No. 81 of 1932 of the Court of the Civil Judge of Agra which had been passed against him on the basis of a mortgage deed. This application was filed before the Civil Judge and was for amendment of the decree under Section 80, Agriculturists' Relief Act by reducing the rate of interest and calculating it in accordance with the provisions of the said Act.2. An objection was taken before the learned Civil Judge that inasmuch as Ch. Sheo Baran Singh had already applied under the Encumbered Estates Act the proceedings under Section 30, Agriculturists' Relief Act were not maintainable by reason ...
Durga NaraIn Singh Vs. Gurdeen
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-23-1948
Reported in: AIR1948All292
Bind Basni Prasad, J.1. We have before us Second Appeal No. 946 of 1943 and civil Revision No. 419 of 1945 which have been referred by a learned single Judge to a Full Bench. The parties in both the cases are the same, but they arise out of two different proceedings. A common question of law is involved in both of them and this judgment will govern the second appeal and the revision both.2. In Second Appeal No. 946 of 1943 Capt. Raja Durga Narain Sing, who is now dead and is represented by his son, applied under Section 81, Agra Tenancy Act, 1926, to the Tahsildar for the issue of a notice to the defendant for payment of arrears of rent and for his ejectment in case of default. The defendant contested the notice and further proceedings took place in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Officer, Kanauj, as provided by law. As the claim was in respect of arrears of rent the realization of which had been stayed, the question arose whether in view of Section 5, U.P. Stayed Arrears of Rent (Remi...
Prakash Chand and ors. Vs. Mahendra Kumar and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-18-1948
Reported in: AIR1948All288
Malik, C.J.1. The learned Counsel for the opposite party has raised a preliminary objection that no revision lies.2. The plaintiffs filed a suit for partition of certain properties on the allegation that the properties belonged to their grandfather Bimal Prasad and they and the defendants are entitled to a half share each in the said property.3. The defence was that the plaintiffs' father, Jamboo Prasad, had been adopted by his maternal grandfather Din Dayal, and Jamboo Prasad was therefore not entitled to any share in the property left by his natural father, Bimal Prasad. It was mentioned that Jamboo Prasad by reason of this adoption had inherited the entire property belonging to his maternal grandfather which has been called shamli property. A plea was taken in the written statement that the suit, being for partial partition, was not maintainable and it should be dismissed. The plaintiffs denied that Jamboo Prasad was adopted by Din Dayal and alleged that Jamboo Prasad had got the pr...
The Punjab Sugar Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. Lachhman Prasad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-17-1948
Reported in: AIR1949All250
Bind Basni Prasad, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of a suit for accounts and profits under Section 231, U.P. Tenancy Act, 1939. In the plaint the amount claimed was Rs. 4,665 as the plaintiff's share of profits and Rs. 584 interest, total Rs. 5,249. Learned Assistant Col. lector applying the principle laid down in Sub-section (2) of Section 233 for the valuation of khudkasht land and excluding the portion of the claim which according to him was time-barred, held that the plaintiff was entitled to Rs. 435-15-0 only for profits and Rs. 49-0-3 as interest, total Rs. 481-15-3. He decreed the suit for this amount and dismissed it for the remainder. The plaintiff comes in appeal and the following three points have been urged on its behalf : (1) That in the peculiar circumstances of this case Sub-section (2) of Section 232, U.P. Tenancy Act, is not applicable and the plaintiff's share of profits should have been determined on the basis of net yield of the plots in suit. This is...
Than Singh and ors. Vs. Lakhapat Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-17-1948
Reported in: AIR1948All265
Bind Basni Prasad. J.1. The sole point for determination in this second appeal is whether on a true interpretation of the provisions of the Agra Pre-emption Act, 1922, a right of pre-emption accrues on the basis of a sale deed executed by the Collector in pursuance of the provisions Section 28, U.P. Encumbered Estates Act, 1934.2. The facts are undisputed. One Mt. Um-mat-uz-zohra Begam was the owner of the disputed property which was mortgaged to the defendants. She made an application to the Collector under Section 4, Encumbered Estates Act. In due course, the Collector forwarded the application to the Special Judge. On 3-6-1939, the 'Special Judge passed a decree under Section 11 of the Act. This was followed by decrees for money in favour of creditors under Section 14 of the Act. The Special Judge then sent the decrees under Section 19 of the Act to the Collector for execution in accordance with the provisions of chapter V of the Act. The Collector proceeded under Chapter V. He made...
Mt. Nawab Jan and ors. Vs. the Notified Area Committee
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-17-1948
Reported in: AIR1948All273
Sapru, J.1. The suit out of which this appeal arises was brought by one Mt. Mahtab Jan who died during the pendency of the appeal in the lower appellate Court and is now represented by her heirs and legal representatives, namely, Mt. Nawab Jan, Mt. Malka, Mt. Bindu and Mt. Sindu. The three latter are minors and are under the guardianship of Mt. Nawab Jan. The suit was for an injunction restraining the defendant, the Notified Area Committee, Auraiya, through its Chairman, from demolishing a chabutra which Mt. Mahtab Jan had constructed in front of her house and from interfering with her possession over the said conetructions. This chabutra lies on a land, the original number of which was 860 but the present number of which is 400.2. The plaintiff's case was that the laud on which this chabutra was built was in the ownership of certain zamindars, that they had transferred it to her by a patta dated 28-7-1941, that the Notified Area Committee had no title to it and that consequently the n...
Aditya Pd. Bagchi Vs. Jogendra Nath Maitra
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-17-1948
Reported in: AIR1948All393
Wanchoo, J.1. This is a revision by Aditya Pd. Bagchi against the order of the Sessions Judge of Allahabad confirming an order of a Special Magistrate of Allahabad dispensing with the presence of Jogendra Nath Maitra, accused opposite party in a trial under Section 500, Penal, Code.[1a]. The applicant filed a complaint against the opposite-party and the case was transferred to an Honorary Special Magistrate. The Magistrate issued a bailable warrant for the arrest of Jogendra Nath Maitra and fixed 12-7-1946, for the hearing of the case. The warrant was actually issued on 20-6-1946, and was served and Jogendra Nath Maitra was released on bail. On the Sate fixed for hearing, namely, 12-7-1946, Jogendra Nath Maitra did not appear personally in Court. An application was filed by his counsel on his behalf praying that his personal appearance be dispensed with on the ground that he was ill and was unable to attend the Court. The Magistrate, thereupon, ordered a summons to issue for the appear...
Rex Through Subedar Singh Vs. Jokhu and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-16-1948
Reported in: AIR1948All299
Harish Chandra, J.1. Three persons, namely Jokhu, Sukhu and Rangu were prosecuted under Sections 25, 26 and 28, Northern India Ferries Act (Act XVII of 1878) in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Banaras (North). Rangu pleaded guilty and was convicted under Sections 25 and 26 of the Act and sentenced to fines. The respondents, Jokhu and Sukhu, were also convicted under the same sections and sentenced to fines. All the accused persons were, however, acquitted under Section 28 of the Act. Rangu did not appeal from his convictions and sentences. The respondents went up in appeal to the Sessions Judge of Banaras and the learned Additional Sessions Judge by whom the appeal was heard allowed it and set aside the convictions and the sentences that had been passed upon the respondents. An appeal has been filed on behalf of the Provincial Government against the acquittal of the two respondents.2. The case against the respondents is that they worked a ferry from a point within a distanc...
Kashi Prasad Dichhit Vs. Raghunandan Khagi and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-06-1948
Reported in: AIR1948All344
Malik, J.1. The facts of this case are set out in details in the judgment of my learned brother. He has fully dealt with the various points urged by learned counsel.2. After a possessory mortgage deed is executed the mortgagee may be in actual occupation of the mortgaged property or the property may be in the possession of tenants. Where a mortgagee is himself in occupation of the property the question arises as to how his income from it is to be calculated. Once a mortgagee took possession of the mortgaged property equity treated the mortgagee much as if he was a trustee. He had to render intelligible accounts; he was liable to account not merely for the profits which he in fact received, but for those which he might have received but for his own wilful default; he was liable for any damage to the property resulting from his bad management; he had to apply, if necessary, any surplus income, after paying the current interest on the mortgage debt, of keeping the mortgaged premises in re...
Mukat Behari Lal Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-04-1948
Reported in: AIR1948All298
Harish Chandra, J.1. A complaint wag lodged against the applicant by Gaya Prasad under Section 466, Penal Code alleging that the applicant who is a patwari had committed a forgery in his roznamcha on 19th September 1942. The com-plaint was lodged on 13th December 1948. The trial Court proceeded with the trial of the case as a warrant case and examined the prosecution witnesses and then framed a charge against the applicant under Section 465, Penal Code on the 27th September 1946. He fixed a date for the further cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses on behalf of the defence. In the mean-while an application was made to the Sessions Judge in revision on behalf of the complainant and on 18th March 1947, the learned Sessions Judge acting under Section 437, Criminal P.C. directed that the case be committed to the Court of Session for trial under Section 466, Penal Code. The applicant came up to the High Court in revision against this order of the learned Sessions Judge and the appl...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »