Allahabad Court August 1948 Judgments
Janardan Das Vs. Mahadeo Prasad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-31-1948
Reported in: AIR1949All201
Wanchoo, J.1. This is a reference by the Sub-divisional Officer of Karwi under Section 113 and Order 46, Rule 1, Civil P.C., in Connexion with certain execution proceedings pending before him under Chap. 5, U.P. Encumbered Estates Act XXV [25] of 1934.2. The facts which have led to this reference may be briefly narrated. An application under Section 4, U.P. Encumbered Estates Act, was filed on behalf of Shri Thakur Lachhmi Narain Ji of Bara Akhara and Mahant Janardan Das. There were five creditors who were shown in the application and three debts were specified. One of those debts was on the basis of an alleged mortage by conditional sale for Rs. 10,000. The other two debts were small ones and related to a profit suit and a decree in favour of some of the creditors. The application was, in due course, referred by the Collector to the Special Judge, and grade, Banda. When the matter came up before that Court, there was a compromise between all the parties. By this compromise, half the p...
Tag this Judgment!Sahu Madan Mohan Vs. Tejram George Coronation Hindu School Association ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-31-1948
Reported in: AIR1949All207
Agarwalla, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 6A, Court-fees Act by a plaintiff and raises a question of court-fees payable on the plaint.2. The suit was for the following five reliefs : (a) It be declared that the plaintiff is intact the President of Tej Ram George Coronation Hindu High School, and is entitled to function as such. (b) It be declared that the resolutions dated 12-4-45, 2-5-45, 8-6-45, 10-6-45 and 1-7-45-and all the proceedings carried out by the defendants are void and ultra vires. (c) Defendants be restrained from altering or adding to the name of the institution. (d) Defendant 2 be restrained from functioning as the President. (e) Defendants be restrained from interfering in plaintiff's functioning as the President. The plaintiff valued relief (a) at Rs. 600, relief (b)at RS. 3000, relief (c) at Rs. 500, relief (d) at RS. 500 and relief (e) at Rs. 500. He paid fixed court-fees on the first two reliefs on the ground that these reliefs were purely declaratory reliefs...
Tag this Judgment!Kashi Prasad Vs. Rex.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-30-1948
Reported in: 1949CriLJ365
ORDER1. Kashi Prasad Nigam was convicted by the Sub Divisional Magistrate of Lucknow for two offences under the U. P. Temporary Control of Rent and Eviction Act (in [3] of 1947) and sentenced to a fine of Rs. 25 or in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one mouth under each count. the case has been referred to this Court by the learned Sessions Judge of Lucknow with the recommendation that the applicant's convictions were illegal and might be quashed.2. The material facts are as follows: Kashi Prasad Nigam is the owner of a house in Lucknow. He let it out to T. P. Nigam. T. P. Nigam informed the Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Lucknow, who exercised the powers of the District Magistrate under Act III [3] of 1947, that he would vacate the house on 30th April 1947. He actually vacated the house on 4th May 1947. Having received this information, the Rent Control and Eviction Officer passed an order on 6th May 1917, asking Kashi Prasad Nigam to furnish certain particulars with ...
Tag this Judgment!Kunwar Singh and ors. Vs. Damodar Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-30-1948
Reported in: AIR1949All203
Seth, J.1. The applicant in the case was the defendant in the Court below in a suit for possession under Section 9, Specific Belief Act. It has been found as a fact that the plaintiff was dispossessed by the defendant on 6th July 1944, without his consent and otherwise than in due course of law. On these findings the suit has been decreed by the Court below. Before the institution of the suit and after dispossession, which took place on 6th July 1944, proceedings under Section 145, Criminal P.C., were started on a police report. These proceedings terminated on 21st December 1944, when it was found by the criminal Court that the defendant was in possession on the date of the preliminary order under Section 146, Criminal P.C., and on that ground his possession over the property was to be maintained so long as he was not evicted therefrom by due process of law.2. The contention of the learned Counsel before me is that the due process of law mentioned in Section 145, Criminal P.C., should ...
Tag this Judgment!Malik Mohammad Shujaat Wali Khan Vs. Mt. Salim Jahan Begam and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-30-1948
Reported in: AIR1949All204
Sapru, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal. It arises out of a suit for pre-emption under the Agra Pre-emption Act, 1922, (Act XI of 1922).2. The pre-emptor, Malik Mohammad Shujaat Wali Khan and the vendor, Malik Mohammad Zulfiqar Wali Khan are brothers. Malik Mohammad Zulfiqar Wali Khan's wife is Mt. Salim Jahan Begam. It is alleged by the pre-emptor that on the 20th September 1943 Malik Mohammad Zulfiqar Wali Khan executed a sale-deed with respect to his share in three villages in lieu of kharch-i-pandan in favour of his wife. The sale consideration shown in this document was Rs. 14,400. It is on the basis of this sale-deed that the plaintiff brought a suit out of which the present appeal has arisen. The trial Court dismissed the suit on the ground that the transaction was in the nature of an exchange and did not amount to a sale as defined in Section 54, Transfer of Property Act, read with Section 4(10), Agra Pre-emption Act. The short question, therefore, in the case is whether the t...
Tag this Judgment!Kashi Prasad Vs. Rex
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-30-1948
Reported in: AIR1949All241
ORDER1. Kashi Prasad Nigam was convicted by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Lucknow for two offences under the U.P. Temporary Control of Rent and Eviction Act (III [3] of 1947) and sentenced to a fine of Rs. 25 or in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month under each count. The case has been referred to this Court by the learned Sessions Judge of Lucknow with the recommendation that the applicant's convictions were illegal and might be quashed.2. The material facts are as follows : Kashi Prasad Nigam is the owner of a house in Lucknow. He let it out to T. P. Nigam. T. P. Nigam informed the Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Lucknow, who exercised the powers of the District Magistrate under Act III [3] of 1947, that he would vacate the house on 30th April 1947. He actually vacated the house on 4th May 1947. Having received this information, the Rent Control and Eviction Officer passed an order on 6th May 1947, asking Kashi. Prasad Nigam to furnish certain particulars wit...
Tag this Judgment!Payag Singh Vs. Kamla Prasad and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-30-1948
Reported in: AIR1949All432
ORDERSeth, J.1. This is a defendant's application in revision and is directed against an order of the lower appellate Court by which it set aside an order of the Munsif directing the plaint to be returned for presentation to the proper Court. The lower appellate Court came to the conclusion that the civil Court had jurisdiction to try the suit and, therefore, remanded the case to the Court of the Munsif for being disposed of on merits.2. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the applicant that the civil Court had no jurisdiction to entertain this suit and that the order of the first Court was a correct order. The suit was brought in order to obtain possession of property which was alleged by the plaintiff to be the joint family property of himself and his father Dwarka Miair, and which was further alleged to have been alienated by Dwarka Misir in favour of defendant Payag Singh. The relief claimed in the suit was that a decree for the possession of the property be passed in favour...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Asray Vs. Hira Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-30-1948
Reported in: AIR1949All681
Chandiramani, J.1. This is the plaintiff's appeal against the decree of Mr. Surendra Vikram Singh, Civil Judge, Unnao, dated 4th June 1942.2. It appears that the appellant Ram Asray (who has died since the filing of the appeal and is now represented by his widow Mt. Sochana-Devi, his son, Radhey Lal and his daughter, Mt. Sukh Dei) and his brother Bhola mortgaged a certain kachcha house and ahata in the town of Unnao to one Mohan Lal on 19th March 1906, for Rs. 200. The rate of interest was 15 per cent, per annum simple. Under this deed the mortgagee was given possession of the property. It was specifically stated in the mortgage deed that the profits of the property shall be deemed to be Rs. 20 per year and, as the interest due on the loan would exceed the income derived from the property, the deficiency, that is, Rs. 10 would be paid in cash. It was also provided in the mortgage deed that the repairs would be done annually by the mortgagors but in case they failed to do so the mortgag...
Tag this Judgment!Nand Kishore Vs. Khillan Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-30-1948
Reported in: AIR1949All714
Agarwala, J.1. This is a reference made by the learned Civil Judge of Bulandshahr under Section 289 (2), U.P. Tenancy Act XVIl [17] of 1939.2. The facts giving rise to the reference are, shortly stated, as follows: Khillan and Jhamman, defendants in the suit which has given rise to the reference mortgaged their share in certain Khewats usufructuarily to one Ganga Dayal on 5th March 1928 and were declared exproprietary tenants of the sir plots which are the subject. matter of the present suit. Rent was assessed in due course. It was not paid and consequently Khillan and Jhamman were ejected under Section 79 of the old Tenancy Act. Ganga Dayal, the mortgagee obtained delivery of possession on 22nd January 1932. Ganga Dayal appears to have been recorded as in possession of the plots as a khudkasht-holder from 1341 Fasli to 1345 Fasli. in 1936 Khillan and Jhamman made an application under the U.P. Encumbered Estates Act and showed this property as their property. Ganga Dayal, the mortgagee...
Tag this Judgment!Meri Mal Vs. Mt. Sharifan and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-26-1948
Reported in: AIR1949All194
Seth, J.1. This is a defendant-vendee's appeal arising out of a suit for pre-emption. On the 26th November 1942, one Bashir Mohammad Khan executed a gale deed in respect of the property in dispute in favour of the appellant. A separate document was executed along with this sale deed on the same date by which the vendee agreed to return the property to the vendor if the sale consideration was repaid to him within a period of three years. No suit was instituted to pre-empt this sale deed dated the 26th November 1942. On 6th November 1943, there took place another transaction. It was brought about by means of a document executed on that date by which the rights of the vendor to get back the property were also conveyed to the vendee. The present suit has been filed to pre-empt the transaction dated 6th November 1943, on the allegation that it is this transaction which constitutes the sale of the property by Bashir Mohammad Khan in favour of the appellant. In order to substantiate this cont...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »