Allahabad Court September 1948 Judgments
Mt. Ram Kumari Vs. Rex.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-29-1948
Reported in: 1949CriLJ527
1. The appellant Mt. Earn Eumari, aged about 80 or 35 years, was convioted by Mr. M. C Desai, Sessions Judge, Luoknow, on 26th July 1948, under Section 302, Fenal Code, and sentenced to death. The usual reference for confirmation of the death sentence is also before us and she has tiled an appeal against her conviction. She was charged with an offence under Section 302, Penal Code, and in the alternative with an offence under Section 201, Penal Code. For the offence under Section 302, Penal Code, she was tried with the aid of assessors and for the offence under Section 201, Penal Code, she was tried by the game assessors as jury, and the unanimous verdict of the jury was that the appellant is guilty under Section 201, Penal Code. The learned Sessions Judge, however, did not agree with the verdict of the jury solely on the ground that as in his opinion the appellant was guilty under Section 502, Penal Code, she could not be convicted under Section 201, Penal Cods, and accordingly he has...
Tag this Judgment!Mt. Ram Kumari Vs. Rex
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-29-1948
Reported in: AIR1949All329
1. The appellant Mt. Ram Kumari, aged about 30 or 35 years, was convicted by Mr. M. C. Desai, Sessions Judge, Lucknow, on 26th July 1948, under Section 302, Penal Code, and sentenced to death. The usual reference for confirmation of the death sentence is also before us and she has filed an appeal against her conviction. She was charged with an offence under Section 302, Penal Code, and in the alternative with an offence under Section 201, Penal Code. For the offence under Section 302, Penal Code, she was tried with the aid of assessors and for the offence under Section 201, Penal Code, she was tried by the same assessors as jury, and the unanimous: verdict of the jury was that the appellant is guilty under Section 201, Penal Code. The learned Sessions Judge, however, did not agree with the. verdict of the jury solely on the ground that as in his opinion the appellant was guilty under Section 302, Penal Code, she could not be convicted under Section 201, Penal Code, and accordingly ha h...
Tag this Judgment!Chandi Vs. Kali Charan and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-24-1948
Reported in: AIR1949All733
Misra, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for possession of a half share in two plots situate in the city of Lucknow by partition.2. The facts may be given with reference to the following pedigree:RUPAN|------------------------------------------------------------------| | |Jeorakhan Nanhun Tulshi = Mt. Mula.| | (Plaintiff)-------------------- ---------------------------- || | | | | | |Maiku Dina Jawahir Ajodhia (Defen- Maiku=Mt. Bal Krishna |dant No. 1) Chhedana (Defendant No. 2) |(Defendant No. 3) |--------------------------------| |Kali Charan Pahlad(Plaintifi No. 1) (Plaintiff No. 2)3. The plots in suit, namely, plot No. 17 in mohalla Ramnagar, area 3 bighas 3 biswas 4 biswansis 10 kachwansis and plot No. 614 in mohalla Salakganj measuring 15 has 18 bis-wansis 16 kachwansis with certain trees and a well were purchased under a sale deed (Ex. 1) in the name of Rupan and Nanhun jointly on 27th July 1905. Rupan subsequently, gitted his share on 19th September 1S09 to Tulsbi. He state...
Tag this Judgment!Mrs. V.E. Argles Vs. Chhail Behari
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-23-1948
Reported in: 1949CriLJ345
ORDERBind Basni Prasad, J.1. This is a reference by the learned Sessions Judge of Gorakhpur, arising out of proceeding under Section 145, Criminal P. C. The dispute is about the property known as Natwar Estate in the district of Gorakhpur which consists of zamindari and markets. It appears from the application, dated 7th May 1948, made to the learned Sessions Judge that eleven villages are involved in this case. This estate originally belonged to one Mr. Argles, who died about 18 years ago leaving the applicant Mrs. Argles as the widow. He had made a will before his death. It is alleged that, according to it, Mrs. Argles was given a. life estate in the property with no powers of alienation and lease. Upon the death of the latter the property was to come absolutely to Mr. Argles daughter.2. On 18th August 1943, Mrs. Argles and her daughter executed a registered deed of lease in favour of Chhail Behari, the oppoiste party before us, for a period of seven years. It is common ground of the...
Tag this Judgment!Behari Lal Vs. Ram Swarup
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-22-1948
Reported in: AIR1949All265
1. This is a defendant's appeal. The dispute relates to a press known as Hari Kishen Karyalay Shukla Printing Press. The plaintiff alleged that on 6th March 1935, the press was opened in partnership with the defendant on certain conditions set out in the plaint, that on 11th February 1943, he served a notice on the defendant terminating the partnership and that he was, therefore, claiming the following reliefs:After accounting, sale of the partnership property and payment of the partnership debts a decree for Rs. 2100 or any other sum found due to the plaintiff. be passed in favour of the plaintiff against the defendant. That the defendant be made to pay the costs of the suit. That any other relief deemed just by the Court be granted.In the alternative the plaintiff prayed:That in case the dissolution of partnership is not proved a decree for dissolution of partnership be passed in favour of the plaintiff against the defendant.The suit has been decreed for the second relief as the lowe...
Tag this Judgment!Balbhaddar Tewari Vs. Jai Ram Tewari and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-22-1948
Reported in: AIR1949All325
Chandiramani, J.1. This is the plaintiff's appeal against the judgment and decree of Mr. H K. Ghoshal, Civil Judge, Faizabad, dated 22nd September 1942.2. Mt. Kalapraji, widow of Hari Ram, own nephew of the plaintiff-appellant, sold on 28th June 1940 some shares in immovable property in villages Madarbhari and Arhanpur to Salig Earn, now represented by his legal representatives, and Baldeo, Raghunandan and Beni Madho. The plaintiff filed a suit for pre-empting both the properties alleging a preferential right in both villages and also stated that the real consideration of the sale-deed was only Rs. 600 and not Rs. 2,500. The trial Court held that the plaintiff had a preferential right to pre-empt; in village Madarbhari and its proportionate price was Rs. 600-12-0. It held that although the vendor was related by marriage to the plaintiff; yet this was not the kind of relationship, contemplated in Section 9, Oudh Laws Act, and that in other respects both the pre emptor and the vendees ha...
Tag this Judgment!Bisheshar and ors. Vs. Rex Through Bachcho Lal Pandey
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-21-1948
Reported in: AIR1949All213; 1949CriLJ322
ORDER1. This is an application in revision against an order of the learned Sessions Judge of Basti dismissing the appeal preferred by the applicants.2. The applicants were convicted by a Special Magistrate first class of Basti for offences under 8s. 325 and 323 read with Section 149, Penal Code, and the sentence passed against them was only a sentence of fine under all the sections. In appeal by the applicants to the learned Sessions Judge, the convictions and sentences were slightly altered. He convicted the applicants under Section 147 Penal Code, also and fined them Us. 15 each and adjusted the fine in such a way as not to enhance the total amount of fine imposed by the Magistrate.3. In village Pachmarhi District Basti a parti land, measuring 18 bighas katcha was owned by the zemindars including the complainant Bachulal. The applicants claimed to hare obtained a lease of this land from the zamindar. Bachulal claimed to have held 8 bighas of this land as a statutory tenant from 1351 ...
Tag this Judgment!Mahabir and ors. Vs. Rex Through Shamdhari
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-21-1948
Reported in: 1949CriLJ338
Wanchoo, J.1. This is a reference made by the Additional Sessions Judge of Banaras in respect of an order passed under Section 522, Criminal P. C., by a Magistrate of the Second Class of Banaras and confirmed on appeal by the Additional District Magistrate of that district.2. The facts of the casa are as follows. Plots Nos. 1160/37 and 1160/60 belonging to Raja Baldeo Das Birla were under the 'cultivation of one ShilSaran, tenant. On 30th July 1946, Baijnath and eight other accused persona forcibly ploughed the said plots. Shiamdhari Singh, servant of Shilsaran, went to the spot and remonstrated with the accused and tried to stop them from ploughing the field, but the accused did not listen to him. On 3lst July 1946, Bhiamdhari Singh lodged a complaint against the accused charging them under Section 447, Penal Code, for having committed criminal trespass and under a, 352, Penal Code, foe having assaulted him.3. The accused pleaded 'not guilty' to the charges. Five of the accused stated...
Tag this Judgment!Faiyaz Ali and ors. Vs. District Magistrate and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-20-1948
Reported in: 1949CriLJ224
ORDERBind Basni Prasad, J.1. These are four applications under Section 491, Criminal P. C., by Syed Ali Kabir, Safdar Husain-Khan, Faiyaz Ali and Munnu alias Abdul Latif. They are under detention in accordance with the order passed under Section 3, U. P. Maintenance of Public Order (Temporary) Act, 1917. Syed Ali Kabir is a resident of Banares and he is a dealer in silk cloth. Safdar Husain is also a merchant who inter alia deals in radios at Banares and Munnu is a dealer in steel trunks at Kanpur and Faiyaz Ali was an Assistant Director in the Industries Department of the Provincial Government at Kanpur.2. Mr. Hamidullah Beg, who appears for the first two applicants, has raised several points but it is not necessary to deal with all of them. Two points which are common to all the four a applications are, in my opinion, sufficient for their disposal. The first contention is that the mandatory provisions of Section 6, of the aforesaid Act have not been complied with in any of these . oa...
Tag this Judgment!Suiti Devi and anr. Vs. Banarsidas Bhagwandas
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-20-1948
Reported in: AIR1949All703
1. This is a defendants' appeal in a suit for possession and damages. The material facts are as follows : Karaundia Industrial Development Co. Ltd., owned a flour mill and an ice factory situated at Aisbbagh, Lucknow. The company went into liquidation and the liquidators appointed by the Avadh Chief Court sold to two brothers. Rangnath Khemraj and Srini-vas Khemraj, the said mill and ice factory for & consideration of Rs. 7,61,000. Rangnath Khemraj and Srinivas Khemraj carried on business in Bombay under the firm name 'Messrs. Khemraj. Srikishendas.' The purchasers created an equitable mortgage over the said mill and factory in favour of the Central Bank of India Ltd., for a consideration of Rs. 4,50,000. The two brothers were adjudicated insolvent on 9th September 1930, and the property owned by them, including the said mill and the factory, vested in the official assignee. On 17th December 1930, the Central Bank of India Ltd., filed a suit in the High Court of Bombay (Original Side) ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »