Allahabad Court September 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.
Tirlok Chand and ors. Vs. Rex
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-10-1948
Reported in: 1949CriLJ238
Wanchoo, J.1. This is a revision by Tirlok Chand and ten others against their conviction under B. 81 (4), Defence of India Rules, read with Section 2, U. P. Sugar Movement Control Order, 1945, and Section 7, U. P. Gur Control Order, 1945.2. The case for the prosecution was that the police of thana Baraut received information that certain persons would export gur and sugar from, the United Provinces to places outside the United Provinces by crossing the river Yamuna near Ghat Jhankar, Consequently, on the night between 1st and 2nd June 1946 the Sub-Inspector along with some constables and other people lay in wait near the ghat to intercept the smugglers. At about 2 A. M. they saw a herd of fifty-eight donkeys most of which were laden with bags crossing the river. The eleven applicants were looking after, these donkeys. When some of the donkeys had gone into the river-bed along with four or five applicants, the police surrounded them and arrested the eleven applicants. The bags which wer...
Krishna Dhan Vs. Ummatul Zohra Begam
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-10-1948
Reported in: AIR1949All209
Malik, C.J.1. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties and are satisfied that the period during which the Court was closed during the vacation must be excluded. Under Order 45, Rule 7, Civil P.C., the appellant had to deposit the security money within ninety days or such further period not exceeding sixty days, as the Court may upon cause shown allow from the date of the decree complained of, or within six weeks from the date of the grant of the certificate, whichever is the later date. The six weeks within which security could be deposited expired during the High Court vacation. If the period expires on a closed holiday, it is not disputed that the time would be excluded in computing the period of six weeks. This is done under Section 10, General Clauses Act (X [10] of 1897), which provides that where under any Central Act any act or proceeding is directed or allowed to be done or taken in any Court or Office on a certain day or within a prescribed period, then, if the Court or O...
Nannhey Khan Vs. Mt. Gomti and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-10-1948
Reported in: AIR1949All289
Seth, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for partition and possession instituted by the plaintiff-respondent, Mt. Gomti. The appellant Nannhey Khan was defendant 5 in the suit. We are concerned with one item of property only in this appeal. It belonged originally to one Abdul Razzak and through the process of inheritance Qaviul Islam, defendant 4, became entitled to 35 sehams out of 96 sehams in this property. These 35 sehams were acquired by the plaintiff-respondent, Mt. Gomti on 15th September 1925. At the time of the suit the disputed property was in actual physical possession of the appellant Nannhey Khan. Mt. Gomti, therefore, impleaded Nannhey Khan also as a defendant to the suit along with other descendants of Abdul Razzak who had inherited the remaining 61 sehams. There was a triangular contest in the suit in this way that the plaintiff asserted that defendants 1 to 3, namely, Habibul Razzak, Hifzul Ruzzak and Moinul Islam, were in possession over the disputed property as co...
Hira Lal Vs. Ram Prasad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-10-1948
Reported in: AIR1949All677
Misra, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit instituted by Hira Lal, appellant, for recovery of Rs. 847 on the basis of a simple mortgage for Rs. 500. The plaintiff alleged that the security bond was executed by Dudh Nath mortgagor on 27th March 1924, but only a certified copy of the document was produced in Court. He accounted for the loss of the original deed by saying that be kept the mortgage deed in the pocket of his kurta and one night while it was left hanging on a peg in his bed room, the kurta as well as the deed were stolen. The plaintiff failed to satisfy the Courts below of the truth of this allegation. The defendants were the transferees from Dadb Nath, Only Behari Lal, defendant 4, contested the suit. He pleaded, inter alia, that the document was still in possession of the plaintiff audi it was not produced because there was an endorsement of payment on the back of it. It appears that in a previous suit, instituted by Behari Lal on the foot of a mortgage of the same prope...
Jagannath Singh and anr. Vs. Pragi Kunwar and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-09-1948
Reported in: AIR1949All448
Bhargava, J.1. On 21st June 1939, Jai Ram was murdered. The suit, which has given rise to was this appeal, was instituted by Jai Ram's widow, Shrimati Pragi Kunwar, on her own behalf and on behalf of her two minor sons, to recover a sum of Rs. 2000 by way of damages from the two appellants, Jagannath Singh and Ram Nath Singh, and certain other persons, who were said to have committed the murder or were otherwise responsible for it. The claim for damages was based on loss of company and support, which the plaintiffs had suffered due to the wrongful act of the defendants. The defendants denied having committed the murder and contended that the suit was not maintainable and the amount of damages claimed was excessive.2. The Courts below have found that the defendants had caused the death of Jai Ram; that the suit was maintainable; and that the plaintiffs were entitled to recover the amount of damages claimed.3. In this appeal, the learned Counsel for the appellants has contended that the ...
Ram Harakh Singh Vs. S. Mumtaz HusaIn and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-08-1948
Reported in: AIR1949All679
ORDERGhulam Hasan, J.1. This revision under Section 115, Civil P.C., raises a point of soma interest. The point arises in this way. Surat Singh and Gajraj Singh made a mortgage of certain property in favour of Mumtaz Husain for Rs. 1,500. Surat Singh died leaving his son Ram Harakh. The interest of Gajraj Singh as co-mortgagor upon his death devolved upon Arjun Singh. Ram Harakh instituted proceedings for redemption of the property under Section 12, U.P. Agriculturists' Relief Act, impleading, besides Mumtaz Husain mortgagee, his co-mortgagor Arjun Singh as a defendant. His case was that he was entitled to redemption without payment of any amount as the entire mortgage money had been paid out of the usufruct of the property. The mortgagee's defence was that the profits were inadequate and a considerable amount was still due under the mortgage. Curiously enough Arjun Singh in his defence supported to some extent the case of the mortgagee. In para. 15 of his written statement he stated t...
Ahmed Sayed Vs. Bashir Ahmed and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-07-1948
Reported in: AIR1949All215
Bhargava, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal, which arises out of a suit for possession over certain land by demolition of the constructions made thereon. Admittedly, the land belongs to the biradari of loharan of Nagiaa and, on 15th March 1945, the defendants had taken it for a period of three years from the panches of the biradari for making constructions thereon. On the same date, the defendant had executed a qabuliat in favour of the panches & and agreed thereunder to vacate the land on the expiry of the said period. He was entitled to make any constructions he liked; and he actually built a residential house over the land. He did not vacate the land after the expiry of the said period. Thereupon the plaintiffs, who claimed to be the panches of the biradari, instituted the suit which has given rise to this appeal. The defendant denied that the plaintiffs were the panches of the biradari. He claimed to be the licensee and pleaded estoppel and acquiescence. It was also contended on hi...
Ram Kishan Vs. Karam Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-07-1948
Reported in: AIR1949All673
Chandiramani, J.1. This is the defendant's appeal against the decree of Mr. Hasan Irshad, Civil Judge, Bahraich, dated 31st August 1943.2. The plaintiff, the sole zamindar of village Jamnaha Bhawanipur, filed a suit for recovery of possession of a site of a house in its hamlet Bhawanipur. He alleged that the defendant respondent Ramji Lal used to live in a house in the abadi of the hamlet Bhawanipur and when this house fell into ruins he sold it to the defendant Ram Kishan, the present appellant, for Rs. 50, contrary to the custom, without his permission and that the defendant appellant Ram Kishan had made certain constructions and those should be demolished and possession of site be given to him. In defence it was pleaded that Bhawanipur was an integral part of village Jamnaha Bhawanipur, that this village had ceased to be an agricultural village on account of a big market there and so the law applicable to agricultural villages was not applicable, that the owner of the house in that ...
Chandrika Vs. Rex
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-06-1948
Reported in: AIR1949All176; 1949CriLJ228
ORDERSeth, J.1. This iS an application for the re-hearing of an appeal which was decided and dismissed on 26th June 1948, under the following circumstances.2. On an application being made, a date was fixed for the hearing of the appeal. That date happened to be 5th July 1948, By a mistake of the office, however, the cage was listed for hear-ing earlier and was heard and disposed of on 25th June 1918, ten days before the date fixed for its hearing. Mr. Rai Rajeshwari Prasad, learned Counsel for the appellant, under the belief that the case could not be taken up before 5th July 1943, was not at Allahabad and, there, fore, no appearance was made on behalf of the appellant when the case was heard. The appel. lant was, thus, deprived of an opportunity of being heard before the case was decided against him. There'cannot be the least doubt that these facts constitute a sufficient cause for setting aside the proceedings, starting with the hearing of the appeal and terminating with judgment, in...
Mohammad HasnaIn and anr. Vs. Rex.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-06-1948
Reported in: 1949CriLJ571
Chandiramani, J.The appellants, Syed Mohammad Hasnain and his son-in-law, Syed Jafer Mehdi, were convicted by Mr. R. C. Verma, Sessions Judge, Bara Banki, on 20th April 1918, under Section 114, Penal Code, and sentenced each to rigorous imprisonment for six months.2. It would appear that in the village of Rudauli in Bara Banki district resides one Ibtihajuddin. The appellants are his next-door neighbours. In front of their houses is a plot of land about 4o' s 25' which has been the bone of contention between the parties. One party after another sought permission from the Notified Area for constructions on the land. Eventually on 10th June I9dl, Ibtihajuddin obtained permission from the Notified Area. The appellant Syed Mohammad Hasnain, who is a retired Sub: Inspector of Police, was not satisfied and sent complaints to the District Magistrate and the Sub. Divisional Magistrate. The Tahsildar, Mr. liar Shankar Singh, reached Budauli on 12th 3uly 1941 and tried to bring about some settle...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »