Allahabad Court December 1949 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.
Rupai Vs. GoshaIn Ram Charandas
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-20-1949
Reported in: AIR1952All391
Waliullah, J.1. These are two appeals by two sets of judgment-debtors whose objections directed against an application for execution have been dismissed by the Court below.2. It appears that Suit No. 88 of 1932 was instituted by Goshain Ram Charan Das against several sets of defendants. By means of this suit the plaintiff claimed recovery of distinct items of property from different defendants on the ground that they belonged to a Math of which he was the rightful Mahant. Some of the defendants appear to have admitted the claim made by the plaintiff while others resisted the claim. In the result the trial Court found that the plaintiff had failed to establish his claim to the Mahantahip of the Math and accordingly the plaintiff's claim was decreed as against those defendants who had admitted his claim while it was dismissed as against the other defendants who had contested the claim Goshain Ram Gharan Das came up in appeal to the High Court against the dismissal of a part of his claim ...
Sm. Safdari Begam Vs. Ashfaq HusaIn Khan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-20-1949
Reported in: AIR1952All538
ORDERDesai, J. 1. The applicant instituted proceedings under Section 145, Criminal P. C., against Ashfaq Husain Khan alleging that there was a dispute between them about possession over a house which was likely to cause breach of peace. The Magistrate got an enquiry made by the Police who reported that there was a dispute and that it was likely to result in breach of peace. The Magistrate thereupon passed the preliminary order calling upon the parties to file written statements in support of their claims of possession. The date fixed for filing of the written statements was 22nd May 1948. When the case was called out on that date the applicant was absent while the opposite party was present. The Magistrate dismissed the applicant's complaint 'in default' and released the house from the attachment. The applicant appeared in the Court shortly after the dismissal of her complaint and presented another complaint on the same allegations. The Magistrate treated it as a fresh application and ...
Mohd. Sharif Khan Vs. U.P. Government
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-19-1949
Reported in: AIR1953All274
Malik, C.J.1. A house in the city of Pilibhit was in the occupation of Mohammad Umar, Circle Inspector of Police on payment of Rs. 50 per month as rent. Mohammad Umar was transferred and was succeeded by Mustafa Khan. When Mustafa Khan wanted to occupy the house that was in the occupation of his predecessor-in-office, the owner of the house raised certain objections The District Magistrate thereupon requisitioned the house under Section 3, U. P. Temporary Accommodation Requisition Act, 25 of 1947.2. In the year 1947, there being an acute shortage of houses which was, to a larger extent, due to influx of refugees and a movement of the population from the rural to the urban areas, the Provincial Legislature passed this Act giving the District Magistrate a right to requisition any accommodation for any public purpose by an order in writing. If after such order and within the period specified in the Act, possession was not given, the District Magistrate was authorised under Section 11, to ...
Sharan Behari Lal and ors. Vs. Kanhaiya Lal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-19-1949
Reported in: AIR1953All276
Agarwala, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit for recovery of money on the basis of a simple mortgage bond dated 23-12-1931, executed by Angan Lal, defendant 1, in favour of the plaintiff, who was at the date of the mortgage and still is, an advocate practising at Mathura. The appellants are subsequent transferees of the hypothecated property and were arrayed as defendants 2 to 5 in the suit. Defendant 1 did not contest the suit. Indeed, he appeared as a witness for the plaintiff. The appellants contested the suit inter alia on the grounds, (1) that the mortgagor, Angan Lal, was on the date of the mortgage, dated 23-12-1931, a member of the joint Hindu family with his brother Kunj Lal and as such, could not mortgage any portion of the property, and (2) that the plaintiff, being a legal practitioner, was prohibited from entering into a trade or business and as the advancing of a loan on the basis of the mortgage is a contract by way of trade or business, the contract...
Fateh Chand Vs. Daulat Chand
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-19-1949
Reported in: AIR1952All358
Malik, C.J. 1. A temple was built at Maheshwari Mohal, Kanpur City, in the year 1872 by one Raghunath Pershad, who installed in that temple an idol of Shri Dharam Nath Swami. A dharamshala was later purchased by Santokh Chand, father of the defendant-respondent, but it is admitted that there is no income from the Dharamshala. It is, however, alleged by the plaintiff that this was property of the temple and did not belong to Santokh Chand. In a partition in 1918, it was found that a sum of Rs. 19,337-1-9 belonging to the temple was in deposit in the parties' ancestral firm Sukhrup Mal Raghunath Pershad. At the time of the partition, the defendant was made responsible for payment of this money to the temple and a charge was created on the two houses allotted to him and it was provided in the arbitration award that he would not be entitled to sell these houses except with the object of raising money to repay the sum due to the temple. With this money some land had to be purchased with the...
Niranjan Lal Bhargava Vs. Mt. Ram Kali Devi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-19-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All396
Seth, J.1. Both these appeals arise out of the same suit which was instituted on 15th December 1943, by Mst. Ram Kali Devi against the appellant, Pandit Niranjan Lal Bhargava, for his ejectment from a building, known as 'Sahu Palace'. The aforesaid premises were let on 1st November 1989 by the plaintiff to the defendant for a period of four years, expiring on 31st October 1943. The plaintiff sought to eject the defendant on three grounds, namely, (1) that the term of the lease had expired, (2) that the defendant was causing injury to the building, and (3) that a sum of Rs. 100 had remained due as arrears of rent.2. The defendant pleaded, in defence, that certain orders passed under the Defence of India Rules prevented the plaintiff from ejecting him. He denied that he was causing any injury to the building or that any arrears of rent were outstanding against him.3. The Munsif gave a conditional decree in the suit to the plaintiff. By that decree the defendant was ordered to be ejected ...
Nand Lal Srivastava Vs. Rex
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-16-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All377
ORDERV. Bhargava, J.1. Nand Lal Srivastava has filed this revision application against his conviction and sentence for an offence Under Section 161, Penal Code. The applicant was convicted by a Magistrate, First Class, and sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000/-. On appeal, the learned Additional Sessions Judge of Benares affirmed the conviction but reduced the amount of fine from Rs. 1,000/- to Rs. 500/-.2. In this revision various points of law were argued on behalf of the applicant to show that his conviction was not justified and was liable to be set aside. I need only deal one point which goes to the root of the case as it affects the jurisdiction of the Magistrate to take cognizance of the case.3. It has been urged on behalf of the applicant that there is no proof that a valid sanction Under Section 6, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, was granted by any competent authority in respect of this offence and, therefore, the learned Magistrate was not...
Mohammad Sharif and anr. Vs. Rex
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-16-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All380
P.L. Bhargava, J.1. This is an appeal by Mohammad Sharif and his own brother, Laiq Ahmad, residents of Kot Sharki in the town of Sambhal district Moradabad. The charge against Laiq Ahmad was that he had, on 9th June 1948, at about 7 or 8 p. m., committed murder by intentionally causing the death of Badri Prasad, and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 302, Penal Code. It was alleged that he had stabbed Badri Prasad with a knife while he was passing in front of his (Laiq Ahmad's) house in the company of his sons, Mahesh Chandra, Girish Chandra and Bishesh Chandra. Mohammad Sharif was charged under Section 302/109, Penal Code and also under Section 392, Penal Code. It was said that he bad abetted the murder of Badri Prasad and forcibly removed currency notes of the value of Rs. 250 from the pocket of Mahesh Chandra. The learned Civil and Sessions Judge, who tried them, found Laiq Ahmad guilty and convicted him under the second part of Section 304, Penal Code and sentenc...
Sumer Vs. Rex
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-14-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All398
ORDERRaghubar Dayal, J. 1. Sumer was convicted by the Temporary Sessions Judge of Hamirpur at Orai of the offence under Section 412, Penal Code, and was sentenced to six years' rigorous imprisonment.2. A dacoity was committed at the house of Mahant Bhagwan Das of Banphara, police station Kotwali, Orai, in April 1916, and the dacoits had taken away gun No. 992 S. B. M. L. This gun was recovered from the possession of Sumer on 13th September 1946.3. Then is no reason to dispute the finding of fact that the gun which was stolen by the dacoits was recovered from the possession of Sumer. I am, however, of opinion that the offence made out against the accused was under Section 411, Penal Code, and not under Section 412, Penal Code.4. Section 412, Penal Code, is:'Whoever dishonestly receives or retains any stolen property, the possession whereof he knows or has reason to believe to have been transferred by the commission of dacoity or dishonestly receives from a person, whom he knows or has r...
Azam Ali Vs. Rex
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-14-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All412
ORDERDesai, J.1. The case against the applicant, a clerk constable at police station Pilkhwa, who has been convicted Under Section. 161, Penal Code, by the Courts below, was as follows.2. A stray camel was caught by one Jaipal and was tied up at his door. A Sub-Inspector of police of Pilkhwa police station went to the village on 23rd January 1947 and arrested Jaipal on the charge of stealing the camel. Though the villagers told him that it was not a case of theft, he did not release Jaipal on bail and took him to the police station where he was locked up. Ami Lal and Shiva Nandan offered security next morning and the Sub-Inspector demanded a bribe of Rs. 150/-. They borrowed Rs. 60/- from one Man Singh and paid the money to the Sub-Inspector and promised to pay the balance on the next day. On this promise, Jai Pal was released on bail. Jaipal, Shiva Nandan and Ami Lal then saw the Deputy Superintendent, Anti Corruption Department, and the Additional District Magistrate who set a trap t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »