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.
Hing Raj Singh Vs. Raja Bhagwati Bux Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-14-1949
Reported in: AIR1952All427
Chandiramani, J. 1. This is the defendant's appeal against the appellate decree of Mr. B. N. Zutshi, Civil Judge, Rae Bareli, dated 25-5-1945. 2. The plaintiff alleged that he waa zamindar of the land in suit and the defendant was a rank trespasser. He prayed for fixation of rent and also for a decree for arrears of rent for 1348 to 1351F. The defendant denied being a trespasserand on the contrary asserted that he was either an under proprietor or a proprietor. He also pleaded that the predecessor of the plaintiff had filed an earlier suit against him on 1933 for the same relief but that suit was dismissed in plaintiff's default under Order 9, Rule 8, Civil P. C. and accordingly the present suit was barred under Order 9, Rule 9 Civil P. C. The issue on the question of title was referred to the civil Court and the finding was that the defendant is neither an under proprietor nor a proprietor. It was also held that the previous suit did not bar the present suit. The rent was assessed at ...
Raghunath Das Vs. Babu Daya Sarup and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All324
Malik, C.J.1. The fasts of the case have been set out in the referring order. The landlord-applicant Daya Swamp filed an application Under Section 4, U. P. Encumbered Estates Act, in the year 1985, which was, in due course, sent by the Collector to the Special Judge, 2nd Grade, Bijnor. Tue learned Special Judge decided an objection which had been filed Under Section 11 on 12th August 1938. Thereafter, on 26th April 1940, he decided the claims and passed decrees Under Section 14 of the Act. It was not till the year 1944, that a fresh objection was preferred by Mt. Tarawati, daughter of the landlord-applicant Under Section 11, claiming that certain items of property mentioned in the notice belonged to her which had been gifted to her by her father before he had filed the application Under Section 4. This objection was dismissed by the learned Special Judge on 11th November 1944. Within one month of this dismissal the landlord applicant filed an application Under Section 20, U. P. Encumbe...
Amrit Lal Vs. Rex
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-1949
Reported in: AIR1952All366
V. Bhargava, J.1. This is a reference by the learned Sessions Judge of Shahjahanpur recommending that an order passed by a Magistrate amending a charge against Amrit Lal accused be set asice and the accused be acquitted.2. The facts show that Amrit Lal was prosecuted in that Court on a complaint filed by one Tika Chamar. During the trial of this case, charges under Sections 374 and 323, Penal Code, were framed against Amrit Lal. After the charges had been framed, further cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses took place and then on 12-6-1918, the evidence of medical officer was recorded under Section 256, Criminal P. C. Thereafter Amrit Lal accused moved an application in Court saying that the case had been compromised and requesting that it may consequently be dismissed. Tika, the complainant, verified this application on that very day and the learned Magistrate then fixed 23-6-1948 for orders. On 2-6-1948, before orders could be passed on the compromise application, two appli...
Khurshed Ali Khan Vs. Ram Saran Das and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All378
Malik, C.J.1. An application under the United Provinces Encumbered Estates Act was filed on 21st October 1936, by Lutuf Ali and the applicant Khurshed Ali. On 20th September 1937, Ram Saran Das, opposite party No. 1, objected to the maintainability of the application by Khurshed Ali and the Board of Revenue held on 13th November 1941, that Khurshed Ali had no right to apply under the Encumbered Estates Act. The result, therefore, was that Khurshed Ali's name was removed and Lutuf Ali remained the sole landlord applicant.2. On 28th July 1924, Lutuf Ali had executed a mortgage deed in favour of Narain Dass for a sum of Rs. 21,250 and had mortgaged his share in a village known as Shadipur Jhadol. Lutuf Ali sold a half share in the equity of redemption to Shib Charan and others for Rs. 24,000 on 18th July 1925, and left a part of the sale consideration or payment to the mortgagee. The payment was not, however, made and ultimately on Slat December 1934, Shib Charan and others returned or re...
Mohan Lal Vs. Lachman Das Mohan Lal and Sons Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-1949
Reported in: AIR1952All563
ORDERMootham, J. Shri Kirpa Ram Bajaj, who admittedly resides in New Delhi, was examined on commission at the instance of the petitioner. The commission has been duly executed & returned to this Court together with evidence taken under it, but Mr. Sanyal for the petitioner states that be does not propose to read it: & he objects to Mr. Bhargava, who appears for the company, doing so. He contends that evidence taken on commission must be tendered as evidence before it becomes evidence in a suit, & that it can be tendered only by the party at whose instance the commission was issued. Mr. Bhargava argues that in a case such as the present, in which it is not in dispute that the witness is beyond the jurisdiction of the Court, Rule 8 of Order 26, Civil P. C. has no application, & that accordingly evidence taken on commission forms part of the record of the suit under the preceding Rule 7 & as such can be relied upon by either party.2. Now Rule 7 of Order 26 provides that where a commission...
Raghubir Gir Vs. Badam Gir
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-09-1949
Reported in: AIR1951All250
Raghubar Dayal, J.1. This is a J.D.'s appeal against the order of the Ct. below disallowing his claim about the non-saleability of certain land in, view of Section 17, U. P, Debt redemption Act.2. The facts leading to this appeal briefly are? that Baghubir Gir & Chunni Gir brothers executed a simple mtge. bond for Rs. 2,100 in favour of Badam Gir and ors. In 1938 the heirs of Ghunni Gir transferred their share of the equity of redemption in the mortgaged property to Baghubir Gir & left Rs. 1,300 out of the sale considerations with the vendee for paying off the vendor's share of the mtge. debt. The mtgee. got the decree for sale against Eaghubir Gir only. In execution of this decree Badam Gir and ors. D.Hs. sought the sale of half the mortgaged property which Eaghubir Gir had purchased from the heirs of Chunni Gir & of the houses of Eaghubir Gir in the Abadi. They also sought the execution of a usufructuary mtge. for 20 years, in accordance with the term of the U. P. Debt Redemption Act...
Sobh Nath Lal Vs. Vidya Prasad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-09-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All409
Harish Chandra, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal from an order of the Court below holding that a permanent lease executed by him on 4th August 1949 in favour of respondents 1 and 2 is an agricultural lease which does not come within the mischief of Section 13, U. P. Regulation of Agricultural Credit Act, 1940 (Act XIV [14] of 1940). The only point for consideration before us is whether the lease in question is a proprietary lease or an agricultural lease to which the Tenancy Act applies. It appears from a perusal of the lease that the appellant, who belongs to Jaunpur District, possessed a two anna share in ft certain zamindari in district Azamgarh which consisted of sir plots and grove land. According to the recital in this document, the said property was situated at some distance from the place of residence of the appellant. He found it difficult to look after it and to cultivate it Accordingly, he made a settlement with respect to that property in favour of respondents 1 and 2 and ...
Kale Khan Vs. Rex Through Tarachand
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-09-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All417
Desai, J.1. A complaint was lodged by the District Magistrate of Agra in the Court of the City Magistrate charging the applicant Under Section 8, Temporary Control of Rent and Eviction Act, III [3] of 1947. It was mentioned in the complaint that the applicant let out his house to Tara Chand tenant, that the rent was Rs. 4/- per month up to 31st July 1946, that the applicant enhanced it to Rs. 6/- with effect from 1st August 1946 and that he further enhanced it to Rs. 12/-with effect from 1st April 1947. It was contended that this enhancement to Rs. 12/- per mouth was in contravention of the provisions of the Act and, consequently, punishable Under Section 8.2. The trial took place before Shri R. T. I. Mohan, City Magistrate. He tried the applicant summarily. Some witnesses were examined in. eluding Tara Chand who also filed receipts. The City Magistrate found that the enhancement of rent from Rs. 6/- to RS. 12/- was prohibited Under Section 5(2) of the Act.3. The applicant pleaded befo...
In the Goods of Mrs. Lydia and ors. and Mrs. Elizabeth Egbert Vs. A.J. ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-09-1949
Reported in: AIR1952All543
ORDERMootham, J.1. In this case the petitioner seeks to obtain probate of the draft of a document which is said to have been the last will of Lydia Isabel Myrtle Higgins, the document itself having been lost or destroyed after the testator's death. Caveats have been entered by A. J Fanthome, an advocate of this Court and his wife Mrs. Phyllis Fanthome, and a preliminary issue has been framed as to whether the caveators have any locus standi to contest this petition. That is the issue which I now have to decide.2. The late Mrs. Higgins had a sister, Miss C. V. Willson, who died on 7-11-1945, leaving a will of which the first caveator was the executor and the second caveator the principal beneficiary. Probate of this will was granted to the first caveator on 22-2-1947. Mrs. Higgins died on 15-6-1918. The caveators contend that they are entitled to oppose the present petition on the ground thatthey have an interest in the estate of the late Mrs. Higgins.3. The dispute centres round a hous...
Abdul Latif Khan Vs. Mt. Sikander Begum
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-08-1949
Reported in: AIR1953All283
Raghubar Dayal, J.1. This is a judgment-debtor's appeal against an order of the Civil Judge, Bareilly, partly dismissing his objection to the execution of a decree against him in favour of the respondent to the effect; that the application for the execution of the decree was time barred.2. The simple money decree in suit was passed on 11-5-1932 for Rs. 7500. The decree allowed instalments of us. 25 a month. It provided :'If the defendant fails to pay three consecutive instalments, the plaintiff will he at liberty to realise the whole decretal amount in one lot.'Instalments falling due on 11-7-1932 or thereafter were not paid.3. The decree-holder applied on 5-9-1934 for the execution of the decree with respect to the entire decretal amount. This application was dismissed without satisfaction. Three other applications with similar prayers were similarly disposed of. The present application is the fifth application for execution, and was presented on 21-4-1945. It may be just noted here t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »