Allahabad Court February 1949 Judgments
Qanayat HusaIn and ors. Vs. Mt. Sajidunnisa Bibi and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-28-1949
Reported in: AIR1949All499
Malik, C.J.1. The plaintiff filed a suit for realization of Rs. 18,430-11-0 on the basis of a mortgage dated 25th July 1924, executed by her husband Syed Hyder Husain in favour of the plaintiff. The mortgage was for Rs. 17,000 and the amount was to carry interest at the rate of 8 annas per cent. per mensem, compoundable annually. The mortgagor had made payments from time to time which were all entered on the back of the mortgage deed and signed by the mortgagor. After the execution of the mortgage, the mortgagor had executed a deed of waqf dated 27th August 1925, and appointed his nephews, defendants 1 to 3, as mutwallis. Defendant 4 is the subsequent transferee. The mortgagor Syed Hyder Husain had died and the suit was filed against the mutwallis, defendants 1 to 3, and the transferee defendant i.2. In defence, amongst others, two pleas were taken by the contesting defendant. Firstly, that the plaint had not been signed or verified by the plaintiff nor had it been presented by a duly ...
Tag this Judgment!Gulzari Lal and ors. Vs. Sm. Sarju Bai and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-23-1949
Reported in: AIR1949All604
Malik, C.J.1. This is an appeal under Clause 10. Letters Patent, against an order passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court on 18th December 1947.2. One Lala Chander Sen deposited a box containing jewellery in the Allahabad Bank Limited, Hathras Branch, in the joint names of himself and his wife, Mt. Sarju Bai. Sarju Bai filed a Suit (No. 54 of 1942) for a declaration that the ornaments belonged to her and were her stridhan property and that Chander Sen had no right or interest in them. Chander Sen contested the suit on the ground that a large part of the jewellery contained in the box belonged to his first wife and that there were some ornaments which belonged to him and the plaintiff's claim that all the ornaments belonged to her was false. The suit was, however, decreed by the lower Court and Chander Sen filed an appeal in this Court (First Appeal No. 217 of 1944). During the pendency of the appeal Chander Sen died on 15th May 1947. An application was thereupon filed by three p...
Tag this Judgment!Kr. Sardar Singh Vs. Hardwargir
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-23-1949
Reported in: AIR1949All608
Malik, C.J.1. The point raised by learned Counsel for the appellant in this Letters Patent appeal was never raised in any of the lower Courts nor even before the learned Single Judge of this Court.2. The plaintiff filed a suit on the basis of a document of the year 1862 and claimed that the plaintiffs predecessors had granted a lease to the ancestors of the defendants with a condition that the lessees would vacate the land whenever the lessors wanted it. Defendants 1 to 3 were admittedly the descendants of the original lessees. Defendant No. i had contested the suit that he had nothing to do with the lease of 1862, and that he did not belong to the family of defendants 1 to 3 but was a tenant independently in his own right on payment of a certain rent. His plea found favour with the lower appellate Court and the suit was dismissed as against him.3. Before the learned Single Judge the only point raised was whether defendant 4 belonged to the family of the original lessees and was theref...
Tag this Judgment!Mt. Haliman Khatoon Vs. Mt. Ahmadi Begum and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-23-1949
Reported in: AIR1949All627
Agarwala, J.1. This appeal arises out of proceedings under the Guardians and Wards Act. Three persons applied to be appointed guardian of the person of a male minor, named, Mohammad Ayub aged about four years. These three persons were Ahmadi Begam, father's mother's mother of the minor, Zohra Khatun, father's sister of the minor and Mt. Haliman Khatun, own mother of the minor who is the appellant before us. The minor's father Mohammad Yaqub died on 19th January 1944. After his death, Mt. Haliman Khatun, on 1st December 1944, married Ahmad Husain, her father's sister's son. The learned Judge of the Court below held that by this marriage Mt. Haliman Khatun had forfeited her right to be appointed as the guardian of the person of her minor son. He therefore appointed Zohra Khatun, father's sister of the minor as the guardian of his person. It is against this order that Mt. Haliman Khatun has filed these three appeals.2. Under the Muhammadan law mother is entitled to the custody (hizanat) o...
Tag this Judgment!Mst. Fatma Bibi Vs. Sayed Ali Hasan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-22-1949
Reported in: AIR1949All769
Seth, J.1. This is an application in revision against an order of the lower appellate Court, directing the memorandum of appeal to be returned for presentation to the proper Court. By the proper Court is intended the appellate revenue Court, namely, the Commissioner. The suit giving rise to this application in revision was instituted under Section 180, U.P. Tenancy Act. It was contested by two of the defendants on the ground, among others, that they were in proprietary possession of the disputed plots. An issue framed as follows was referred to the civil Court for decision:whether Mt. Basra Bibi and Mt. Fatima Bibi are in proprietary possession of the plots in suit.' The issue was re-framed by the civil Court in the following words:whether the defendants Mt, Basra Bibi and Mt. Fatima Bibi are proprietors of the plots in suit?The issue was decided by the civil Court and a finding returned to the revenue Court. Thereafter the revenue Court proceeded to decide the whole suit on merits. It...
Tag this Judgment!Kameshwar Dutt Misra Vs. Rex.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-17-1949
Reported in: 1949CriLJ894
Malik, C.J.1. We have heard learned Counsel for be to parties. It is not necessary to treat this as a criminal revision and give any decision on the point. The learned Magistrate had convicted certain accused. The learned Sessions Judge allowed the appeal, In his judgment the learned Sessions Judge made the following remarks about the trying MagistrateIt leaves a bad impression upon my mind, on going, through the evidence and the circumstances of the case, about the capacity of the Honorary Magistrate. He appears to be at pains to record a finding of guilty against the appellant.It is desirable that superior Courts, when deliver, ing judgment, should always use restrained language about inferior Courts so that confidence of the public in the administration of justice might not be shaken. After these remarks so publicly made the learned Magistrate could not inspire any confidence in the minds of the litigant public. If the learned Sessions Judge was of the opinion that the Magistrate wa...
Tag this Judgment!Har Prasad and ors. Vs. Budh Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-15-1949
Reported in: AIR1949All752
Seth, J.1. This is an appeal arising out of execution proceedings. The decree under execution was passed by a civil Court. It was transferred to the Collector for execution. The judgment-debtor filed an objection to the execution of the decree by the sale of the land which was sought to be sold alleging that it was protected under Section 17 (1) (a), U.P. Debt Redemption Act. The objection was dismissed by the Bale officer and the order of the sale officer dismissing the objection was confirmed in appeal by the Collector. The judgment-debtor then filed the same objection in the civil Court. The Court held that the decision of the sale officer confirmed by the Collector operated as res judicata and the objection could not be entertained afresh by the civil Court. This order has been set aside by the lower appellate Court and the case has been remanded to the Court of first instance. The lower appellate Court has held that the sale officer had no jurisdiction to decide the objection whic...
Tag this Judgment!Jai Prakash and anr. Vs. P.N. Tagore and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-14-1949
Reported in: AIR1949All747
ORDERRaghubar Dayal, J.1. This is a revision against the order of the Assistant Collector, 1st class, Dehra Dun, in connection with an application for injunction prayed against the defendants with respect to their making construction on the tenancy land in suit. The application was made in a suit under Section 171, U.P. Tenancy Act for the ejectment of the tenants and the alleged sub-tenants.2. A preliminary objection has been taken that no revision lies to this Court. I agree with the objection.3. Section 276, U.P. Tenancy Act, empowers this Court to call for the record of any suitor application which has been decided by any subordinate revenue Court, and in which an appeal lies to the District Judge and in which no appeal lies to the High Court as the case may be, and if the District Judge or such subordinate Court appears to have acted in either of the ways mentioned in Clauses (a) to (c) of the section. It is not disputed that no appeal lay to the District Judge from the decree und...
Tag this Judgment!Devi Prasad Vs. Municipal Board
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-10-1949
Reported in: AIR1949All741
Malik, C.J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal and, as the parties had agreed that the case should be heard without preparation of a paper book, it has been listed out of turn.2. The plaintiff filed a suit in the Court of the learned Civil Judge of Parrukhabad for an injunction to restrain the defendant Board from attaching certain properties belonging to him for realisation of Rs. 1,000 which had been levied as a circumstance and property tax under Section 128, Sub-section (1), Clause (ix), U.P. Municipalities Act (II [2] of 1916). The plaintiff's case was that he does not reside or carry on business within the limits of the Kanauj Municipality and the Municipal Board had, therefore, no right to assess him to this tax. The plaintiff further alleged -that the assessment beyond Rs. 50 was illegal and void. In defence, the Municipal Board asserted that the plaintiff did carry on business within the municipal limits and was liable, therefore, to pay the tax. The Board, further, alleged that t...
Tag this Judgment!L. Jagannath Prasad Vs. Ram Chandra and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-09-1949
Reported in: AIR1952All408
Desai, J. 1. This is an application moved by Jagannath Prasad for committing four persons, Ram Chandra, O. P. 1, Brahmanand Sharma O. P. 2, Brijmohan Lal O. P. 3, and Mithan Lal O. P. 4, for contempt of the Court of the Civil Judge, Aligarh.2. Jagannath Prasad, Brijmoban Lal and Mithan Lal are real brothers but separate from one another. Ram Chandra is the son of Brij Mohan Lal; it is alleged by Jagannath Prasad that they are joint with each other, but the allegation is denied by them. A certain dispute which had arisen between Jagannath Prasad and Brij Mohan Lal was referred to the arbitration of Mithan Lal, another person with whom we are not concerned, and Jwala Prasad, Jwala Prasad being the umpire. The nature of the dispute referred to arbitration is in controversy; according to Jagannath Prasad it was in respect of rent of a godown which had been let out by him to Brij Mohan Lal, while according to Brij Mohan Lal it was in respect of certain ornaments worth Rs. 9,000 which had be...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »