Allahabad Court May 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.
Radha Krishna Swami Vs. Parshottam Das and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-09-1949
Reported in: AIR1953All296
Desai, J.1. This is a second appeal from a decree of District Judge of Sitapur in a mortgage suit. Har Bux Singh owned the entire mahal Lalta Singh in village Bhilawan. In 1918, ho executed a mortgage EX. El, in favour of Sheo Dayal and Sheo Sagar for Rs. 2300. In 1921, he executed another mortgage, EX. B17, in favour of Mahant Basudeo Gir, defendant 2, for us. 16000. On 22/ 24-3-1922, he executed one more mortgage, EX. 3, in favour of Sheo Darshan Singh, defendant l, and Jagannath Singh, defendant 5, for Rs. 4000. This mortgage was for the entire mahal Lalta Singh. One Raghubar Singh owned zamindari property in village Tikara. In 1920, he mortgaged it with Sheo Darshan Singh and Jagannath Singh. Thus Sheo Darshan Singh and Jagannatb Singh were mortgagees of two different properties. The share of each was one-half in the mortgagee rights under each mortgage. Jagannath Singh has been paid off his dues and we have nothing to do with his share in the mortgagee right in this dispute. Sheo ...
Mt. Kulsumunnisa Vs. Rex and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-06-1949
Reported in: AIR1949All623; 1949CriLJ949
ORDERBhargava, J.1. This application in revision has been filed by Mt. Kulsumunnisa against an order, dated 20th August 1948, made by the Sessions Judge of Agra, affirming an order, dated 6th May 1948, passed by a Magistrate of the First Glass at Agra, in a proceeding under Section 145, Criminal P.C.2. On 16th June 1945, Mushtaq Ahmad made an application to the Magistrate that there was a dispute likely to cause a breach of the peace. In this application Nabi Uddin, Ghaffar Khan, Akhtar Husain and Ashfaq Husain were arrayed as opposite party. The application was sent to the police for enquiry and report; and on receipt of the police report and on being satisfied about the existence of a dispute of the nature alleged the Magistrate made an order, under Sub-section (1) of Section 145 of the Code, calling upon the parties concerned to file written statements of their respective claims with regard to actual possession of the subject in dispute.3. It is not disputed that the order was duly ...
Ori and ors. Vs. Rex
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-06-1949
Reported in: AIR1952All453
Kidwai, J. 1. Eight person, 1 ori, 2 Chokhey, 3Ishwar Din, 4 Brij Lal, 5 Moti, 6 Bhailal, 7Bipat and 8 Har Bhajan were convicted by theCivil and Sessions Judge of Lucknow for offencesunder sections 147, 325/149 and 323/149, Penal Code.Under sections 147 they were sentenced to two years'rigorous imprisonment each, under section 325/149 tothree years' rigorous imprisonment and undersections 323/149 to one years rigorous imprisonmenteach; the sentences were to run concurrently.They come up in appeal.2. The prosecution story as sought to be establishedat the trial was that on the 21st of May1947, at about 8in the morning while Dhanpathis son Ram Nath and Dhanpat's grove to irrigate theRampal went to Dhanpat's grove to irrigate thetrees, 18 persons, including the present eightappellants, attacked them. Ram Nath ran awayand informed his uncle Mahabir and other membersof the family. Thereupon Mahabir, his sonBabu Lal, his wife Ram Piari and Dhanpat'swife Ram Dulari all reached to the help of ...
Rahmat Ullah and ors. Vs. Maqsood Ahmad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-06-1949
Reported in: AIR1952All640
P.L. Bhargava, J.1. This is an appeal by Rahmatullah & his three sons, who were defts. in a suit, instituted by the plffs.-respondents, Maqsood Ahmad & his two sisters, to recover possession over a house, which admittedly be. longed to Mohammad Yaqub, son of Seadat by his wife Mt. Qadri. It is not disputed that the plaintiffs are the children of Mohammd Yaqub's own sister. They claimed title to the house in suit as heirs of Mohammad Yaqub & alleged that the defts. were in wrongful possession thereof. The defence set up by Rahmatullah (deft. 1) was that he was the own brother of Mohammad Yaqub, being the son of Seadat & Mt Qadri, & thus he had inherited the houses as an heir under the Mohammedan Law. The case of Rahmat-ullah's sons (defts. 2 to 4) was that they were owners in possession of the house, under a will executed by Mohammad Yaqub. The plffs. denied that Rahmatullah was the son of Saadat A challenged the will set up by his sons.2. The learned Munsif of Meerut, who tried the sui...
Shukrullah and ors. Vs. Sir Vijaya Ananda Gajpati Raj Maharaj Kumar Vi ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-04-1949
Reported in: AIR1949All739
Harish Chandra, J.1. This is a defendants' appeal from the judgment and decree of the learned civil Judge of Banaras decreeing the plaintiff-respondent's suit for a one-fourth share of the sale price of a house situated in the city of Banaras in Ahaia Bohila in Mahal Sheo Narain Puri of village Bhadaini on the basis of custom. The trial Court had dismissed the suit. But the lower appellate Court allowed the appeal and setting aside the judgment and decree of the trial Court decreed the plaintiff's suit.2. The existence of a custom by which zar-e-chaharum is paid to the zamindar whenever any house property is sold in this mahal by a parjawatdar was admitted on behalf of the appellants. The only question that arose was whether the respondent was or was not a zamindar. The respondent is recorded in the khewat as the proprietor of haqiyat-i-mutafarriqa. It is said that he is, therefore, merely a plot-proprietor and is not entitled to the benefit of this custom. But the proprietor of a spec...
Sangram Singh and ors. Vs. Zahar Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-03-1949
Reported in: AIR1949All662
Agarwala, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of a suit filed in the Revenue Court for ejectment of defendants 1 and 2, under Section 180, U.P. Tenancy Act. The plaintiff alleged that by an agreement between the co-sharers he alone was entitled to eject and settle tenants on plot No. 4559 (old)-4317 (present), that formerly Mt. Sunder Kunwar was the tenant and Kallu was her sub-tenant of the plot, that after Sunder Kunwar's death the plaintiff obtained a decree for ejectment against Kallu, who was ejected. Thereafter, the plaintiff let out the land to one Balwant Singh, but before he could take possession, defendants 1 and 2, who are co-sharers, took possessions without the consent of the plaintiff. He accordingly sued for their ejectment and for damages.2. The defence of defendants 1 and 2 was that they were not trespassers, but that they were co- sharers, and that they could not be ejected.3. An issue about the proprietary title of the defendants was referred to the Civil C...
Salamat Ullah Vs. Mt. Maharaj Kuar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-03-1949
Reported in: AIR1949All770
1. This is an execution of decree appeal. It is directed against the appellate order of the learned District Judge Bara Banki upholding the order of the execution Court and allowing the judgment-debtor Mt. Mahraj Kuar's objections under Section 47, Civil P.C., against the execution of the decree of Shaikh Salamat Ullah appellant.2. The only question involved in this appeal is whether the decree of which the appellant sought execution was or was not a nullity by reason of the fact that it was obtained against the judgment-debtors during the pendency of the Encumbered Estates Act proceedings initiated by some of them. It is admitted on behalf of the appellant that the suit, which resulted in the decree under execution, was filed subsequent to the initiation of proceedings under the En-cumbered Estates Act by three judgment-debtors, namely, Chaudhri Maqbulul Rahman, Chaudhri Musbtaqul Rahman and Beni Madho Singh, The decree-holder further admitted that in the proceedings consequent upon t...
Aziz Mirza Vs. Mt. Tayabba Begum
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-02-1949
Reported in: AIR1949All651
Harish Chandra, J.1. This is a second appeal on behalf of the judgment-debtor, Aziz Mirza, from the judgment and decree of the District Judge of Agra confirming the judgment and decree of the Munsif of Agra by which an application made by the appellant to the Collector, to whom the execution of a mortgage decree obtained by the respondent, Smt. Tayyaba Begam, against the appellant had been transferred under Section 68, Civil P.C., praying that the benefit of Sections 16 and 17, U.P. Debt Redemption Act, 1940 (U. P. Act XIII [13] of 1940) be given to him, has been directed by the Munsif to be recalled from the Court of the Collector to his own Court for disposal.2. A mortgage was executed by the appellant in favour of the respondent on 7th November, 1980. On 20th February 1933, the respondent obtained a decree against the appellant on the foot of that mortgage. A final decree was passed on 9th December 1933. Some time after that the appellant became insolvent and the Official Receiver w...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›