Allahabad Court September 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.
Khanzaman Khan and ors. Vs. Maqbool and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-08-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All191
V. Bhargava, J.1. This second rent appeal under Section 269, U. P. Tenancy Act read with Section 100, Civil P. C., arises out of a suit for ejectment under Section 180, U. P. Tenancy Act.2. The suit for ejectment was decreed by the learned Revenue Officer on 31st December 1943. On appeal the order for ejectment was set aside by the lower Court by its judgment dated 3rd August 1944. The present appeal was filed by the plaintiffs against this order dismissing the suit for ejectment on 6th November 1944. When this appeal came up for hearing a prelimiary objection was taken on behalf of the respondents that in view of the U. P. Tenancy (Amendment) Act, 1947, he suit under Section 180, filed by the appellants was time barred and hence the dismissal of the suit by the lower Court is correct. It appears from the plaint that the appellants alleged that the respondents had taken wrongful possession of the land in suit from the beginning of Fasli year 1346. The possession of the respondents thus...
Mt. Raj Rani Vs. Rajaram
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-08-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All202
Chandiramani, J.1. This is the plaintiff's appeal against the appellate decree of Mr. Akbar Husain, District Judge, Lucknow, dated 27th November 1946.2. The plaintiff, Mst. Raj Rani applied on 22nd August 1946, before the District Judge, Luck now, for the grant of letters of administration on the basis of a will dated 7th March 1945, executed by Jamna Prasad deceased. She alleged that the will had been executed on 7th March 1945, that the testator, Jamna Prasad died the same day, that she was the sole legatee under the will and that the deceased testator had a fixed abode at Sarojni Devi Lane Katra, Maqboolganj in the city of Lucknow. The proceedings were transferred to the Court of Civil Judge, Lucknow, for disposal, on 25th August 1945. On notices being issued, the present defendant respondent objected to the grant of the letters of administration and claimed that there was no will, that in any case the will was not duly executed as the testator was not of sound disposing mind and th...
Krishna Gopal and anr. Vs. Ospal Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-08-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All229
Malik, C.J.1. This is an appeal against an order, dated 26th November 1943, passed by the learned Special Judge, first grade, Mainpuri. By reason of this appeal, the proceedings before the Collector have been held up for over five years.2. Sauji Ram and Mauji Ram died leaving certain property. The heirs of the deceased made an application under Section 4, Encumbered Estates Act. Under Section 49, Encumbered Estates Act the debts due from the deceased were liable to be paid only out of the property left by them. In the list of properties mentioned in the written statement filed by the applicants under Section 8, U. P. Encumbered Estates Act item No. 4 was included in the list though it was specifically mentioned that it was the self-acquired property of Ospal Singh, one of the applicants. At the time when the learned Special Judge sent the list of properties to the Collector from which the debts of the deceased Sauji Ram and Mauji Ram had to be paid, this note was overlooked and this It...
NaraIn Das Vs. Rex
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-07-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All99
ORDERHarish Chandra, J.1. The applicant Narain Das was in this revision as well as the other connected revisions numbered 925, 926, 927 and 951 convicted under para. 8, U. P. Oil Seeds and Oilseeds' Products Control Order, 1945 issued under Notification No. A-7584/C. S. dated 1st September 1945, read with Sub-rule 4 of Rule 81, Defence of India Rules and sentenced to thirty days' rigorous imprisonment in the case out of which this revision arises and to various amounts of fines in the other cases, by Shri Brij Behari Lal, Magistrate of the First Class, Allahabad. His appeals were dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge of Allahabad. He has come up in revision to this Court against his convictions and sentences. The offences alleged to have been committed in all these cases occurred between 1st December 1945 and 26th January 1946. The Control Order was issued by the U. P. Government in exercise of the power conferred by Sub-rule 2 of Rule 81, Defence of India Rules. The Defence of India...
S.E. Orde Vs. Mrs. T.C. Deacon and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-07-1949
Reported in: AIR1952All582
Malik, C.J. 1. This is a revision against an order passed by the learned first Civil Judge of Meerut rejecting an application for leave to sue in forma pauperis. An application was filed as required by Order 33 Rule 2, Civil P. C. The application contained the particulars required in regard to plaints. A schedule of the property belonging to the applicant was also given & the estimated value thereof & the document was signed & verified by the applicant. It was mentioned in the application that the applicant, was a pauper & was unable to pay the court-fees. A second application which was wholly unnecessary was attached to the application mentioned above & that has given rise to an objection by the opposite party that the second application was the real application under Order 33 & was defective as it was not in accordance with the provisions of Order 33, Rule 2, Civil P. C. We have looked into the first application which has been called 'the plaint' & are satisfied that the document ful...
Sri NaraIn and ors. Vs. Gur Charan Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-02-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All177
1. One Mt. Rajeshwari filed a suit for maintenance against 6 sets of defendants out of whom we are concerned only with 5 sets in this appeal. These 5 sets of defendants were: (1) Jugal Kishore, (2) Sri Narain, Prem Narain and Jagat Narain, (3) Kali Prasad, Kali Fragana and Kali Nath, (4) Sheo Prasad, Durga Prasad and Brahma Narain and (5) Rameshwar Prasad, Raj Narain, Ram Narain and Mahraj Narain. Mt. Rajeshwari's suit was decreed in the year 1924 against all the 6 sets of defendants and the amount of the decree was made a charge on the immovable property belonging to all of them. The whole amount in respect of the decree was realised by Mt. Rajeshwari from Jugal Kishore alone. Jugal Kishore obtained a suit for contribution against the remaining sets of defendants and obtained a preliminary decree on and December 1930. In this decree the amount due from sets Nos. 2 to 6 was shown separately from the amount due from set No. 6. The final decree in Jugal Kishore's suit was passed on 8th N...
Gulzar Ahmad Jafri Vs. Government of United Provinces
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-02-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All212
Malik, C.J.1. Gulzar Ahmad Jafri, the appellant, was a Sub-Inspector of Police in the United Provinces and was appointed as such by the Inspector-General of Police on 28rd October, 1931. On 3rd October 1938, he was suspended by the Superintendent of Police, Jaunpur, on a charge of having demanded and accepted illegal gratification. On 20th July 1939, charges were framed against the appellant in accordance with certain rules made under the Police Act and an enquiry was held by a Board, consisting of the Deputy Inspector-General of Police and two Superintendents of Police. There is no complaint about the procedure followed at the enquiry. The appellant appeared before the Board, and the Board, ultimately, after considering the materials placed before it held that the charges were proved and the appellant was dismissed from service under orders of the Deputy Inspector. General of Police dated 18th August 1980. The appellant appealed to the Inspectors-General of Police who dismissed the ap...
Abdul Qayume and anr. Vs. Fariudoon Mirza
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-01-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All519
ORDERKaul, J.1. This is an application preferred under Section 25, Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, for revision of a decree pissed by the Judge, Small Cause Court, Lucknow, in a suit for damages on account of injury caused to the plaintiff's wall by the defendants allowing rain water to accumulate on their land by building a pushta (embankment).2. The material facts lie within a short compass; The plaintiff's house adjoins some plots of land owned by the defendants. In order to prevent the rain water flowing from the southern plots on to the northern plots owned by the defendant?, they constructed an embankment or pushta, which obstructed the channel through which rain water naturally used to flow out. This, it was complained, resulted in the accumulation of rain water on the defendants' land which damaged the wall of the plaintiff's house. He accordingly instituted the suit, which has given rise to the present application, in the Court of the Judge, Small Causes, Luck-now, for reco...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›