Allahabad Court November 1950 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.
Mahesh Chand Vs. Brij Mohan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-22-1950
Reported in: AIR1953All612
ORDERBrij Mohan Lall, J. 1. This is an application in revision by a plaintiff whose suit for arrears of rent in respect of a shop has been dismissed by the learned Judge, Small Cause Court of Meerut 2. The shop in question was constructed after June 1946. It was let out to the opposite party by the applicant on a monthly rent of Rs. 200/-. On 1-4-1949 the parties entered into an agreement by which the rent was reduced, with the consent of the parties, to Rs. 150/- per mensem, in addition to house tax. It was paid before the tenth day of the succeeding month, a rebate of Rs. 25/- per mensem would be granted to the opposite party. 3. Sometime in January 1950 the opposite party got reasonable annual rent fixed by the District Magistrate under Section 3-A, U. P. Temporary Control of Rent and Eviction Act (3 of1947). The District Magistrate fixed the reasonable annual rent at Rs. 80/- per mensem. 4. The applicant instituted this suit for the recovery of Rs. 82/8/- as one month's rent. His c...
Chanderjit Das and ors. Vs. Debi Das and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-22-1950
Reported in: AIR1951All522
Agarwala, J.1. These three appeals arise out of a suit for possession over five annas four pies odd share in Mahal No. 2 Tappa Nai Karni of village Heoti, and three annas six pies two suls odd share in Tappa Khas of village Dewarwa in the district of Gorakhpur. The following pedigree will be of help in understanding the facts of the case. DEBI DAS _____________________|____________________________ | | | L.Bihari Das (deceased) Gobardhan Das Gopal Das =Mt.Ramkali | | | Sarju Das (deceased) _____|___________________ | =Mt.Shyamraji | | | | Kukur Das Mahabir Das Bindbachal | deft.2 deft.1 Das | | | _________________________| | | | | Mukut Das, deft.4 Kamta Das | deft.3 | | _______________________________________|_____ | | Daughter Mt. Deomurta wife Daughter Mt. Sheo | Raji Wife | Mangal Das | | | Ram Rachcha Das,deft.9 ____________|____________________________________________________ | | | | | | Kashinath Badri Asram Bhagwan Charan Chandrajit Brijraj Das Janak Raj Das pltff.4 pltff.3 pl...
The Union of India (Uoi) Through the Secretary Ministry of Food Govern ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-22-1950
Reported in: AIR1951All541
Bind Basni Prasad, J.1. This is an appeal from an order dated 20-2-1950, passed by the learned civil Judge of Agra refusing to stay proceedings of a suit on the defendant's application under Section 34, Arbitration Act of 1940. The relevant facts are as follows :2. The plaintiff is a firm, registered under the Partnership Act carrying on the business of purchasing and selling ghee. In November 1948, the Government of India invited tenders for the supply of ghee to the armed forces and the plaintiff submitted one. Its tender to supply 2,600 tons of ghee at a total cost of about Rs. 1,31,80,000 was accepted. In February 1949 the Central Government increased the quantity to 3,250 tons at a total cost of about Rs. 1,64,00,000. The acceptance of the plaintiff's tender was contained in a letter with which its enclosures is printed at pp. 29 to 45 of the paper book supplied to us by respondent's counsel. Detailed terms and conditions of the contract are contained therein. The plaintiff accept...
L. Har Saran Dass and ors. Vs. Mukandi Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-22-1950
Reported in: AIR1951All514
Malik, C.J.1. This is an application under Articles 226(1) and 227(1) of the Constitution of India read with Sections 115 and 151, Civil P. C. A suit was filed before the First Munsif of Bulandshahr by Mukandi Lal claiming that he was the reversioner of one Bakshi Ram. The plaintiff claimed possession of the property on the ground that after the death of the widow the succession had opened in his favour. The widow in her lifetime had made several transfers and the transferees were also impleaded as parties to the suit. Some property in Mussoorie had been transferred to the applicant who were residents of Mussoorie. A plea was taken on their behalf that the learned Munsif of Bulandshahr had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit about the property situate in Mussoorie which had been transferred to them. The issue of jurisdiction was framed as a preliminary issue and the learned Munsif came to the conclusion that he had jurisdiction to hear the case. The view taken by him was that there w...
Mendai Singh Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-21-1950
Reported in: AIR1952All486
Chandiramani, J. 1. The appellant Mendai Singh has been convicted by Shri S.B. Banerji, Additional Sessions Judge, Partabgarh, on 26-4-1950, under Section 302, Penal Code, and sentenced to transportation for life. 2. The appellant Mendai Singh is a Thakur and lives in village Parbatpur. He was carrying on an illicit love intrigue with Mt. Manjokhi, deceased, wife of Bhuar Chamar. She was living in village Bindra, a hamlet of village, Partapur. Her husband used to live away from his village but returned there a few weeks before the present occurrence. The love intrigue between the appellant and the deceased was notorious in the village and Bhuar came to know of it and he made a complaint to the Adalati Panchayat in that behalf. This ended in a compromise on 38-11-1949 and Rs. 40 were paid as compensation by the appellant to Bhuar, husband of the deceased. After the compromise, relations between the appellant and the deceased were broken off so much so that the deceased, whenever she saw...
Ratan Vs. Achhey Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-21-1950
Reported in: AIR1953All606
V. Bhargava, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal whose suit for possession over half portion of the disputed house by ejectment of the respondent has been dismissed by the lower appellate court. The plaintiff-appellant claimed that he was the sole owner of the whole house in dispute and that the respondent had been living in half the house with his consent, by which he meant that the respondent was a mere licensee. The trial court accepted the plea of the appellant and decreed the suit. The lower appellate court, however, disagreed with the trial court and held that the respondent's plea that he was himself the owner of half the house was correct and, therefore, dismissed the suit. The appellant challenges this finding of fact given by the lower appellate court.2. The lower appellate court's decision that the respondent is the owner of half the disputed house is based on a number of pieces of evidence including an agreement, dated 14-7-1937, which was entered into between these parties. ...
Abdal Ahmad Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-20-1950
Reported in: AIR1952All597
ORDERSeth, J. 1. This is an application in revision against the appellate order of the Ses. J. of Mainpuri, dated 19-9-1949, by which he has maintained the conviction of the applicant under Section 5 (2), Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (II [2] of 1947), hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'. 2. The prosecution case may briefly be recapitulated thus: Applicant Abdal Ahmad wag posted as Second Officer at thana Kotwali, Mainpuri, on 4-9 1947, when a first information report was lodged there by Deoki Nandan against Nathu Ram, Babu Ram & six others, accusing them of an offence punishable under Section 504, Penal Code, alleged to have been committed at village Pindsara. Two days later, that is, on 6.9.1947, another first information report was lodged by Deoki Nandan's brother, Chet Earn Patwari, at the same police station. Ghet Bam reported that an offence of theft under Section 380, Penal Code had occurred at his residence in Mainpuri & expressed his suspicions against Baghubir Singh & t...
Malkhan Singh Vs. Sadhu and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-17-1950
Reported in: AIR1952All284
Sankar Saran, J. 1. This is a plaintiffs appeal in a suit for pre-emption.2. On 22-7-1945, a sale deed was executed by one Mahabir Prasad in favour of Sadho Ram and Sita Ram. Next day a suit for pre emption (Suit No. 345 of 1915 was filed by the present appellant and subsequently on 5-9-1945, another Suit No. 393 of 1945 was filed by Bharat Singh and others for pre empting the same property. During the pendency of the suit, on 18-10-1945, the plaintiffs in Suit No. 393 of 1945, Bharat Singh and others, became co-sharers by a deed of exchange in the same Khewat. It may be mentioned that the plaintiff Malkhan Singh was a co-sharer in the mahal. 3. This case was heard by a learned single Judge of this Court who considered it necessary to refer it to a Bench with the following observations : 'Learned counsel for the plaintiff-appellant argues, on the analogy of the proviso to Section 19, that just as a vendee could not defeat a suit merely acquiring a share after the institution of the sam...
FakhruddIn Vs. Nasiruddin
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-17-1950
Reported in: AIR1951All497
Y. Bhargava, J.1. This is a second appeal arising out of a suit brought by the plaintiff-appellant against the defendant-respondent for an injunction restraining the latter from interfering with the possession of the appellant over the plots in suit and for possession in case it be held that the appellant is not in possession over the plots in suit. This suit was instituted on 7-11-1945, and was decided by the trial Court on 22-7-1946. The appeal before the lower appellate Court was filed on 30-8-1946, and was decided on 23-9-1947. The lower Court, by its decision, directed the plaint to be returned to the appellant for presentation to the proper Court holding that, under the provisions of the U. P. Tenancy (Amendment) Act (NO. X [10] of 1947) which had the retrospective effect, the suit lay in the revenue Court and not in the civil Court. It is against this order that the present second appeal has been filed before me.2. When this appeal came up for hearing, a preliminary objection wa...
Bhajan Lal Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-17-1950
Reported in: AIR1951All504
Wanchoo, J.1. This is an appeal by Bhajan Lal against his conviction under Section 341, Penal Code, by the Additional Sessions Judge of Bareilly. The trial was with the aid of a jury which returned a unanimous verdict of guilty against the appellant.2. The prosecution story was briefly this. One Sm. Majidan was the daughter of one Chhotey of village Sheopuri. She was married sometime in 1947 with Nanhe of village Kurtara. Nazir, who was also an accused in the Court below, is the brother of Nanhe. Nanhe died soon after the marriage and Nazir wanted to marry Sm. Majidan. As, however, he had already a wife, Sm. Majidan and her father were not agreeable to this proposal. This was, therefore, a cause of annoyance to Nazir. On 21-1-1949, the Nikah of Sm. Majidan was performed with one Munshi of village Titauli at village Sheopari. The aforesaid Nazir was present at this nikah and had tried that he should be the bridegroom, but was unsuccessful and returned to his village Kurtara. Sm. Majidan...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »