Allahabad Court February 1951 Judgments
Ajai Verma Vs. Ram Bharosey Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-28-1951
Reported in: AIR1951All794
Malik, C.J.1. This appeal has been filed by Raja Ajai Verma of Pawayan. The appellant, Raja Ajai Verma, filed an application under Section 4, Encumbered Estates Act in the Court of the Special Judge, first grade, Shahjahanpur, on 27-1-1936. At the time when he filed the application there was an appeal pending before their Lordships of the Privy Council relating to the property known as the Pawayan Estate.2. Raja Fateh Singh, the Raja of Pawayan, died on 28-12-1921, leaving two sons Raja Indra Vikram Singh and Kunwar Vijai Verma. Kunwar Vijai Verma claimed that the property left by his father Raja Fateh Singh was not impartible as was claimed by his elder brother and in the alternative that his father had left a will dated 2-8-1918, under which he had given him half the property. On these allegations Kunwar Vijai Verma filed Suit No. 53 of 1922 against Raja Indra Vikram Singh for partition and possession of half share in the entire properties. Raja Indra Vikram Singh claimed that the pr...
Tag this Judgment!Kailash Chandra and ors. Vs. Mt. Shri Devi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-27-1951
Reported in: AIR1951All636
Malik, C.J.1. The pltf. Sri Devi is the widow of Dr. Parshottam Das who died on 29-6-1940. On 5-10-1940, the pltf. & Ch. Prag Das executed a lease in favour of Hirdey Ram & Hanuman Prasad for constructing certain building & factoriea. A nazrana of Rs. 600 was received & the annual rent reserved was Rs. 165. Ch. Prag Das, however, did not pay to the pltf. her share of the annual rent & the pltf. filed a suit on 11-9-1944, for recovery of three year, rent at the rate of Rs. 82-8-0 per year, payable in October 1941, October 1942, October 1943. The total claim was for Rs. 270. 2. The suit was contested on the ground that the property included in the lease was the joint family property on which the name of the pltf. was entered merely for her consolation & her name was entered in the lease also for the same reason. It was further pleaded that the pltf. had no right to bring the suit for profits for one item only & the suit was, therefore, not maintainable The first Ct. came to the conclusio...
Tag this Judgment!Makka and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-27-1951
Reported in: AIR1952All435
ORDERMisra, J. 1. The applicants Makka, Ram Charan, Chunni and Chinta were convicted by a learned Special magistrate, 1st Class of Sitapur of offences under Sections 147, 323/149 and 325/149, Penal Code. Each of them was sentenced to six months rigorous imprisonment under the first count, to a fine of rs. 20 under the second count or to two weeks rigorous imprisonment in default and on the third count to 9 months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of rs. 10 with one week's rigorous imprisonment in default. Seven others were also challaned by the police and were sentenced by the learned Magistrate in like manner but they were acquitted in appeal by the learned sessions Jude. The conviction of the applicants under Sections 323 and 325 was maintained. The learned judge, however, reduced the sentences under Section 325 tosix months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 10 with a provision for one week's further rigorous imprisonment in default of payment of fine. He maintained the sentence...
Tag this Judgment!Governor-general in Council Vs. Firm Badri Das Gauri Dutt
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-26-1951
Reported in: AIR1951All702
Agarwala, J.1. These are two connected appeals by the deft, the Covernor-General in Council arising out of two suits for recovery of loss suffered by the pltf.-resp. firm. The facts are that in S. A. No. 113 of 1948, arising out of suit No. 773 of 1944, the pltf. firm delivered one bale of cloth to the railway at Wadi Bunder for carriage to Basti for delivery to the pltf. This bale was received at Basti railway station on 11-6-1943. It was in a loose condition when it reached its destination. In the other suit, i.e., No. 774 of 1944, which has given rise to S. A. No. 112 of 1948 one bale of cloth was delivered to the Bombay- Baroda & Central India Railway at Ahmedabad on 1-5-1943 for carriage to Basti for delivery to the pltf. This bale reached its destination on 11-5-1943, one month earlier than the previous bale, but was in a damaged condition. On or about the dates when the bales arrived at Basti, the pltf. asked the railway clerk in charge of making delivery at Basti to give open d...
Tag this Judgment!Gokul Chand and ors. Vs. Babu Ram Ratan Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-26-1951
Reported in: AIR1952All423
Malik, C.J. 1. This is an appeal under the Letters Patent read with the U.P. High Courts (Amalgamation) Order, 1948, against an order of a learned Single Judge of this Court dismissing an appeal on a preliminary ground that no appeal lay. The proceedings were before the learned Civil Judge and an application was made on behalf of the Official Receiver for setting aside of abatement. The application was granted and it is against the order granting the application and setting aside the abatement that this appeal was filed. Section 75, Provincial Insolvency Act (Act V of [5] 1920) provides for appeals and appeals to this Court can be filed only against decisions or orders of a 'District Court' as specified in Schedule I while appeals lie to the 'District Court' from judgments of 'subordinate Courts.' District Court is defined in Section 2(b) as meaning principal civil Court of original jurisdiction. 2. The learned Civil Judge was not a principal civil Court of original jurisdiction. In Se...
Tag this Judgment!Chanda Lal Vs. Ram Kishan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-23-1951
Reported in: AIR1952All607
Chandiramani, J.1. This is a deft's second appeal against the appellate decree of Sri Grish Chandra, 1st Civil Judge, Kheri, dated 27-5-1950.2. It appears that the plff. let out on rent to the deft. appellant a certain ahata within the municipal limits of the town of Lakhimpur-Kheri. After some time the plff. served on the deft. a valid notice to quit the premises & when he failed to do so, a suit for ejectment & damages was filed. An objection was taken that because the premises were situate within municipal limits, the U.P. (Temporary) Control of Rent & Eviction Act, 1947, applied & that as the plff. wanted the house for his own residential purposes, the previous permission of the District Magistrate was necessary before the suit could be filed. The plff. denied that the premises let out were accommodation within the meaning of the Act.3. The trial Court held that the premises constituted accommodation within the meaning of the Act & as no previous permission of the District Magistra...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Sewak Vs. Ram Sahai and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-22-1951
Reported in: AIR1952All169
Agarwala, J. 1. This is a decree-holder's appeal arising out of execution proceedings. A decree for demolition of certain constructions was obtained by the appellant-decree-holder against the respondent. Thereafter, the judgment-debtor made an application under Order 21, Rule 2, Civil P. C. praying that an adjustment of the decree be recorded. Under the alleged adjustment, the decree-holder was alleged to have given up his right to get the decree executed for demolition of the constructions in lieu of receipt of a sum of RS. 1,000. The decree holder replied that no such adjustment had been arrived at. The executing Court came to the conclusion that the adjustment, as alleged by the judgment debtor, had in fact been made and recorded the adjustment accordingly. Against this order, the decree holder went up in appeal to the lower Appellate Court. While the appeal was pending the parties came to terms. A statement was made in Court on 18.11-1945 to the effect that the decree-holder would ...
Tag this Judgment!Mahadeo Singh and ors. Vs. Jagdeo Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-21-1951
Reported in: AIR1954All23
Agarwala, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit for possession of a portion of plot No. 335. The plaintiff-respondent's case was that the portion in dispute had been given to him in exchange by the Revenue Court under Section 53, U. P. Tenancy Act, and that later on the defendant dishonestly had made constructions, over the same and dispossessed the plaintiff. The defence was that the order of the Revenue Court was without jurisdiction, as the land was not land as defined in the U. P. Tenancy Act and further that the constructions were more than twelve years old. The trial court decreed the suit in its entirety. There was an appeal and the case was remanded to the trial Court, which decreed the suit again with the exception of land covered by the 'ghari' (cattle-shed) and the well. Both sides appealed to the lower Appellate Court. The lower Appellate Court dismissed both the appeals but made one amendment in the decree of the trial Court. It ordered that 'the 'ghari' ...
Tag this Judgment!Sukhdeo Baiswar Vs. Brij Bhushan Misra and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-21-1951
Reported in: AIR1951All667
Desai, J.1. On an appln. by Sukhdeo, appct., notices were issued to the opposite parties calling upon them to show cause why they should not be punished for contempt of the Ct of Panchayati Adalat, Rampur Athiri. The opposite parties have appeared & we have heard their defence.[2] On 28 & 29-3-1950, two complaints were filed in the Panchayati Adalat of Rampur Athiri against the appct. on the allegations that several tenants had paid rent to the appct., that he had not granted receipts to them saying that he was not dishonest & that he was in the habit of not issuing receipts. The Panchayati Adalat took cognizance of the complaints & summoned the appct. for trial Under Section 290, I. P. C. In the complaints no law was quoted under which the appct. had rendered himself liable to prosecution & apparently the Panchayati Adalat thought that the allegations in them made out an offence punishable Under Section 290, I. P. C. There was no quorum on 9-4 1950 & the cases were adjourned to 23-4 1...
Tag this Judgment!Dayal Das Vs. Smt. Sushila Devi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-1951
Reported in: AIR1953All755
ORDERMisra, J. 1. These two revision applications are directed against an order passed by the learned Munsif, North Lucknow, under section 7-B, U. P. (Temporary) Control of Rent and Eviction Act (III of 1947). The order relates to a house situate on No. 1, Jagat Narain Road and occupied by Dayal Das, a refugee from Sind. The house was allotted to the aforesaid tenant on 29-4-1949, under Section 7(1)(a) of the Act. On 30-9-1950, Srimati Sushila Devi, purporting to act as a landlord applied to the learned Munsif for issue of notice to thetenant under Sub-section 3 of Section 7-B calling upon him to pay arrears of rent amounting to Rs. 1625/-at the rate of Rs. 125/- p.m. from 29-8-1949, till 29-9-1950. The application contained the particulars enjoined by Sub-section (2) (a). It was verified in the ordinary way and the learned Munsif issued the notice prayed for. The rent was not deposited within the time specified. The tenant, however, attempted to file objections regarding the maintaina...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »