Allahabad Court March 1952 Judgments
Browse smarter
Turn browsing into brief-ready notes
Open any judgment and get a structured AI Brief in seconds — plus Semantic Search when you need to hunt by meaning, not keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed — log in to pick up where you left off.
Haji Ahmad Raza and ors. Vs. Municipal Board
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-18-1952
Reported in: AIR1952All711
Bind Basni Prasad, J. 1. This suit which was originally instituted before the learned Civil Judge of Allahabad has, by an order of the Court, been removed to the extraordinary original side of this Court. It came up for hearing before a Division Bench which recorded the statements of learned counsel for the parties, framed issues and took down evidence which was concluded on the 10th December, 1951. On the 11th December, 1951, it directed the case to be laid before the Hon'ble the Chief Justice for constituting a Full Bench to decide it as it raised questions of general importance in this State. The case then came up before this Full Bench on the 18th January, 1952, when at the request of the learned counsel for the defendant the following issue was added:'Is the suit bad for want of notice under Section 326 of the U. P. Municipalities Act?' Learned counsel for the plaintiffs requested for time to argue on this new issue and this was granted to him. It may be mentioned that in para. 11...
Buddhu Vs. Municipal Board and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-18-1952
Reported in: AIR1952All753
Bind Basni Prasad, J. 1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution directed against (1) the Municipal Board of Allahabad, (2) the Commissioner, Allahabad Division, and (3) the State of Uttar Pradesh, in which the relief prayed is that a writ of Mandamus or directions be issued or such other suitable orders be passed as the Court may deem fit to restrain the Municipal Board of Allahabad from enforcing its bye-laws published by Notification No. 4100/XXIII-82(3)-49 in the U. P. Gazette, dated the 31st March, 1951. The facts are as follows:2. The applicant is a butcher and carries on the business of slaughtering cows, bulls and calves at Allahabad. Bye-laws to regulate the slaughter of animals have been in existence in this Municipality since 1916. On 31-3-1951, an amendment was made in these bye-laws according to which Clause (iii) of bye-law No. 1 was inserted to the following effect: 'No bull, bullock, cow, calf (both male and female) shall be slaughtered in any slaug...
Prag Vs. Ram Das and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-17-1952
Reported in: AIR1953All24
ORDERAgarwala, J. 1. This is an application in revision against an order rejecting an application that the Magistrate trying a case pending before him had no jurisdiction to try it. 2. The dispute relates to certain agricultural plots, which according to the applicants are part of village Angraura in the district of Sitapur and according to the complainants opposite-parties are part of village Bhonri Kaundor situated in district Bahraich. These two districts of Sitapur and Bahruich are divided by river Ghogra, which often changes its course. The dispute was about possession over these plots and the complaint was filed in the Court of Sub-Divisional Officer of Qaisergunj, district Bahraich. The applicants' case was that the Sub-Divisional Officer of Qaisergunj had no jurisdiction to try the case because the plots in dispute were situated on the other side of the river Ghogra, the side on which the district of Sitapur was situated. 3. In the Revenue Manual (Volume II) paragraph 1631, the...
Brahma DIn and ors. Vs. Bachan Pershad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-17-1952
Reported in: AIR1953All242
Beg, J. 1. This is a first appeal arising out of an application for redemption under Section 12, U. P. Agriculturists' Relief Act, 1934. The facts giving rise to the case may be briefly stated as follows: 2. On 23-12-1889, Salik Ram and Shrimati Rukmin executed two mortgage deeds for Rs. 5,500/- and Rs. 300/- in favour of three persons named Daljit, Ram Ratan and Niranjan. On 17-4-1936, one Data Ram, a successor-in-interest of the mortgagors, gifted the property in question to Brahma Din, the father of the applicant Bachan Prasad. Thus, after the death of Brahma Din the applicant became the sole representative-in-interest of the original mortgagors. He gave this application impleading 18 persons as opposite-parties. These 18 persons are the successors-in-interest of the three original mortgagees. The two mortgage transactions in respect of which the application for redemption was given appear to be mortgages by conditional sale. Under the terms of the said deeds the mortgagees were put...
Rajendra Misra and ors. Vs. Tirathraj Misra and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-17-1952
Reported in: AIR1953All376
Mushtaq Ahmad, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal against a decree modifying the final decree in a suit for partition.2. The preliminary decree was passed on 18 8-1941, in which the shares of the parties who represent two different branches of the same family were indicated in equal moieties. That decree became final on 21-9-1942. On 10-12-1942, the final decree was passed. This was modified on appeal on 19-7-1944 by the lower appellate Court, and the present appeal is against this last decree.3. As usual, a commissioner had been appointed before the final decree was passed by the trial Court to divide the properties, and he made two lots of the same, A and B, the one for the plaintiffs and the other for the defendants. This allotment was accepted by the trial Court, and, on the basis of it, it passed the final decree on 10-12-1942 as already mentioned.4. The present appeal raises only three points, relating respectively.(1) to a decree standing in the name of Sanman Datt, defendant 3, ...
Ajodhiya Singh and anr. Vs. Baleshwar Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-17-1952
Reported in: AIR1952All818
ORDERAgarwal, J.1. This is an application in revision against an order of the Assistant Sessions Judge of Gonda directing a Magistrate to transfer a complaint to the Panchayati Adalat. The facts of the case briefly are these : The complainants and the accused live in a small hamlet Dhauria of village Gohsarai, police station Nawabganj. The house of the complainant Ajodhya Singh is opposite the house of the accused Chhattarpal Singh with a narrow lane intervening. Sometime ago Ajodhya Singh made a construction in a part of the narrow lane which diverted the flow of water towards the house of Chhattarpal Singh. Chhattarpal Singh thereupon tried to divert the flow of water towards the house of Ajodhya Singh. Ajodhya Singh remonstrated whereupon Chhattarpal Singh and the other three accused, who are opposite parties, belaboured Ajodhya Singh and his cousin Ram Kumar Singh with lathis. Ajodhya Singh received six injuries including a fracture of the left thumb and Bam Kumar Singh received se...
Fateh Kunwar Vs. Durbijai Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-14-1952
Reported in: AIR1952All942
Sankar Saran, J.1. This is an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court. The applicant is the widow of Lal Durga Saran Singh. One Raja Earn Chandra Singh was the owner of an impartible Raj known as Rampur Raj. He died in the year 1883 leaving a widow, Rani Krishna Kuar, and a daughter, Munni Saheba. After his death his widow, Rani Krishna Kuar, succeeded to the Raj and continued to be in possession of it till her death in May, 1939. She died issueless and there was a dispute upon her death between the applicant, Rani Fateh Kuar, on the one hand and Raja Durbijai Singh, opposite party, on the other in respect of the succession to the Rampur Raj.2. A suit was filed in October, 1939, on the allegation that, upon the death of Raja Ram Chandra Singh, Rani Krishna Kuar entered into possession of the estate as his heir, that there was a litigation between Rani Krishna Kuar and a brother of Raja Ram Chandra Singh and that after several contests a family settlement is said to have be...
Gur Prasad Vs. Ram Sukh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-10-1952
Reported in: AIR1952All938
Wali Ullah, J.1. This is a defendants' appeal against the judgment passed by a learned single Judge of this Court. It arises out of a. suit for declaration. Two sale deeds were executed by Mt. Hubraji, widow of one Munnu Lal--one on 19th May 1939 for a sum of Rs. 100, the property conveyed by this sale deed consisted of certain groves and trees which had belonged to Munnu Lal, and the other on 7th November 1939, for a sum of Rs. 500 and the property conveyed by this sale deed was a residential house which had belonged to Munna Lal and which had come down to Mt. Hubraji as the widow of Munnu Lal. Both of these sale deeds were in favour of the defendants-appellants. The suit was instituted by the plaintiffs, Ram Sukh and Ram Nath, who claimed to be the daughter's sons of Munnu Lal. The claim was only for a declaration that the transactions evidenced by these sale deeds were not binding upon the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs' case was that the sale deeds were without consideration and that f...
Daryao Singh and ors. Vs. Board of Revenue and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-06-1952
Reported in: AIR1952All829
Bind Basni Prasad, J.1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution directed against the Hon'ble Board of Revenue, Uttar Pradesh and one Gandra Gir for a writ of prohibition to restrain opposite party No. 1 from trying revision No. 44 of 1950-51 in a case under Section 27, U. P. Tenancy (Amendment) Act of 1947.2. The relevant facts are as follows: Section 27, U. P. Tenancy (Amendment) Act, 1947 provides for the reinstatement of certain tenants who had been ejected from their holdings under Section 165 or Section 171 or Section 180, U. P. Tenancy Act, 1939. Gendra Gir made an application under this section to the revenue Court. The trial Court dismissed that application. There was an appeal to the Collector under Sub-section (6) of Section 27 but it was infructuous. A petition in revision was filed before the Commissioner, but without any success. Thereupon ha filed a revision purporting to be under Section 275, U. P. Tenancy Act, 1939 before the Hon'ble Board of Revenu...
State Vs. Kailash Chandra and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-05-1952
Reported in: AIR1952All799
ORDERP.L. Bhargava, J. 1. This is a reference, under Section 438, Criminal P. C., by the Additional Sessions Judge of Etawah. The facts and circumstances leading to the reference are these : 2. Sri Kailash Chandra, Sri Swami Dayal and Sri Surendra Narain, the proprietors of the Prabhat Talkies, Etawah, were prosecuted under Section 5 read with Section 4, U. P. Entertainment and Betting Tax Act (NO. vIII [8] of 1937) for having admitted thirteen persons, who were liable to pay entertainment tax, to their cinema-house--a place of entertainment--without payment of the tax leviable under Section 3 of the Act. 3. According to the prosecution story, on 7-2-1950, the Entertainment Tax Inspector entered the cinema-house for the purpose of checking and he found in the Inter Glass thirteen persons sitting without ticket. These persons were liable to pay the entertainment tax under Section 3 (2) of the Act but they had been admitted without payment; of the same. The proprietors of the cinema hous...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »