Allahabad Court February 1953 Judgments
Mohar Singh and ors. Vs. State and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-27-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All81
Malik, C.J.1. This is an application under Article 227 of the Constitution for an appropriate order Setting aside a conviction by the Panchayati Adalat of Mohabbatpur. The complainant was one Sonpal, resident of village Jonthri which is situate within the jurisdiction of the Gaon Sabha Mohabbatpur Labhna. He filed a complaint before the Panchayati Adalat Deohli against three persons, Mohar Singh, Pokhu and Badnu, also residents of the same village. The charges were under Sections 323 and 447, Penal Code. The Sarpanch constituted a bench of five Panches, of whom only one belonged to Gaon Sabha Mohabbatpur Labhna while (he other four belonged to some other Gaon Sabha or Gaon Sabhas. The Panchayati Adalat convicted the three accused under Sections 323 and 447, Penal Code and imposed fines of Rs. 80/- and Rs. 70/- respectively on each of them. There was a revision application filed before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate under Section 85, U. P. Panchayat Raj Act, but the revision was dismisse...
Tag this Judgment!Bankey Lal Vs. Narendra Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-27-1953
Reported in: AIR1953All533
Mukerji, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit for partition. The appeal came up before a learned single Judge who has referred it to a Bench for decision because of the importance of the question of law that arises for determination in the case.2. The facts giving rise to the appeal, very briefly stated, were these. One Lachhman Singh married twice and the two wives were named Savitri and Sarwati; they are both alive. He also had a son Narendra Singh who was the plaintiff in the suit. Narendra Singh was born sometime roundabout the year 1940 -- the exact year of his birth is however not given in the pleadings of the parties to this case. On the aforesaid composition of the family, Narendra Singh claimed one-fourth share in the family properties by right of his having an interest in the properties by being born into this family.In the year 1936, Lachhman Singh made an application under Section 4 of the Encumbered Estates Act, he having been encumbered with debts and h...
Tag this Judgment!Molhar Mal Vs. State Through Sm. Krishna Gupta
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-26-1953
Reported in: AIR1953All524
R. Dayal, J. 1. Molhar Mal filed a complaint under Section 317, I. P. C. against Smt. Krishna Gupta. She was discharged by the Magistrate. The Magistrate ordered the complainant to payRs. 50/- as compensation to the accused under Section 250, Cr. P. C. Molhar Mal went up in revision to the Sessions Judge, who referred the case to this Court, recommending that the order for the payment of compensation be set aside as S, 250, Cr. P. C. could not apply to the trial of warrant cases, and, therefore, the Magistrate could not order the payment of compensation to the accused in case he found the complaint to be false and frivolous or vexatious. He relied on the case of Harihar Dat v. Maksud Ali : AIR1926All159 . 2. When the matter came up before an Hon'ble Judge of this Court, it was considered of sufficient importance and was therefore referred to a Division Bench, and hence this case is before us. 3. Mr. Sateyndra Nath Verma was requested by the learned single Judge to appear in support of ...
Tag this Judgment!Govind Dass and ors. Vs. Smt. Sarju Bai
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-25-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All449
Agarwala, J. 1. Govind Das, Bansidhar and Ram Das, brothers, as proprietors of the joint firm Bansidhar Ram-das, carrying on cloth business at Jhansi, made an application before the District Judge of Jhansi under Section 9, Provincial Insolvency Act praying that Shrimati Sarju Bai, opposite party, be declared as insolvent. In the application it was alleged thatthe debts due to the applicants from the opposite party amounted to a sum of Rs. 1,43,187/8/6, that the opposite party had not made any arrangements for the payment of the debt, but on the contrary had transferred six houses for Rs. 98,284/-/6 on 11-7-1949, in order to defeat the claim of the applicants and further that she was secluding herself so as to deprive the applicants of the means of communicating with her. The applicants further mentioned that they were carrying on cloth business as members of a joint Hindu family. One of the applicants, Bansidhar died during the pendency of the application on 25-5-1950. An application ...
Tag this Judgment!Mt. Rajiya and anr. Vs. Mt. Sukhrani and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-23-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All166
Kidwai, J.1. This is an office report to theeffect that there is a deficiency in court-feeamounting to Rs. 250/- not only in this Court but in each of the courts below. Office, therefore, asks for a direction to the appellant to pay a sum of Rs. 750/-. This report is contested by Mr. Banerji and is supported by the learned Standing Counsel.The facts are that a succession certificate has been granted to the defendant by the Civil Judge, Partapgarh. Subsequently the plaintiff appellant instituted a suit claiming the amount of money left by the deceased as his heir. Office has reported that this involves a cancellation of the succession certificate. It has relied upon a case of -- 'Mokhoda Dossee v. Nobin Chunder Mitter', 16 WR 259 (Ca3) (A). That case can have no reference to Section 7, Clause (iv-A), which was inserted into the Court-fees Act by the United Provinces legislature in 1938. This clause involves payment of- court-fee for cancellation of or adjudgingvoid instruments and decre...
Tag this Judgment!Sm. Ram Katori Vs. the Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Agra and anr ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-1953
Reported in: AIR1953All543
Agarwala, J. 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, praying that the order of allotment of the petitioner's house passed by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Agra, on 6-7-1951, in favour of Govind Ram opposite-party be quashed and that an 'ad interim' injunction be issued staying the operation of the said order pending the disposal of this petition.2. The petitioner is the owner of house No. 3456/3557 situate in mohalla Gulabkhana, Agra.According to her, she purchased it in 1948 for her residence. At the time of purchase, the whole house was in occupation of a tenant. The house fell vacant in January, 1951, when the upper portion of that house was allotted to her by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer and the lower portion was thereafter allotted to one Jiwat Ram but Jiwat Ram vacated it soon after and then the petitioner occupied the lower portion also. On 19-1-1951, the Rent Control and Eviction Officer without consulting the petitioner, allotted the said...
Tag this Judgment!Sita Ram Singh Vs. Gaya Prasad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-1953
Reported in: AIR1953All620
ORDER1. This is a plaintiff's application in revision arising out of proceedings under Section 12, U. P. Agriculturists' Relief Act (27 of 1934) read with Section 9, U. P. Debt Redemption Act (13 of 1940). The predecessors-n-interest of the applicant executed a usufructuary mortgage, which was sought to be redeemed in the present case, in the year 1855. One of the terms of the mortgage was that the profits were to be taken in lieu of interest. It was not a self-liquidating mortgage. The application under Section 12, 'U. P. Agriculturists' Relief Act read with Section 9 of the Debt Redempion Act was filed in the year 1946 and it was claimed that the entire mortgage, money had been paid up by the usufruct, calculating the same in accordance with the provisions of Section 9, U. P. Debt Redemption Act. 2. The trial Court allowed the application and passed a decree in favour of the applicants holding that the entire mortgage money had been paid up by the usufruct. In appeal it was held that...
Tag this Judgment!Madhua Nand and ors. Vs. Suresha Nand and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-19-1953
Reported in: AIR1953All547
Agarwala, J. 1. This is a defendants' appeal arising out of a suit for a declaration that a certain decree of the revenue court dated 27-2-1938 obtained by the appellants was void and not binding on the plaintiffs-respondents and the defendants second set who are arrayed as respondents. The facts briefly stated are as follows: (2) The defendants first set are residents of village Gheri, and the plaintiffs and the defendants second set are residents of an adjoining village Thapli. Both these villages are situated in the district of Garhwal. In the revenue settlement which was made sometime in 1936 Gheri people claimed a right to graze their cattle in a plot of land which was included within the boundaries of the village Thapli and prayed that the plot be included within the boundaries of their village Gheri. The Settlement Officer considered the claim and held that the plot of land over which grazing rights were claimed should be attached to village Gheri and made the entries accordingl...
Tag this Judgment!Gaya Rai and ors. Vs. Lalji Rai and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-19-1953
Reported in: AIR1953All579
Malik, C.J. 1. A preliminary objection has been raised that this appeal should not have been filed in this Court and should have been filed in the Court of the learned District Judge. The plaintiff filed an application under Section 12, U. P. Agriculturists' Relief Act for redemption of a large number of mortgages. The suit was decreed in part. Under Section 23, U. P. Agriculturists' Relief Act an appeal against such a decree lies to the Court to which original decrees passed by such Courts are ordinarily appealable and where such decrees are appealable to more Courts than one, to the Court of lowest jurisdiction. Section 21, Bengal, Agra and Assam Civil Courts Act (Act 12 of 1887) provides that 'an appeal from a decree or order of a Subordinate Judge (in this state Civil Judge) shall lie- (a) to the District Judge where the value of the original suit in which or in any proceeding arising out of which the decree or order was made did not exceed five thousand rupees, and (b) to the Hig...
Tag this Judgment!Sudhakar Rao and ors. Vs. Radha Krishna Das
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-17-1953
Reported in: AIR1953All544
Agarwala, J. 1. This is an appeal by the landlord-applicants arising out pf Encumbered Estates proceedings. The learned Special Judge passed a decree for Rs. 39,8407- with pendente lite and future interest at 3 per cent, per annum in favour of the respondent-creditor. This amount of Rs. 39,840/- consisted of Rs. 30,000/-as principal and the rest as interest. The only contention raised before us in this appeal is that the learned Special Judge was not justified in decreeing pendente lite and future interest on the total amount of Rs. 39,840/- but that he should have allowed interest on the principal amount of Rs. 30,000/- only. This contention has no force. Section 14 (7) clearly authorises the Special Judge to pass a decree for the amount found due by him with pendente lite and future interest. The amount that the learned Special Judge is required to find is the amount due, i.e. principal and interest, up to the date of the application, vide Clause 2 of Section 14, U. P. Encumbered Est...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »