Allahabad Court August 1953 Judgments
Sunder Lal and anr. Vs. Mohammad Ishaq
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-28-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All111
Malik C.J.1. These are four special appeals arising out of four suits. But they can be disposed of by one judgment as the point for decision is the same in all the four cases.2. The plaintiffs, who are the landlords, filed four suits for ejectment, arrears of rent and also for mesne profits on 2-4-1946. These suits were decreed on 30-9-1946. Before filing the suits, notices for ejectment were given on 11-8-1945, and the tenants were required to vacate by 31-8-1945. The plaintiffs had also applied for permission to the District Magistrate and the permission to file the suits had been granted on 28-2-1946.3. After the decrees, the defendants filed appeals. During the pendency of me appeals, an Ordinance known as U. P. (Temporary) Control of Rent and Eviction Ordinance, 1946, (Ordinance No. 3 of 1946), was passed which came into force from 1-10-1946. The Ordinance was replaced by the U. P. Control of Rent and Eviction Act, 1947 (Act. No. 3 of 1947), which Act was passed on 31-3-1947, and ...
Tag this Judgment!Jangi Lal Vs. Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Allahabad and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-27-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All126
Malik, C.J. 1. There is no force in this writ application and it must fail. This application has been filed against an allotment order made by the Town Rationing Officer of Allahabad allotting the ground-floor of a certain premises to the opposite party No. 2, Narbada Prasad. The house was rented out in two portions, the ground-floor being in the occupation of one Ram Autar and the upper portion being in the occupation of another tenant. The landlord was living in another house at some distance from this house. The landlord filed a suit No. 485 of 1949 under Section 3 of the U. P. Temporary Control of Rent and Eviction Act, 1947, and obtained a decree. In execution of the decree Ram Autar was ejected in April 1953. After the ejectment of Ram Autar, the groundfloor became vacant and it could be allotted to a tenant under the Rent Control and Eviction Act. The applicant, however, took possession of the premises and after the allotment order was made by the Town Rationing Officer on 4-5-1...
Tag this Judgment!State Vs. Mt. Dukhtari
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-27-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All173
Malik, C.J.1. The respondents were prosecuted under Section 5, Influx from Pakistan (Control) Act, 1949, (Act No. 23 of 1949) but were acquitted by the learned Magistrate. The State has filed these appeals and the point urged on behalf Of the State is that the order of acquittal was incorrect.2. The facts are really not in dispute. The respondents were all residents of various villages in Haldwani, district Naini Tal presumably of parents who were also residents there. In the year 1948 Samvat Dukhtari, who is the respondent in Government Appeal No. 374 of 1952, went from Haldwani to West Pakistan. She went with her parents and left behind her husband in Haldwani. The other respondents in the other six cases left in May 1950, except Nabi Raza Khan who left in July 1950. All the seven accused persons admittedly went to West Pakistan without a permit and then came back to India 'via' East Pakistan. Four of them, namely, Smt. Dukhtari, Nabi Jan Khan, Abdul Rauf and Smt. Rais, wife of Abdul...
Tag this Judgment!Mst. Nanhi Nabbi Vs. Mst. Bunyadi Begam Ghani Raza
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-26-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All87
Malik, C.J.1. This second appeal has been referred to a bench for the decision of the question whether the second demand, 'talab-i-ishhad', was performed by the plaintiff in accordance with the provisions of the Mohammadan law of Pre-emption.2. The plaintiff Bunyadi Begam filed a suit against the defendants Mst. Nanhi and Mst. Shakila Begam claiming pre-emption of a house on the ground that the vendee was a stranger and the plaintiff pre-emptor was entitled to claim pre-emption under the Mohammedan law. The plaintiff alleged that she had performed the first demand, 'talab-i-mowasibat', immediately on coming to know of the Sale, and the second demand by going to the house to be pre-empted in the company of witnesses and declaring her intention to pre-empt by touching the wall of the house and also after mentioning that the 'talab-i-mowasibat', had been performed.3. The plaintiff's evidence was believed and the suit was decreed by the lower appellate court.4. Mst. Nanhi, defendant, has f...
Tag this Judgment!Wasiq Ali Khan Vs. Nand Kishore and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-26-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All119
Malik, C.J.1. The facts of this case are very simple, but it raises a point of law of some interest, as there are no clear decisions on the point.The plaintiff-appellant is the mortgagor who fil-ed a suit for redemption of a mortgage with possession. Tnat suit was decreed on 24-7-1934 on payment of Rs. 6221/-. A decree under Order 34, Rule 7 for redemption of the mortgage was passed and the decree-holder was given six months' time to pay the amount. The decree-holder mortgage? thereupon deposited Rs. 6221/- and on the deposit being made in accordance with the provisions Of Order 34, Rule 7, a final decree for redemption was passed and the plaintiff-decree-holder was put in possession of the property.The money, however, remained in deposit in the Court as the defendants did not choose to withdraw it. The defendants filed an appeal, which was allowed on 16-4-1941. It was held that the mortgage had become time-barred on the date of the suit and the plaintiff could not, therefore, get a de...
Tag this Judgment!All India Shia Conference Through Syed Kalbe Abbas Hony. General Secre ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-26-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All124
Agarwala, J. 1. This is an application under Section 226 of theConstitution. The applicant All India Shia Conference is a registered Society under the Societies Registration Act 21 of 1860. It is a representative body of the Shias of India. It has been given representation on the Shia Central Waqf Board, formed under the U. P. Muslim Waqfs Act 13 of 1936. That Act created two bodies, the Shia Central Waqf Board and the Sunni Central Waqf Board to look after and manage Shia and Sunni Waqfs respectively.Section 8 provided for the constitution of the Shia Central Board which shall consist of (i) five members to be elected in the manner prescribed by the Shia members of the local legislature; (ii) one member to be elected in the manner prescribed by the Executive Committee of the All India Shia Conference; (iii) one member to be elected in the manner prescribed by the Board of Trustees of the Shia College, Lucknow; (iv) three members to be co-opted by the above seven members from person...
Tag this Judgment!U.P. Oil Mills Agency, Kanpur Vs. Saraswati Soap and Oil Mills Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-26-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All129; [1954]24CompCas450(All)
ORDERBrij Mohan Lall, J. 1. This is an application under Section 183 (5), Companies Act (7 of 1913) by the U. P. Oil Mill Agency, Kanpur (hereinafter described as claimant) against a decision of the official liquidators awarding it interest up to the date of the winding up order. The claimant contends that interest should be allowed till the date of payment. 2. The claimant had deposited two sums of Rs. 25,000/- and Rs. 15,000/- with the Saraswati Soap and Oil Mills Ltd. (hereinafter described as Company) while it (the Company) was a going concern. When the Company went into liquidation the claimant filed a claim before the official liquidators and urged that it was entitled to priority against other creditors. The official liquidators admitted the claim but denied priority to the claimant. A petition under Section 183(5) was filed by the claimant and the only point argued on that occasion was whether or not it was entitled to priority. By my order dated 5-12-1952 I held that the claim...
Tag this Judgment!Gir Raj Kishore Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-19-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All421
Malik, C.J. 1. The applicant Girraj Kishore was convicted by a Magistrate of the First Class for having contravened the provisions of the High Denomination Bank Notes (Demonitisation) Ordinance, 1946, Ordinance No. III of 1946, and has been sentenced to undergo two years' rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- in default of payment of the fine to a further term of rigoroua imprisonment for six months. The learned Magistrate's order is in these terms:'I find the accused Girraj Kishore-guilty of the offence under Section 7 (1) of the Ordinance No. III of 1946 for contravening Section 4 of the Ordinance by exchanging one thousand rupee notes on 14-1-1946, from the Sagri Sub-treasury without filing a declaration as required under Sub-section (2) of Section 6 of the Ordinance and convict him under the said section of the said Ordinance.'2. Girraj Kishore was Treasurer's agent at the Azamgarh Government Treasury and the charge against him was that on the 14th of January, 1946...
Tag this Judgment!Union Bank Ltd., Utraula Vs. Mst. Ram Rati and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-19-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All595
Randhir Singh, J. 1. These two second appeals arise out of a single judgment and decree.2. Sallar had two sons, Ram Harakh and Raghubar Dayal Ram Harakh died leaving the plaintiff as his widow. Sallar was possessed of some immoveable property and it was alleged on behalf of the plaintiff that this property had been settled by a family settlement or partition in three equal shares in favour of Gangajali wife of Sallar, and the two sons of Sallar, Ram Harakh and Raghubar Dayal. Each of these three persons became owner of a third of the property of Sallar. On the death of Ram Harakh, his widow, the plaintiff, it was so alleged, agreed to marry Raghubar Dayal on the condition that he executed a gift deed of his property in her favour. Thegift deed was executed on 20th February 1946 by Raghubar Dayal in favour of Ramrati in respect of his entire interest in the property. This deed was, however, not registered till 28th March 1946. In the meantime, on 26th February 1946, Raghubar Dayal execu...
Tag this Judgment!Kesho Datt and ors. Vs. Panchayati Adalat and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-18-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All84
Malik, C.J.1. This application under Article 226 of the Constitution was referred to a large Bench as the learned Judges wanted an authoritative decision on the point, whether a Panchayati Adalat can under the U. P. Panchayat Raj Act (Act 26 of 1947) appoint a commissioner to make a local investigation and make a report?2. The facts, so far as can be ascertained from the papers on the record, are that one Shiam Lal filed a complaint against four persons that they had committed an offence under Section 447, Penal Code, inasmuch as they had broken down a mendh which separated the field of the complainant from their field and had planted mustard seed crop on the land belonging to the complainant. The Panchayati Adalat Bench issued a commission to Sampat Singh the Sarpanch and one Roshan Singh, who though on the panel of panches was not a member of this Bench of the Panchayati Adalat, to make a report as regards the condition of the field after a local inspection. The two commissioners wen...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »