Allahabad Court August 1957 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.
(Lala) Paras Ram Vs. Smt. Noor Jahan Begum and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-19-1957
Reported in: AIR1958All330
A.P. Srivastava, J.1. This is a defendant's application in revision. It furnishes an instance of how difficulties can arise as a result of an attempt to enforce an incomplete order.2. The plaintiff had filed a suit for specific performance of a contract of sale. The defendants had filed their written statements and issues had been framed on 19-10-1953. 4-1-1954 was fixed as the date for final hearing. On that date the defendant No. 1 applied that the case be adjourned and adjournment to 21-4-1954 was allowed on payment of Rs. 25 as costs within fifteen days. On the adjourned date, the defendant again applied for adjournment on the ground of illness. The order passed on this application was in these words: 'The defendant's application for adjournment on the ground of illness allowed on payment of Rs. 25 as costs to the opposite party to be paid within a month. Fix 11-8-54 for final hearing.' Cost was not paid by the defendant within a month as ordered. On 10-7-1954, the plaintiff pointe...
Oudh and Tirhut Railway Vs. Mrs. Karam Chand Paras Ram
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-14-1957
Reported in: AIR1958All234
Desai, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal from a decree of the Judge, Small Cause Court, Meerut, for Rs. 5,135/11/- on account of damages for loss of goods. On 10-8-1942 a consignment of 37 bales of gunny bags was booked from Jogbani railway station on the Bengal and Assam Railway to Ghaziabad on the East Indian Railway under railway risk note H by the Biratnagar Jute Mills Ltd. The consignee was the Jute Mills Ltd. itself and the railway receipt was assigned by it to the respondent, who thereupon became entitled to take delivery of the goods at Gaziabad.The consignment was placed in wagon No. 15317 and the train left Jogbani on the the same day and reached Katihar Junction on 11-8-1942. At Katihar the wagon was detached from the train and handed over to the appellant, which was then known as the Bengal North Western Railway, for conveyance to Bara Banki from where it was to be carried by the East Indian Railway to the destination, Ghaziabad. The appellant took charge of the wagon at Ka...
Ganesh DIn Vs. Bishwanath
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-14-1957
Reported in: AIR1958All310
ORDERM.C. Desai, J.1. The opposite party filed a suit against Dani Ram, father of the applicant, and obtained an ex parte decree in 1945. No process in execution was issued so long as Dani Ram was alive; after his death a warrant of attachment of his property was issued and the applicant's property was attached. Then the applicant knew that an ex parte decree had been passed against his father and on 5-1-1953 made an application for its being set aside. In the application he stated that Dani Ram had died leaving him as his heir. The application was allowed and the ex parte decree was set aside on 28-3-1953. The opposite party neither applied for substitution of the name of the applicant in place of the name of Dani Ram in the plaint nor was the name of Dani Ram expunged by an order of the court and substituted by that of the applicant and the suit proceeded against Dani Bam as if he were Still alive. On 6-4-1954 it was dismissed in default, but on the same day an application for restor...
Kameshwar and anr. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-13-1957
Reported in: AIR1958All318; 1957CriLJ276
ORDERR.K. Chowdhry, J. 1. This is an application in revision by Kameshwar and Murli, who were the two accused in Sessions Trial No. 109 of 1956 before a learned Assistant Sessions Judge of Kanpur. They along with one Ram Ratan are alleged to have entered into a criminal conspiracy to cheat and to have succeeded in doing so by selling forged railway receipts to a number of shop-keepers of Kanpur in the month of August 1955. It was alleged that five such sales were effected.Charges for offences under Sections 420, 467 and 468 I P C. were framed against them in respect of each of the five sales, and there was a common charge of criminal conspiracy under S 120B in respect of all the said offences. Ram Ratan was absconding so that these charges were framed only against Kameshwar and Murli, and as the Magistrate who enquired into these offences was of the view that he could not adequately punish them he made an order committing the accused for trial by the court of session.The trial came up ...
Lala Shri Ram and anr. Vs. Nand Kishore and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-09-1957
Reported in: AIR1958All107
Srivastava, J. 1. The dispute in this appeal relates to a shop situated on plot No. 490 of village Datiana is the district of Meerut. One Narottam Dass was the Riyaya in possession of the shop. On the lath July 1932 Narottam Dass executed a deed of gift in respect of the shop in favour of his brotner's grandson Jehangiri Mal. He continued residing in the shop with Jehangiri Mal till his death which took place on the 26th May 1933.After he died the plaintiff who was the zamindar of the site tiled a suit No. 754 of 1939 for recovery of possession over the shop on the ground that the gift in favour of Jehangiri Mal was not permissible and alter Narottam Dass's death the shop had reverted to him. Jehangiri Mal contested the suit but It was ultimately decreed against him and the zamindar recovered possession over the shop. The suit out of which the present appeal has arisen was the filed in 1944 by Smt. Kirpa Devi, the daughter of Narottam Dass.She claimed possession over the shop on the al...
Babulal Vs. G.S. Hashmi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-09-1957
Reported in: AIR1958All97
ORDERMehrotra, J. 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution praying for a writ of prohibition restraining the Tehsildar of Mau, opposite party No. 1, from proceeding further with the proceedings, under Rule 115-C, U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Rules.2. Before the abolition of the zamindari, the petitioner asserts that he was a co-sharer in patti No. 10 of village Khor, pargana Mau, district Banda, in which plot No. 251/1 measuring an area of 53 bighas and 3 biswas is situate. According to the petitioner's assertion in the affidavit it was cleared and brought under cultivation in 1358-F. and since then he has been cultivating it.Near about 6th of November, 1956 a registered letter purporting to be on behalf of apposite parties Nog. 2 to 14 was sent to the Tahsildar of Mau complaining against Sri Ansdhari, Pradhan of the Gaon Sabha. A similar letter was sent to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Karvi, and that was sent by him to the Tahsildar of Mau. Thereupon...
The State Vs. Maqbool Ahmad and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-08-1957
Reported in: AIR1958All728; 1958CriLJ1260
D.N. Roy, J. 1. This is a matter under Section 3 of the Contempt of Courts Act, which has been brought to our notice by the Deputy Commissioner of Sultan-pur. Certain judicial proceedings were pending before the, Judicial Magistrate of Sultanpur in which bail was granted to certain individuals on 22-4-1957, and the question of bail in respect of others was still pending. On 13-7-1957, that is during the pendency of the bail application, the respondents Maqbool Husain and Mpham-mad Muti approached the Judicial Magistrate at his residence and, in spite of his warning them against talking about any pending judicial matter, Maqbool Husain told him that the Magistrate had committed the grave mistake in releasing Smt. Abida Begum on bail in April, and Maqbool Husain also said that because of this order the prestige of the Magistrate had considerably fallen in the estimation of the public. He further told the Magistrate that if he released! Abida Begum on the subsequent bail application again...
Dominion of India Now the Union of India (Uoi) Vs. L. Ram Kumar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-06-1957
Reported in: AIR1959All168
ORDERB. Mukerji, J.1. This is an application in revision on behalf of the Union of India against a decree of a Judge, Small Causes Court at Moradabad, whereby, the learned Judge decreed a suit filed by Lala Ram Kumar for damages for non-delivery of a part of a consignment.2. A few facts have to be stated in order to appreciate the point of law raised by Mr. Sanyal on behalf of the Union of India in this petition. A consignment of ilaychi was booked from a place called Shyam Nagar in Bengal to Rampur in Uttar Pradesh on 10-9-1948 under Railway, Receipt No. 396733. Rarh Kumar was the consignee of the aforementioned consignment. Part only of the aforementioned consignment, which consisted of three bags arrived at Rampur on 11-10-1948: two bags reached Rampur while one did not.3. Ram Kumar served a notice on the General Manager, East Indian Railway, Calcutta under Section 80 of the Civil Procedure Code on 15-9-1949. In this notice Ram Kumar mentioned the name of the station of booking as S...
Nazakat Ali Khan Vs. Bankey and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-05-1957
Reported in: AIR1958All106
Raghubar Dayal, Ag. C.J. 1. Nazakat All Khan, the appellant, filed a petition before His Highness the Nawab of Rampur sometime before the 1st of December 1949, praying that the order of the Board of Revenue, Rampur, dated the 22nd May 1949, be set aside. The State of Rampur merged with the United Provinces of Agra and Oudh in 1949. Paragraph 12, Clause (e) of The States' Merger (Governors' Provinces) Order, 1949, as amended by the States' Merger (United Provinces) Order, 1949, provided:'12. As from the appointed day, --(e) all proceedings (including proceedings for confirmation of the sentence of death) pending before the Ijlas-e-Humayun immediately before the appointed day shall stand transferred to the High Court at Allahabad and shall be heard and decided by that Court as if they had been proceedings instituted or commenced in that Court or Submitted to it for confirmation of a sentence of death by a Sessions Judge subordinate to that Court, in accordance with Sub-section (2) of Sec...
Jag-naraIn Mallah Vs. Bhagauti Prasad Pandey
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-02-1957
Reported in: AIR1958All48
Desai, J.1. These two revision applications raise the same question whether a suit can be instituted in a civil Court under Section 9 of the Specific Relief Act even though a suit could be instituted in a revenue Court under Section 180 or Section 183 of the U. P. Tenancy Act.2. The two suits which give rise to the applications were instituted in civil Courts under Section 9, Specific Relief Act and were both decreed in spite of the objections of the defendants-applicants that the jurisdiction of the civil Courts to hear them was barred by the provisions of Section 242 of the U. P. Tenancy Act. Both the suits purported to be suits purely and simply under Section 9, Specific Relief Act; the only allegations contained in the plaints were that the plaintiffs were in possession of the land in dispute previously and that they were dispossessed by the defendants within the six months immediately preceding the institution of the suits.In the suit giving rise to the application, No. 1543 of 19...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »