Allahabad Court December 1969 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.
Abbasi Begam Vs. Nanhi Begam and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-31-1969
Reported in: (1896)ILR18All206
John Edge, Kt., C.J. and Burkitt, J.1. This is the plaintiff's appeal from, the decree of the Subordinate judge of Bareilly dismissing the plaintiff's suit for dower. The plaintiff's case was that she and Muhammad Mohib Ali Khan who was generally known as Nabba Sahib and who was a member of the Rampur family, went through the ceremony of marriage in the nikah form some fifteen or sixteen years prior to 1893, that is to say, in 1877 or 1878. The plaintiff's case further was that it was agreed at the time of the nikah ceremony that her dower should be a lakh and twenty-five thousand rupees. Nabba Sahib is dead; the dower has not been paid: hence this suit.2. Nabba Sahib died on the 17tb of October 1,889. The period of limitation for a suit for deferred dower is prescribed by Article 104 of the second schedule of the Indian Limitation Act, 1877, and that period is three years from the date, in this case, when the marriage was dissolved by death. On the 16th of October 1892, the three year...
Kali Parshad Vs. Ram Charan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-31-1969
Reported in: (1875)ILR1All159
1. The answer to the question referred to us is, it appears to us, supplied by express texts of the Mitakshara. The fifth section of the first chapter of that work treats of the rights of father and son in property ancestral, and in the fifth paragraph the author declares that for or because the right is equal or alike, therefore partition is not restricted to be made by the father's choice; and having explained in the seventh paragraph that the texts which he had discussed in the second section referred to property which had been acquired by the father himself, in the eighth paragraph he distinctly announces the rule in the following terms:--' Thus, while the mother is capable of bearing more sons, and the father retains his worldly affections and does not desire partition, a distribution of the grandfather's estate does nevertheless take place by the will of the son.' In the ninth and tenth paragraphs he treats of the son's right of interference in the father's dealings with ancestra...
Queen-empress Vs. Maru and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-31-1969
Reported in: (1888)ILR10All207
Mahmood, J.1. In this case the two prisoners, Maru and Fatten, were tried together and both have been convicted. The prisoner Maru has been convicted under Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to two years' rigorous imprisonment, and the other prisoner, Fatteh, has been convicted under Section 368 read with Section 363 of the Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment.2. Both prisoners have appealed. So far as Maru is concerned I have arrived at the same conclusions on the evidence as the assessors and the learned Sessions Judge. The substantive offence charged against Maru was that of kidnapping within the meaning of Section 363 of the Penal Code, and the person kidnapped was a girl, Musammat Thakuri, whose father has stated her age to be about nine years. She was examined as a witness for the prosecution, but without any oath or solemn affirmation, and this circumstance has furnished one of the difficulties in the case. Speaking of her the lear...
Shiam Sundar Vs. Amanant Begam
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-31-1969
Reported in: (1887)ILR9All234
Straight and Tyrrell, JJ.1. There are four questions raised in regard to this appeal, the first of which relates to the right of the plaintiff to maintain the suit at all. Assuming this to be answered in the affirmative, then we must determine whether the Subordinate Judge was right in holding the suit out of time quoad the share in Kamalpur, and wrong in his view that he is estopped by conduct as to the share in Muhammadpur Mai; and lastly, what was the actual consideration paid by the vendees to the vendors in respect of the shares in those villages.2. As to the first point, it is admitted that the plaintiff was, prior to 1879, a co-sharer with the vendors in the villages of Kamalpur, Muhammadpur Mai, and Kalupur, jointly answerable along with them for the Government revenue, and subject, in common with them, to the conditions of the wajib-ul-arz applicable thereto. It is also conceded that the shares of the plaintiff in those villages have been made the subject of a perfect partitio...
Chhiddu and anr. Vs. Naubat and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-31-1969
Reported in: (1902)ILR24All67
Banerji, J.1. One Ganga Ram died about 40 years ago, leaving three sons, namely, Gopil and Bliupal, sons by his first wife, and Chunni, son by his second wife Musammat Udni, who also survived him. Ganga Ram owned a 21/2 biswa share in mauza Amba Madanpur, After his death a partition of the property took place, one-half being recorded in the names of the sons by his first wife and the other half being recorded as held in equal shares by Chunni and his mother Musammat Udni. Musammat Udni died in 1869. Her son Chunni is also dead, and the quarter share, of which she was recorded as in possession, is now held by the three sons of Chunni, who, with their mother Musammat Lado, are the defendants to this suit. The plaintiffs are the sons of Gopal and Bhupal. Their case is that Musammat Udni held the share which was recorded in her name by way of maintenance, and for her life-time only, and that on her death it should be divided amongst the grandsons of Ganga Ram per stirpes. They accordingly ...
isuri Prasad Singh and ors. Vs. Umrao Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-31-1969
Reported in: (1900)ILR22All234
Aikman, J.1. Proceedings had been instituted at the instance of one Balwant Singh against Isuri Prasad Singh and six other persons to hare them bound over to keep the peace. Whilst the case was pending in the Court of a Magistrate of the first class, a petition was presented to the District Magistrate by Isuri Prasad Singh and the others, asking that the case might be transferred to some other Court, and that a local inquiry might be made. In this petition it was alleged by the petitioners that one Umrao Singh had got Balwant Singh falsely to institute the proceedings against them in order to prejudice them in their defence to a civil suit which Umrao Singh had caused to be brought against them. Umrao Singh coming to know of this, prosecuted the petitioners for defamation. They have been convicted under Section 500, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced, Isuri Prasad Singh to a fine of Rs. 10, and the others to a fine of Rs. 2 each. Both parties applied to the Sessions Judge--Umrao Singh as...
Fatima Begam Vs. Sakina Begam and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-31-1969
Reported in: (1875)ILR1All51
1. In our view the lower appellate Court is in error, and Azim Khan's residence or dwelling within the meaning of those terms in Section 5, Act VIII of 1859, and Section 4. Act XXIII of 1861, is in the jurisdiction of the Farukhabad Civil Court.2. The words dwelling or residence are synonymous with domicile or home, and mean that place where a person has his fixed permanent home, to which, whenever he is absent, he has the intention of returning. In Lord v. Colvin 4 Drew 366 : 28 L.J.Chanc. 361 it was held 'that place is properly the domicile of the person in which he has voluntarily fixed the habitation of himself and family, not for a mere special and temporary purpose, but with a present intention of making it his permanent home unless and until something (which is unexpected or uncertain) shall occur to induce him to adopt some other permanent home.' And in a case cited in Broughton's Civil Procedure Code, R. v. Murray (2 East P.C. 496), it was held that a man may have two dwelling...
Banaspat Singh Vs. Chunni Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-31-1969
Reported in: (1887)ILR9All23
Oldfield and Tyrrell, JJ.1. The plaintiff leased three villages to the defendant, Earn Pathak, for two years, 1279 and 1280 fasli, at a rent of Rs. 3,000 a year, and the latter executed a deed, dated the 26th August 1871, by which he covenanted to pay the annual rent and fulfil other conditions of the lease, and gave security in Rs. 3,000 by mortgage of landed property. He fell into arrears, and the plaintiff instituted suits in the Rent Court, and in 1874 obtained three decrees for arrears of rent He took out execution of these decrees, and payment was arranged to be made by instalments, and the decrees were partially satisfied, and thus further execution is now barred by limitation The plaintiff has now brought the present suit to recover the balance due by enforcement of the mortgage security under the deed dated the 26th August 1871, against Earn Pathak and Chunni Lal, who, on the 22nd August 1878, purchased the mortgaged property.2. We are only in this appeal concerned with the cl...
Queen-empress Vs. Mukundi Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-31-1969
Reported in: (1899)ILR21All189
Knox, J.1. This is an appeal presented by one Mukundi Lal. Mukundi Lal has been convicted of keeping a common gambling house, and, so the Magistrate's order runs, sentenced under the provisions of Section 4 of the Gambling Act, to rigorous imprisonment for one month. Section 4 of Act No. Ill of 1H67 prescribes no penalty for owning or keeping a gambling house; that offence is provided for by Section 3. The grounds on which I am asked to interfere are that the record of the summary trial does not comply with Section 263 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and it is urged that the formalities laid down in that Section should be strictly observed for the protection of the public. Reference is here made to the entry required by law under Section 263, Clause (h), of the Code of Criminal Procedure under the head in the summary register relating to this case. The entry made is as follows: 'The Police made a raid on information received and caught all the accused gambling. The defence of Mukund...
Queen Vs. Jagat Mal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-31-1969
Reported in: (1875)ILR1All162
Robert Stuart, C.J.1. This is an application for revision of the order of the Judge of Farukhabad made in an appeal to him by Ram Gholam, Gula Mal, and Jagat Mal. These three persons were, along with others, tried and convicted by Mr. C.W. Watts, Joint Magistrate of Farukhahad, of false swearing, under Section 193, Indian Penal Code, and respectively sentenced by that officer to two years' rigorous imprisonment.2. The circumstances out of which the case arose are these. In January last three men, Kanhaiya, Bishan, and Lalman, were prosecuted and convicted by the Judge on a charge of grievous hurt, under Section 326, Indian Penal Code. After convicting and sentencing them, the Judge directed that ten of the witnesses who had been examined in the case before him, including Ram Gholam and Gula Mal, should be tried by the Magistrate of the District on a charge of giving false evidence. On receipt of the Judge's order, Mr. Harrison, the Magistrate, transferred the case to Mr. Watts, the Joi...
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »