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.
Muhammad Bakhsh Vs. Nand Ram and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-31-1969
Reported in: (1880)ILR2All616
Robert Stuart, C.J.1. We cannot entertain this appeal. The Judge having proceeded under Section 556 of the Civil Procedure Code, the defendants ought to have applied to the Judge of the District for the re-admission of the appeal to him under Section 558,1 and the only further procedure open to the defendants was by an appeal to this Court from the Judge's order under Section 588 as amended by Act XII of 1879, Section 90(27), but not having proceeded before the Judge under Section 558, there is no appeal to us, and the order of the Judge made under Section 556 is now final.2. The Judge must be assumed to have done his duty according to law and the course of his Court, and with the exception of a vague suggestion as to the defendant not having known when his appeal to the Judge was coming on for hearing, nothing is stated to us against such an assumption, which we feel assured in this case is a very just one. In any case the appeal to this Court being wholly incompetent, must be rejecte...
David Hay Vs. Razi-ud-dIn and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-31-1969
Reported in: (1897)ILR19All202
John Edge, Kt., C.J. and Burkitt, J.1. In 1876 one Muhammad Husain mortgaged with possession a five-biswa share in a village named Sajauli to one Bahauddin. The terms of the mortgage were that the period should be for six years; that the money advanced, namely Rs. 1,000, might be repaid on the expiry of six years; and that, on repayment of that money together with any arrears of rent due by tenants at that time, the mortgagor should have redemption. The mortgage was usufructuary only so far as interest was concerned, the usufruct being taken instead of interest. We mention the fact, although we do not think that the principle which must guide us in this case would be affected by the fact of the mortgage being wholly or partially usufructuary. Muhammad Husain brought a suit for redemption after the expiration of six years and obtained a decree for redemption in February 1884. The decree did not comply with Section 92 of the Transfer of Property Act in that it did not specify what should...
Queen-empress Vs. Narain
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-31-1969
Reported in: (1887)ILR9All240
John Edge, Kt., C.J.1. I am of opinion that the principle enunciated in the ruling reported in the Madras High Court Reports, Vol. 6, p. xxiii (Appendix), is applicable to a case arising under Section 488 of the present Criminal Procedure Code. In my opinion the section contemplates that a separate warrant should issue for each separate monthly default, and where that is done, the maximum punishment can be one month's imprisonment. If a warrant is issued for an accumulation of arrears for several months, the Magistrate has no power to pass a greater sentence in such a case than if the warrant in that case only related to one particular breach. To hold otherwise would raise a very great difficulty in regard to the manner in which the amount of punishment would have to be arrived at. For instance, an order is made for the payment of Rs. 10 monthly, and default is made for six months, from January to June. On this a warrant is issued for Rs. 60 arrears and returned by levy of Rs. 30. It w...
Stowell, Manager Uncovenanted Service Bank Limited Vs. Billings
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-31-1969
Reported in: (1875)ILR1All350
1. The Judge holds that as Act XIV of 1859 was in force in March 1873, when the notice to show cause was issued, there was 'a proceeding to enforce or keep in force a decree,' and therefore the present application made within three years from that date is within time.1. But respondent's counsel contends that in 1873, when the above proceedings took place, the decree which appears to be dated 5th January 1869, was dead, and that it was even so if the time be reckoned from the 7th September 1869, when the arrangement referred to was made. He also contends that no arrangement made between the parties though recognised by the Court can enlarge the period allowed by law for the execution of decrees, nor can the terms of a decree be varied by the Court executing the decree, and in support of this contention he cites the Full Bench ruling of the Calcutta Court dated 4th September 1869 4 B.L.R. F.B. Rulings p. 101, Krishna Kamal Singh, D.H., v. Hira Sirdar and Ors., and a decision of this Cour...
Bimla Jati Vs. Biranja Kuar and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-31-1969
Reported in: (1900)ILR22All238
Arthur Strachey, C.J.1. This is a suit by the mortgagee under a mortgage for fifteen years, executed on the 12th November 1889, to enforce against the mortgagor and his vendee of the mortgaged property, a covenant for preemption, alleged to be contained in the mortgage-deed. Certain lessees from the mortgagor were also made defendants. The Court below has dismissed the suit upon two grounds--first, that the covenant in question does not give any right of pre-emption to the mortgagee and is unenforceable at law, because, in the opinion of the Court, it is void for uncertainty; secondly, that the covenant was without consideration. Against this decision the plaintiff has appealed to this Court.2. Now the deed of mortgage recites that the mortgagors have already sold to the mortgagee a 4-anna share in the village of Rampur. The mortgage is a mortgage of another 9 annas 3 pie share in the same village. The covenant in question is as follows: 'If we the executants stand in need of making an...
Durga Dihal Das and ors. Vs. Anoraji and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-31-1969
Reported in: (1895)ILR17All29
Blair, J.1. This is a case of considerable difficulty, because it is certainly not explicitly provided for by the Code of Civil Procedure. There was one issue, and one only, in the case, and that was whether or not a certain deceased Hindu had, up to the time of his death, continued to be a member of a joint Hindu family. The parties appeared before the Munsif and the plaintiff produced a quantity of documentary evidence which was admitted and acted upon by the Judge. The plaintiff had also present in Court to the knowledge of the Court a number of witnesses, whose oral evidence he was prepared to tender had it been necessary. The learned Munsif was satisfied with his own construction of the documentary evidence, and passed a formal order that it was unnecessary to have oral evidence upon either side. So far the plaintiff, seeing that the Munsif was prepared to decide it in his favor, should not have suffered injury; but the Munsif's decisions are appealable, and, except under the circ...
Chadami Lal Vs. Muhammad Bakhsh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-31-1969
Reported in: (1875)ILR1All563
Oldfield, J.1. This suit has been brought to recover certain shares in mauza Saran Top and Mahal Bagh, pargana Kanauj, by right of pre-emption based on the village administration-papers of the current settlement. It was urged in defence by the purchaser that the village administration-papers are not binding on his vendor, who was no party to them, and that, as a matter of fact, the plaintiff' refused the offer of the estates when made to him. The lower Court has dismissed the claim finding in favour of the answering defendant. The objections now taken in appeal by the plaintiff appear to us to fail. The wajib-ul-arz of Mahal Bagh was not signed by the vendor or any one he represents, and though in that of the zamindari mahal there is an endorsement to the effect that Gajadliar Lai attested it, there is nothing to show that, if he did so, he had any authority to do so. He was the lessee of the owner, Musammat Banno, but this position did not give him authority to act for her at the sett...
Malak Chand and anr. Vs. Bakhshi Nand Kishore
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-31-1969
Reported in: (1885)ILR7All289
Oldfield, J.1. The infringement of the rule in Section 290 of the Civil Procedure Code vitiates the sale. It is an illegality vitiating the sale and is something more than a material irregularity in publishing and conducting a sale to which Section 311 refers. The sale is set aside, and the appeal decreed with costs....
Muhammad Abdullah Khan and anr. Vs. Kallu and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-31-1969
Reported in: (1899)ILR21All187
Banerji and Aikman, JJ.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiffs to a suit which purported to have been brought under Section 539 of the Code of Civil Procedure, and was instituted in the Court of the District Judge of Meerut. The allegation was that a certain piece of land was wakf property, being a grave-yard dedicated to the use of persons who had no grave-yards of their own, that the defendants had taken wrongful possession of the land, and that one of the defendants had sold it to the other. The plaintiffs asked for a declaration that the land was endowed property, for the appointment of one of the plaintiffs or some other person as mutawalli of the property, for the framing of a scheme for the management of the property, for the ejectment of the defendant No. 1 from the land and for the making over of the land to the person who might be appointed mutawalli. The Court below has dismissed the suit on the ground that this was not a case to which Section 539 of the Code of Civil Procedu...
Haidar Shah Vs. Jamna Das and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-31-1969
Reported in: (1895)ILR17All157
Knox and Aikman, JJ.1. This order (i.e., that under the last clause of Section 359 of the Code of Civil Procedure), it is hardly necessary to point out, was certainly not one in accordance with law. All that the last clause of Section 359 authorises under certain circumstances, which did not arise in the present case, as there had been an order passed under the first clause of the section, is that the Court may send an applicant for insolvency before it to the Magistrate to be dealt with according to law In the present case the Judge had already adopted the first of the two courses prescribed in Section 359 and had no power to have recourse to the second alternative. The meaning of this section appears to have been somewhat misunderstood. What the section requires is that if a Court be moved thereto by a creditor it shall, under the circumstances set out in the section, sentence the applicant to imprisonment. This is the only course open to a Court when set in motion at the instance of...
- ‹ Prev
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- Next ›
- Last »