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.
Maharaja Mahendra Mahendra Singh Vs. Chandi Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-31-1969
Reported in: (1902)ILR24All112
Knox, Acting C.J. and Blair, J.1. This case has been argued with great force and ability by the learned vakil for the appellant. The matter which is before us for determination is whether the liability of the appellant to pay interest on certain arrears of land revenue over a particular area is or is not res judicata. No other point is before us. In order to understand what led up to the present plea it is only necessary to set out that the respondent in a previous suit instituted a claim for Arrears of Government revenue to which he alleged that he was entitled and which arose out of what is known as khata No. 47 in mauza Fatehpura. In addition to the arrears of Government revenue which he claimed, he also sued for interest. The respondent is assignee of Government revenue in mauza Fatehpura, and apparently this mauza consists of several khatas. In that suit the present appellant was defendant. He contested inter alia the liability to pay interest. His contention was that arrears of G...
In Re: Banarsi Das
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-31-1969
Reported in: (1896)ILR18All213
Aikman, J.1. This is an application for the revision of an order of the Sessions Judge of Gorakhpur. From the record submitted it appears that one Lalla was sent up by the Police for trial on a charge of attempt to commit housebreaking by night. He was convicted by Mr. Lemaistre, Deputy Magistrate, and sentenced to six months' rigorous imprisonment. On appeal he was acquitted by the Sessions Judge. The following are the concluding words of the Sessions Judge's appellate judgment: 'The appeal is allowed and the conviction and sentence of Lalla are quashed. He will be immediately released, and is at liberty to prosecute Banarsi Das under Sections 211, 193, Penal Code, or other sections applicable, for getting up and falsely testifying in this case.' This order was passed on the 27th of April 1895. On the 23rd of October following Lalla filed a complaint against Banarsi Das the applicant, for offences punishable under Sections 211 and 193 of the Indian Penal Code. An objection was taken t...
Gokal Das Vs. Gobar Dhan Das
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-31-1969
Reported in: (1880)ILR2All633
Pearson, J.1. The provisions of Regulation XVII of 1806, to which the first ground of appeal refers, are only applicable to the holders of deeds of conditional mortgage. The plaintiff, appellant, was not the holder of such a deed; and the provisions of the Regulation aforesaid were not therefore applicable to him. This being so, we must hold that according to the condition on which the property was made over to him he became the owner of it after the expiry of three months from the date on which it was made over to him, in consequence of the amount of the loan not having been repaid to him. It thus appears that he had acquired a full proprietary right and title to the property before Kishen Das' insolvency. Accordingly we affirm the decree of the lower Courts and dismiss the appeal with costs....
Queen-empress Vs. Kandhaia and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-31-1969
Reported in: (1885)ILR7All67
Duthoit, J.1. This is an appeal under the provisions of Section 417 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.2. For its purposes the facts may be thus stated:On various dates in September and November 1883, the police authorities of the Banda district represented that in mauza Khandia there resided Kandhaia and other persons of bad livelihood, and that unless measures for restraining those persons were taken, serious offences against property in the neighbourhood were to be apprehended.3. On the 8th December 1883, an order was issued by Saiad Sadik Husain, a Magistrate exercising first class powers, to the officer in charge of the Police Station of Khunna in the following terms:Charge, Section 55, Act X of 1882.--Government v. Kandhaia, Brahman and Bhawani, Nair, residents of mauza Khandia.After perusal of the Special Diary noted above, and of the order of the Magistrate of the District of Banda, dated the 1st December 1883, you are hereby directed to send up (chalan) the case in due form (ha...
Binda Prasad and ors. Vs. Ahmad Ali and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-31-1969
Reported in: (1875)ILR1All368
1. The respondents are the holders of a decree dated the 28th March 1855, and have applied for its execution against the appellants who are the representatives of one Sheo Din Rai by realization of Rs. 5,865-11-11, from the judgment-debtor's property.2. It appears to us that the objection taken by the appellants is valid, that the respondents cannot recover the money under this decree from appellants.3. There was a decree dated 9th June 1847 against Sheo Din Rai for a sum of money, and in its execution certain ladies objected to the sale of certain property, claiming it in their own right.4. The decree-holder in consequence brought a suit against them and the judgment-debtor, Sheo Din Rai, and it was in this suit that the decree dated 28th March 1855, which is now in execution, was made.5. The object of that suit was to have certain property claimed by the ladies declared liable to sale in execution of the decree of 1847, and if the judgment and decree be examined it will be seen that ...
Amiran Bibi and ors. Vs. Rahim Bakhsh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-31-1969
Reported in: (1896)ILR18All219
Banerji and Aikman, JJ.1. This appeal was preferred by Sheikh Rahim Bakhsh, one of the defendants to the suit. The suit was brought by three plaintiffs, two of whom claimed to be heirs to one Fateh Ali, who was alleged to have once been the owner of the property claimed. The third plaintiff, Muhammad Hasan, was an assignee from Musammat Amiran, the first plaintiff, of a portion of the share claimed by her. Rahim Bakhsh, among other pleas, raised an objection to the frame of the suit, on the ground that one plaintiff had nothing to do with the others and that a collective suit on behalf of all the plaintiffs could not be entertained. He evidently meant that there was a misjoinder of plaintiffs and causes of action. The first issue raised in the Court below had reference to this plea, and it is evident from the judgment of the Subordinate Judge that he understood the plea to be one of misjoinder of plaintiffs and causes of action. The Subordinate Judge, however, overruled that plea and o...
Ram Sahai and anr. Vs. Ram Sarup
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-31-1969
Reported in: (1888)ILR10All270
John Edge, Kt., C.J.1. In this case one of the two plaintiffs-respondents died pending the appeal. Three years have not expired since the day of his death. The defendant-appellant applies to have his appeal heard in the absence of any representative of the deceased plaintiff-respondent. For the reasons stated by the majority of this Court in Muhammad Husain v. Khushalo, ante, p. 223, I am of opinion that we should not accede to this request until we have the proper parties on the record. We have held that Article 178 and not Article 17IB applies to the case of a deceased respondent, be he plaintiff or defendant in the suit. In my opinion the motion should be refused.Straight, J.2. I am of opinion that the contention of Mr. Kashi Prasad, which has been referred to this Full Bench by the Divisional Bench for disposal, should be decided against him, and that he should not be allowed to proceed with the trial of this appeal, and to have it decreed as against the respondent who has died sin...
Kedar Nath Vs. Muzaffar Ali Khan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-31-1969
Reported in: (1898)ILR20All266
John Edge, C.J. and Burkitt, J.1. No affidavit in support of the application was filed in the Court below, Affidavits are necessary, not only for the information of the Court but for the information of the opposite side, and an affidavit should have been tiled in the Court below. We agree with the decision of this Court in Hari Das Mukerji v. Radha Kishan Das Weekly Notes 1890 p. 166, and dismiss this appeal with costs....
HusaIn Bakhsh Vs. Dwarka Das and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-31-1969
Reported in: (1875)ILR1All564
Robert Stuart, C.J.1. I am reminded by the order of reference that in the case of Chando v. Alim-ud-din H.C.R. N.W.P. 1874 p. 28 I gave my judgment with hesitation. I did so, no doubt, but chiefly, if not solely, in consequence of the deference I felt for the opinion of my colleague, Mr. Justice Spankik, in the case of Shumshoolnissa v. Zohra Beebee H.C.R. N.W.N. 1874 p. 2, who had most carefully and anxiously considered the question now referred in the burg judgment lie therein delivered. I cannot, however, say for myself that I had any doubt, that is, any argumentative doubt, on the question then before us, and I remain of the opinion I then expressed and subsequently in the Full Bench in the above case of Chundo v. Alim-ud-din H.C.R. N.W.P. 1874 p. 28, and this is my answer to the reference.Pearson, J.2. For the reasons given in my judgment of the 1st December 1873, in Full Bench, in the case of Chundo v. Alim-ud-din H.C.R. N.W.P. 1874 p. 28, I adhere to the opinion therein expresse...
Srimati Baran Mai Dasi Vs. Behari Lal Pal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-31-1969
Reported in: (1895)ILR17All53
John Edge, Kt., C.J. and Banerji, J.1. The suit in which this appeal has arisen was instituted on the 3rd November 1892, for rent due in respect of a villages for the years 1297, 1298 and 1299 Fasli. The suit was brought upon a lease which reserved a lump yearly rent for the village. In the lease the village is described as containing 7, 323 bighas, but the rent was not fixed per bigha. The plaintiff in the Lower Appellate Court obtained a decree for rent for the three years in question. One of the grounds in this appeal by the defendant is that the village in fact contained only 7,003 bighas, and he claims a proportionate section in respect of 320 bighas. It appears to us that the reference to 7,323 bighas was not intended or expressed as a warranty that the villas contained in actual measurement 7,323 bighas. The rent was fixed irrespective of the number of bighas and for the village en bloc. In our opinion the mis-description of the number of bighas in the village does not under the...
- ‹ Prev
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- Next ›
- Last »