Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 28Ind.Cas.652
George Knox, J.1. By an order, dated the 3rd of February 1915, the Sessions Judge of Cawnpore transferred two Criminal Appeals Nos. 7 of 1915 and No. 14 of 1915 pending in his Court to the Court of the Assistant Sessions Judge for trial. The section of the Code which he considered justified this procedure on his part was Section 193, Clause 2. This section provides that Assistant Sessions Judges shall try such cases only as the Sessions Judge of the division by general or special order may make over to them for trial. In the opinion of the learned Sessions Judge the word 'case' as used in this clause is not defined, and he saw no reason why it should be confined to cases and not extend to appeals or other matters.2. This Court has called for the records of the cases in question by the powers conferred upon it by Section 435 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. So far as I know the word 'case' has never been defined in any General Clauses Act or in the Code of Criminal Procedure, nor am I...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (1915)ILR37All286
George Knox, J.1. By an order, dated the 3rd of February, 1915, the Sessions Judge of Cawnpore transferred two criminal appeals, Nos. 7 of 1915 and 14 of 1915 pending in his Court to the court of the Assistant Sessions Judge for trial.2. The section of the Code which he considered justified this procedure on his part was Section 193, Clause 2. This section provides that Assistant Sessions Judges shall try such cases only as the Sessions Judge of the division by general or special order may make over to them for trial. In the opinion of the learned Sessions Judge the word 'cases,' as used in this clause is, not defined, and he saw no reason why it should be confined to 'cases ' and not extend to appeals or other matters.3. This Court has called for the records of the cases in question by the powers conferred upon it by Section 435 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, So far as I know the word 'case' has never been defined in any General Clauses Act or in the Code of Criminal Procedure, no...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 29Ind.Cas.403
Piggott, J.1. I have stated the facts of this case at some length in my remand order of July the 3rd 1914. The finding of the lower Appellate Court on the remanded issue puts it beyond question that the plaintiff is the successor-in-interest of the original mortgagor. The essential facts may, therefore, be recapitulated. On the 24th of January 1867 the predecessor-in-title of the present plaintiff mortgaged by conditipnal sale a house in the town of Chandausi to one Hazari Lal and put him in possession. On June the 15th, 1873, Hazari Lal sold this shop to Panna Lal, the defendant-appellant. There had been no foreclosure of the mortgage by conditional sale. In the deed of June the 5th, 1873, Hazari Lal recited that the shop in question had come into his possession under a mortgage by conditional sale, but that he was now in possession as a full owner. He did not say that he had foreclosed the mortgage. He undoubtedly purported to sell the shop itself and not any mortgagee rights in resp...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1915All311; 29Ind.Cas.274
Chamier, J.1. This appeal arises ont of an application made on November 12th, 1913, for execution of a decree dated May the 10th, 1909. The decree was for a considerable sum of money to be paid in certain instalments. The first instalment amounting to Rs. 124 was to be paid at the end of Aghan Sambaf, 1966 corresponding with December the 26th, 1909. The second instalment amounting to Rs. 62 was to be paid at the end of Jeth Sambat 1967. Subsequent instalments of Rs. 62 each were to be paid at the end of Agfiai and at the end of Jeth till the whole decree wns satisfied. In case of default the whole amount became payable at once. The decree-holders in their application of November 12th, 1913 stated that they had received the first four instalments, but that there had been a default in payment of the instalment due at the end of Aghan Sambat 1968, and they, therefore, claimed the whole amount remaining1 due under the decree. Payment of the first 4 instalments was not certified to the Cour...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1915All422; 30Ind.Cas.564
Chamier, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiffs for possession of property which was mortgaged as long ago as. September 6th, 1856. by Shambbu, under whom the plaintiffs claim, to a man named Hulasi. The plaintiffs claimed to be entitled to redeem the mortgage. They said that defendants Nos. 1-7 were owners of the mortgagee rights. Those defendants resisted the suit on the ground that they had become proprietors of the property, in April 1877, the rights and interests of the mortgagee were put up to sale and purchased by one Ghasi. In January 1884, Ghasi sold to defendants Nos. 1-3 half the rights which he had acquired at the auction-sale, and in December 1888, he sold to the predecessor-in-titlo of defendants Nos. 1-7 not only the mortgagee rights which lie had acquired at the auction-sale, but what he represented to be an absolute proprietary interest in the property, for a sum of Rs. 100. The suit has been decreed as against defendants Nos. 1-3 on the ground...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1915All424; (1916)ILR39All47; 31Ind.Cas.1002
Tudball and Chamier, JJ.1. This is a Government appeal against an order of acquittal passed by a Magistrate of the first class in. the case of two persons Mian Din and Farid-ud-din who were charged with an offence under Section 3 of the Public Gambling Act, 1867. The Magistrate passed his order on the finding that the spot where the gambling was taking place was not a 'place' within the meaning of Section 1 or Section 3 of the Act. In Section 1 a common gaming house is defined as 'any house, walled enclosure, room or place in which cards, dice, tables or other instruments of gaming arc kept or used for the profit or gain of the person owning, occupying, using or keeping such house, enclosure, room or place' etc. The spot where the gambling is said to have taken place in the present case is the lower end of a bullock-run of a disused well on a bit of open land where there are some trees and a small hut. Round the sides of the bullock-run, in the shape of a semi-cirele, has been raised a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1916All299; 35Ind.Cas.161
Piggott, J.1. This is an application in revision against the order of a Magistrate taking cognizance of a complaint filed by one Cheda Lal against the applicant Bhawani Das. The offence alleged against the latter is abetment of the forgery of a sale-deed, dated 27th June 1913, whereby Cheda Lal purported to convey certain property to one Het Ram. On the same date Het Bam executed a mortgage-deed, whereby he purported to borrow money from Bhawani Das on the security of this very property. Cheda Lal's case is that he knew nothing about the sale-deed, and that his signature to the same was forged by one Babu Lal. The question was raised in two separate suits filed in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, one by Cheda Lal and one by Bhawani Das. The latter did not affirm the disputed sale-deed to be genuine, but on the contrary claimed damages from Babu Lal and Het Ram for having defrauded him. The Subordinate Judge held that the deed was a forgery and that Bhawani Das had been defrauded. He...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (1916)ILR38All540
Piggott and Lindsay, JJ.1. This is a defendant's appeal against an order passed by the Subordinate Judge of Agra in the exercise of his appellate powers. He has directed that a suit which had been pending in the court of the Munsif of Agra, and in which an appeal had bean preferred to his court, should be sent back to the court of first instance for determination of the remaining issues. The suit which was before the Munsif was a suit for redemption brought by Taik Ram and others, who alleged themselves to be the descendants of one Sukhjit. In the third paragraph of the plaint the plaintiffs gave particulars of the mortgage under which they claimed to have a right of redemption. It is stated in that paragraph of the plaint that the mortgage had been made in the Sambat year 1913; that the name of the mortgagor was Sukhjit; that the mortgage had been executed in favour of Muhammad Husain Khan; that the total amount of the mortgage-debt was Rs. 200, and that the mortgage was with possessi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1916All201; 36Ind.Cas.452
1. This is a defendant's appeal against an order passed by the Subordinate Judge of Agra in the exercise of his appellate powers. He has directed that a suit which had been pending in the court of the Munsif of Agra, and in which an appeal had been preferred to his Court, should be sent back to the Court of first instance for determination of the remaining issues. The suit which was before the Munsif was a suit for redemption brought by Tek Ram and others, who alleged themselves to be the descendants of one Sukhjit. In the third paragraph of the plaint the plaintiffs gave particulars of the mortgage under which they claimed to have a right of redemption. It is stated in that paragraph of the plaint that the mortgage had been made in the Same year 1913, that the name of the mortgagor was Sukhjit, that the mortgage had been executed in favour of Muhammad Husain Khan, that the total amount of the mortgage debt was Rs. 200 and that the mortgage was with possession, the agreement being that...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (1916)ILR38All474
Walsh, JJ.1. In this case the facts appear in the Judgment of my brother Mr. Justice Sundar Lal. There is only one point of law involved in the appeal. But it is an important question of principle, the determination of which must necessarily involve the rights and interests of a considerable number of persons. I am deciding this case upon the hypothesis, which I adopt as correct, that this is a case of debt, and that if the authority of Allah Dad Khan v. Sant Ram (1912) I.L.R. 35 All. 79, relied upon by Mr. Peary Lal Banerji was rightly decided, Mr. Banerji is entitled to succeed. On the other hand if it was not rightly decided this appeal must fail., On a consideration of that case, a subsequent authority to which I will refer in one moment, and the language of the section itself, I entertain no doubt whatever that the decision relied upon by Mr. Banerji cannot be regarded as sound law. The contention is that an assignee of a debt due to the estate of a deceased person cannot recover ...
Tag this Judgment!