Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1929All202
Dalal, J.1. I passed a preliminary order in this matter on 4th December 1928. The opinions expressed therein were merely tentative and the whole matter shall be examined over again in the present order. Janeshar Das and Khushi Ram, two servants of the treasurer of the Muzaffarnagar treasury, were charged with three offences and each offence was framed in the alternative either of criminal breach of trust or abetment thereof. There was found deficiency on a certain date in stamp labels kept in the double lock of the treasury and in cash kept in the single-lock. Inquiry was made and the prosecuting agency appears to have been doubtful whether Janeshar Das committed the breach of trust and Khushi Ram abetted him, or whether Khushi Ram committed the breach of trust and Janeshar Das abetted him. Three items of defalcation were chosen, two relating to stamps and one relating to cash, and as regards each item the charge was framed in the alternative. Both Janeshar Das and Khushi Ram were 'tri...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1929All831
1. This is a plaintiff's appeal and arises out of a suit brought to recover Rs. 672 on account of rent of a shop which had been let to the defendant by the plaintiff on 1st May 1924. No lease was executed but on 7th May 1924, a document styled a sarkhat was executed by the defendant. It provided that the defendant had taken the shop on rent for a period of two years and that, if the defendant vacated the shop before the expiry of the two years, he would be liable to pay the rent, water rate and house-tax in respect of the unexpired portion of the term for which the shop had been let. The defendant vacated the shop on 7th July 1925, and the plaintiff's claim was for rent, water rate and house tax for the unexpired period, viz., period beginning from 7th July 1925 to 30th April 1926.2. The defendant resisted the plaintiff's suit inter alia on the ground that the sarkhat in question is in fact a kabuliat and comes within the definition of 'lease' given in the Registration Act and the kabu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 122Ind.Cas.671
1. This is a plaintiff's appeal and arises out of a suit brought to recover Rs. 672 on account of rent of a shop which had been let to the defendant by the plaintiff on the 1st of May, 1924. No lease was executed but on the 7th of May, 1924, a document styled a sarkhat was executed by the defendant. It provided that the defendant had taken the shop on rent for a period of two years and that, if the defendant vacated the shop before the expiry of the two years, he would be liable to pay the rent, water rate and house-tax in respect of the unexpired portion of the term for which the shop had been let. The defendant vacated the shop on the 7th of July, 1925, and the plaintiff's claim was for rent, water-rate and house-tax for the unexpired period, vis., period beginning from the 7th of July, 1925, to the 30th of April, 1926.2. The defendant resisted the plaintiff's suit inter alia on the ground that the sarkhat in question is in fact a kabuliyat and comes within the definition of 'lease' ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1930All48
Mukerji, J.1. This is a reference by the Commissioner of Income-tax, united Provinces, under Section 66(2), Income-tax Act of 1922.2. The case sent up for expression of opinion on the part of the High Court is fully stated in the 'statement of the case,' submitted to us and very briefly is as follows: The assessees, at whose instance the reference has been made, carry on business at Cawnpore, Bombay and Calcutta with headquarters at Cawnpore. Under Section 64, Sub-section (1), Income-tax Act, the Income-tax Officer of Cawnpore had the right and power of assessing the income-tax, because Cawnpore was within his jurisdiction. The Income-tax Officer of Cawnpore, on 22nd April 1927 issued a notice under Section 22(2), Income-tax Act, requiring the assessees to submit a return of their total income in the 'previous year.' The previous year in this case was from Dewali 1925 to Dewali of 1926, as the account year of the assessees commenced on the first day after the Dewali festival of a Hindi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1929All879; 122Ind.Cas.680
1. This is a defendant's appeal and arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiff-respondent for possession of certain zemindari share by cancellation of a sale-deed, dated 12th May 1917, executed by the plaintiff's mother during the plaintiff's minority. The plaintiff's case was that there was no necessity for the sale and that the sale was not binding on him.2. The defence to the suit was that the sale was for necessity and for the benefit of the minor and therefore, it was binding on him. It was further pleaded in defence that the plaintiff's age was 25 and not 21, as stated in the plaint, and that the suit was time barred.3. The consideration for the sale was Rs. 640, and both the Courts below agreed in holding that, out of the sale consideration, a sum of Rs, 480 was for the benefit of the plaintiff and was binding on him and that the necessity for the remaining sum of Rs. 160 had not been proved by the vendee. On the question of limitation both the Courts below held that the suit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1929All980
Niamatullah, J.1. The plaintiff-applicant brought the suit, out of which this revision has arisen, for recovery of Rs. 506-6-0, alleged to be due under a pro-note, dated 6th January 1925, executed by the defendant. The plaint recites that, in consequence of the defendant's fraudulent conduct, a stamp of only one anna was affixed on the pro-note which, on that account, is inadmissible in evidence, and that the plaintiff claims to recover on foot of the loan transaction independently of the pro-note which he relies on for a collateral purpose. The plaint, as drawn up, is more capable of the interpretation that, according to the plaintiff, the loan had been advanced on 6th January 1925, though, it is not altogether inconsistent with the case that the pro-note was executed in lieu of an old debt. The plaintiff started to establish the case of cash consideration having been paid on the execution of the pro-note referred to; but his own witnesses, under the circumstances which it is not nece...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 121Ind.Cas.108
Niamatullah, J.1. The plaintiff-applicant brought the suit, out of which this revision has arisen, for recovery of Rs. 506-60 alleged to be due under a pro-note, dated the 6th of January, 1925, executed by the defendant. The plaint recites that, in consequence of the defendant's fraudulent conduct, a stamp of only one anna was affixed on the pro note which, on that account, is inadmissible in evidence, and that the plaintiff claims to recover on foot of the loan transaction independently of the pro-note which he relies on for a collateral purpose. The plaint, as drawn up, is more capable of the interpretation that, according to the plaintiff, the loan had been advanced on the 6th of January, 1925, though it is not altogether inconsistent with the case that the pro-note was executed in lieu of an old debt. The plaintiff started to establish the case of cash consideration having been paid on the execution of the pro-note referred to but his own witnesses, under the circumstances which it...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1931All31
Dalal, J.1. A revenue Court decree was passed on 10th February 1915. The decree-holder applied for execution admittedly within time by reason of his previous application of 21st March 1923 for the arrest of the judgment-debtor in execution of the decree. There was no arrest. On 29th August 1923, the parties applied to the execution Court to register an agreement between them that the judgment-debtor would pay the decretal amount by certain instalments payable on certain dates. For the purposes of the present case the only date worth noting is that of 15th January 1928 when the judgment-debtor agreed to pay the balance. The balance not having been paid on that date the decree-holder applied on 16th January 1928 for recovery of the balance by attachment of property. On that date the application was beyond 12 years from the date of the decree and came within the bar of Section 48, Civil P. C, from the date of the decree sought to be executed unless that bar was escaped by the date of a su...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 125Ind.Cas.477
Grimwood Mears, C.J., Boys and Young, JJ.1. One Basudevanand Gir obtained leave to appeal to the Privy Council and on the due date deposited a sum of Rs, 4,000 as security for costs and a further sum for printing charges.2. On the 2nd of November, 1927, Mr. Newal Kishore, who was the legal practitioner for Shantanand Gir, the respondent to the Privy Council appeal, drafted an application to the Court of the Subordinate Judge at Allahabad in which he prayed that the cash certificates for Rs. 4,000-12-0 and a sum of Rs. 798 110 for printing charges, which had been paid into the High Court by the appellant, might be attached and the amount of the decree may be so far as possible satisfied by attachment thereof. The application came before Mr. Sudeshar Maitra on the 4th of February, 1928. His order was a short one and may be given in full:The items objected to relate to the printing charges and security furnished by the defendant-objector in connection with his appeal to His Majesty in Cou...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1930All225
1. One Basdeonand Gir obtained leave to appeal to the Privy Council and on the due date deposited a sum of Rs. 4,000 as security for costs and a further sum for printing charges.2. On 2nd November 1927 Mr. Newal Kishore, who was the legal practitioner for Shankernand Gir the respondent to the Privy Council appeal, drafted an application to the Court of the Subordinate Judge at Allahabad in which he prayed that the cash certificates for Rs. 4,000-12-0 and a sum of Rs. 798-11-0 for printing charges, which had been paid into the High Court by the appellant, might be attached:and the amount of the decree may be so far as possible satisfied by attachment thereof.3. The application came before Sudeshar Maitra on 4th February 1928. His order was a short one and may be given in full.The items objected to relate to the printing charges and security furnished by the defendant objector in connexion with his appeal to His Majesty in Council. The decree-holder is anxious to lay his hands on these i...
Tag this Judgment!