Privy Council Cases
Colonial & appellate judgments
Browse Privy Council & House of Lords decisions
Search appeals from Indian High Courts decided by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council and related appellate benches - foundational authority for constitutional and commercial law.
Colonial & appellate
Latest Privy Council judgments
Kanhaiya Lal Vs. the Panchayati Akhara
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1949All367
Malik, C.J.1. I have had the benefit of reading the judgment of my brothers Seth and Bhargava and after the full discussion of the question by them it is not necessary for me to say much. I have already indicated my views in my referring order. I agree with my brother Bhargava that a decree-holder can file an application for execution either in person or through a recognised agent or through a duly appointed pleader. My brother Seth has set out the various steps that have to be taken in the preparation of and in filing a plaint or a memorandum of appeal or an application. As he has pointed out, some of these steps require personal skill or care or exercise judgment, while others are purely ministerial acts and do not need such skill or care. Before the document is brought before the Court the various steps taken amount to preparation, the penultimate step which gives the document, in other respects complete, its legal character, is putting it before the Court in accordance with the rul...
Tag this Judgment!Maqbool Ahmad and ors. Vs. Debi and ors.
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1949All455
Mushtaq Ahmad, J.1. This is a plaintiffs' appeal arising out of a suit for ejectment of the defendants and for recovery of Rs. 30 as damages for use and occupation.2. The plaintiffs' case was that one Badrul Islam was the owner of the disputed site and the houses thereon, which, under a rent deed dated 31st December 1934, were occupied by the defendants on a yearly rent of Rs. 60. The land is situate in what is known as 'Sarai Badrul Islam in Qasba Nehtaur, district Bijnor.'3. In April 1943, after the death of Badrul Islam, his heirs transferred the sardi to the plaintiffs who brought the suit as its present owners. Their main complaint was that the defendants had unlawfully settled in the sarai other persons and thereby made themselves liable to ejectment.4. The defence taken was that, while Badrul Islam was the owner of the site, he was not the owner of the houses which had really been built by defendants l to 4 and 6 with the consent of the proprietor of the sarai. The defendants al...
Tag this Judgment!Basdeo Singh Vs. Bharat Singh
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1949All542
1. The sole controversy in this second appeal relates to jurisdiction.2. The suit was for possession of certain tenancy lands on the basis of a patta from the landlord and for recovery of damages. The defendant Kunj Behari who has since died and is now represented by Basdeo Singh appellant set up a rival claim to tenancy. The learned Munsif, Partabgarh, who investigated the case passed a decree in favour of Bharat Singh plaintiff, and the decree was confirmed by the learned Civil Judge, Partabgarh, in appeal. It is not denied on behalf of the defendant, and indeed it could not be disputed in view of the decision in the case of Ori Lal v. Ganeshi A.I.R. (34) 1947 Oudh 104 F.B., that the suit was rightly instituted in civil Court. It is contended, however, that in view of the recent alteration of Section 180, Tenancy Act by Section 18, U.P. Tenancy (Amendment)' Act of 1947 (U.P. Act [10] of 1947) the learned Munsif must now be deemed to have decided; the case without jurisdiction. It is ...
Tag this Judgment!Jagarnath Sahu and ors. Vs. Srikant Dube and ors.
Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1949All589
Seth, J.1. Guptar Dube and Loknath Dube executed a usufructuary mortgage in favour of Jagarnath and Suraj Nath on 23rd May 1922, for a sum of Rs. 1,300. It was registered on 22nd June 1922. The property mortgaged consisted of fourteen specific plots comprising an area of 3.32 acres. The mortgagors are dead. Their sons applied under Section 12, U.P. Agriculturists' Relief Act for the redemption of the mortgage. They impleaded as opposite parties not only the two mortgagees, Jagarnath and Suraj Nath, but also their father, Rachha Sahu. Rachha was impleaded on the allegation that his name stood fictitiously recorded as a tenant over two of the mortgaged plots, Nos. 554 and 240, comprising an area of 34 acres. It was alleged that, in fact, the mortgagees themselves were in possession of these two plots. The plaintiffs prayed for actual possession of all the plots mortgaged including the aforesaid two plots over which Rachha's name was recorded as a tenant. Rachha pleaded that he had no con...
Tag this Judgment!Kidar Nath S/O Siri Ram Vs. the Crown
Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : 1949CriLJ756
Khosla, J.1. This is a petition under a. 23, Press (Emergency Powers) Act, XXIII [23] of 1981. The petitioner before us is Shree Kidar Nath, the keeper of the Press known as the Printers Ltd., of Ambala Cantonment. He was ordered by the East Punjab Government to deposit a sum of Rs. 8,000 as security under Section 3, Sub-section (8), Press (Emergency PowerB) Act on account of the publication of an article 'Yeh kaun aya hai' in the 'Weekly Insaf of 4th August 1948. It was alleged that this article contained matter which 'tends directly or indirectly to bring into hatred or contempt the Government established by law or to excite disaffection towards the said Government' within the meaning of clause (d), Sub-section (l) of Section 4, Indian Press (Emergency Powers) Act. The petitioner has moved this Court for the cancellation of the order of the Punjab Government.2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner raised three points before us. He argued in the first place that incitement to violen...
Tag this Judgment!Jit Singh S/O Indar Singh Vs. the Crown
Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : 1949CriLJ840
Harnam Singh, J.1. Jit Singh, Amrik Singh and Harnam Singh of village Akalgarh were tried for the murder of Hazura Singh of village Rasulpur in the Court of the Sessions Judge, Ludhisna. Jit Singh and Amrik Singh are brothers and Harnam Singh is their uncle. Amrik Singh and Harnam Singh have been acquitted and Jit Singh has been convicted under Section 302, Penal Code, and sentenced to transportation for life. Jit Singh appeals.2-3. Briefly, the prosecution case is that there was enmity between Bakhshi Singh an uncle of Hazura Singh deceased, and the accused. Hazurft Singh had come to visit his uncle Bakhshi Singh in village Akalgarh and at about sunset on I8tb June 1947 he was taking Mb meals with Bakhshi Singh when Jit Singh, Amrik Singh and Harnam Singh attacked him. Jit Singh appellant gave a. barohha blow in the abdomen of Hazura Singh while Amrik Singh attacked him with dhangi on his head and Harnam Singh gave him a dang blow on the bipa. Nichhatar Singh and Bakhshi Singh witness...
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Latif Vs. Divisional Superintendent, Lahore Division
Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1959P& H398
A.N. Bhandari, J.1. The short point for decision in the present case is whether an appeal lies from an order refusing to make a direction under Section 15 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936. It appears that one Abdul Latif who was employed as a Booking Clerk on the North Western Railway was removed from service of the Crown on 9-8-1942. He submitted a number of petitions under Section 15 of the Act of 1936 for payment of delayed wages, including the one dated 31-8-1945 which forms the subject of the present case and in which he claims payment of delayed wages for the period commencing with the 1st April 1945 and ending with the 30th September 1945. The Authority appointed by the Provisional Government to hear and decide the claims arising under the statute came to the conclusion that there was a bona fide dispute between the employer and the employee as to whether the removal was or was not valid in the eye of law and, consequently, that in view of the proviso to Sub-section (3) of Sect...
Tag this Judgment!Shamrao Ganpatrao Patil Vs. King-emperor
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1949CriLJ580
ORDERHemeon, J.1. The applicant Shamrao of Sirsoli, Akot taluq, Akola district, had filed an application under sa. 107 and 145, Criminal P. 0., against the non-applicant Mahadeo and others in the Court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate Akot, who, on 14th September 1946, passed a preliminary order under Section 145 with respect to fields survey Nos. 96/1 and 96/3 situate in the aforesaid village Sirsoli. After it had been pointed out to him that the dispute actually related only to field survey No. 9C/l,ke in the order-sheet, dated 26th September 1946, noted that he would have no jurisdiction over that portion of survey no. 98 which was not in dispute and he also made it clear that the only crop liable to be sold by the Court would be that from the disputed portion of that survey number.2. Subsequently, according to Shamrao, Mahadeo, in spite of the order of attachment, had picked and removed cotton from the land in question; and the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, after due enquiry, filed on...
Tag this Judgment!Thakar Das and anr. Vs. Chet Ram and ors.
Court : Punjab and Haryana
Reported in : AIR1949P& H367
Achhru Ram, J.1. By means of a mortgage-deed dated 22nd June 1945 Rala Ram and Mt. Prabhi, his brother's widow, Brahmins of the village Ajoli in Una Tahsil in the district of Hoshiarpur, mortgaged 8 kanals and 10 marlas of land in favour of defendants 1 to 4 for a sum of Rs. 4000. By means of another mortgage-deed dated 12th June 1945 Rala Ram alone mortgaged 3 kanals and 17 marlas of land to the Same defendants for a sum of Rs. 1,300. Thakar Das and Jagan Nath eons of Rala Ram brought two separate suits for the usual declaration in respect of the two mortgages. The suits were resisted by the mortgagees inter alia on the pleas that the Brahmins of the village Ajoli were not governed by agricultural custom in matters relating to alienation, that Rala Ram's powers of alienation were not subject to any customary restriction and that the mortgages-were for legal necessity. The learned Subordinate Judge held that in matters of alienation Brahmins of the village of the parties were governed ...
Tag this Judgment!Netram Asaram Vs. Mt. Rajju Bai and anr.
Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1950CriLJ166
ORDERHemeon, J.1. Rajjubai and her minor daughter Skakuntala were awarded Under Section 10 and Rs. 3 respectively as maintenance from the applicant Nacre by the First Class Magistrate, Dmdori; and in revision the District Magistrate, Mandla sent back the case for further evidence regarding the quantum of maintenance. The same rates of maintenance were fixed by the first Court and the District Magistrate rejected the application for revision of that order. The applicant has now come up in revision to this Court.2. Bajjubai had sought a maintenance order in the civil Courts, but the case was compromised and under the deed of compromise, Ex. P-l, dated 7th September 1945, Netram agreed to pay her Ea. 6 per mensem as maintenance so long as she did not remarry and bahaved according to his directions. Since Bhadon (August-September) 1946, however, he had ceased paying it.3. The main contention raised in the applicant's behalf was to the effect that as the parties had entered into an agreemen...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 6655
- 6656
- 6657
- 6658
- 6659
- 6661
- 6662
- 6663
- 6664
- 6665
- Next ›
- Last »