Privy Council Cases

Sm. Radha and ors. Vs. Sm. Gulzari and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1952All462

Harish Chandra, J. 1. This is a first appeal from orderagainst the order of the learned Civil Judge ofBanaras setting aside the order of the learnedCity Munsif of Banaras rejecting the plaint ofrespondent 1, who is the main respondent in thisappeal, under clause (d) of Rule 11 of order 7, Civil P.C. 2. The property in suit is a house in the cityof Banaras which respondent 1, sm. Gulzari Kuer, claims to be her own property. In theyear 1936 Jagdamba Prasad, the farther-in-law ofthe respondent and Ganesh Prasad her husbandtogether with her sons and nephews, who wereall arrayed as defendants in the suit, presentedan application under the Encumbered EstatesAct before the Collector of Banaras. It was indue course transferred to the Court of the SpecialJudge, Second Grade. The property in questionwas shown by the landlords-debtors as their own property. The Special Judge declared this property along with other properties belonging tothe debtors as liable to attachment, sale or mortgage in sat...

NaraIn Singh Vs. Rex

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1952All621

ORDERDesai, J.1. These five applications are for revision of judgments of the Ses. J. of Mathura confirming the applicant's convictions & sentences under Section 7, Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act, 1946 (Act XXIV [24] of 1946) read with Clause 3 (iii), D. P. Food Grains (Movement) Control Order, 1948. The facts found by the Courts below, which are accepted by me sitting in revision, are that these applicants carried rice in motor trucks along the road going from Mathura to Kosi & were caught at the level crossing just in front of Kosi Railway station, on 58-10-1948, at about 4 A. M. There were five trucks loaded with rice. The Police had received previous information that rice would be carried in trucks along the road & so they got the level crossing closed & waited for the trucks to arrive. They all arrived together & were seized by the police. In some trucks there were the owners of the rice. They, as well as the drivers & cleaners of the trucks, were prosecuted. There were...

Durga Prasad Vs. Dalpat Ram and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1952All645

Agarwala, J.1. This is a D-H's. appeal arising out of execution proceedings. The decree sought to be executed was a mortgage decree for sale on the basis of a mortgage deed of 1925. A suit in forma pauperis was filed on the basis of a prior mortgage & ultimately the mortgaged property was sold for payment of the amount due to Govt. on account of court-fee & was purchased by Dalpat Singh respondent for a sum of Rs. 137. When the suit on the basis of the mortgage deed of 1925 was filed by the D.H. Dalpat Singh was impleaded as a subsequent transferee. His defence was that he was not a subsequent mortgagee, but was a prior charge holder. It was held that he was a prior charge holder to the extent of Rs. 137 & the suit was decreed for sale of the mortgaged property subject to the payment of Rs. 137 to him. This decree was made final on 20-10-1934.2. The first execution application was made on 24-4-1937. One of the J. Ds. had died & in the application his heirs had been impleaded. The Court...

Belumani Nath and anr. Vs. Ramesh Chandra Nath

Court : Guwahati

Ram Labhaya, J.1. The petitioners in this case were convicted Under Section 341, Penal Code and sentenced to pay a fine of Es. 20 each, and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for one week. The order of conviction was upheld in appeal.2. The prosecution case was that the jangal (path ail) in front of complainant's bari reached as to and joined the village path to the east of his bari and that this pathway had been in existence since the time of the complainant's grandfather. A part of the pathway, about cubits in length, was on the land of the accused. They included the pathway in their field and grew paddy on it. Plaintiff was thus prevented from using the pathway. This act of the accused according to the complainant amounted to an offence Under Section 341.3. The defence was that the complainant had no right of way over the land of the accused. Five witnesses were examined on behalf of the complainant. The trial was summary. The learned Magistrate states that these witnesses s...

The Crown Vs. Laxminarayanlala and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 1951CriLJ181

ORDERHemeon, J.1. The station officer, Rampaili, filed an application in December 1947 requesting action under 9. 107, Criminal P.C. against party No. l, consisting of Laxminarayan and 8 others, and party No. 2 consisting of Taradatta and 14 others, as he apprehended a breach of the peace. On 6-3-1948, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Waraseoni, passed an order under Section 112, Criminal P.C. against both parties. Written statements were thereafter filed and the case was fixed for evidence on 7-7-1948 when it was adjourned to 20-7-1948 on which date party No. l filed an application for the vacation of the preliminary order on the ground that there was no material against them. Arguments were heard on 13-9-1948, and on the 21st of that month the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Waraseoni, vacated the preliminary order vis-a-vis party No. 1 and discharged all the members of that party. Thereafter, an application for revision of that order was made to the Additional Sessions Judge, Balaghat, and...

Abul Hasan and anr. Vs. Rex

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1952All365

ORDERV. Bhargava, J. 1. This is a reference by the learned Sessions Judge of Shahjahanpur arising out of proceedings for the extradition of three persons, Abul Hasan, Abdul Ali and Muhammad Khan.2. A warrant for the arrest of these persons was recived from a Court in Bhopal by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Shahjahanpur in April 1949. The Sub-Divisional Magistrate recommended to the Provincial Government the extradition of these three persons to the Bhopal State and pending the orders of Government, committed them to jail. Revision applications against this order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate were filed before the learned Sessions Judge of Shahjahan-pur who has made this reference thereon.3. Before dealing with this reference, I have to take notice of the fact that in making this reference the learned Sessions Judge has not done his duty at all. He has mentioned four points that arose for decision in connection with the revision applications before him. Instead of exercising his m...

Mt. Chandi Devi Vs. Deoki Nandan and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1952All561

Malik, C.J.1. This is a deft.'s appeal in a suit for pre-emption. On 5-2 1949, defts. 2 to 6 sold a house situate within the municipal limits of Shahjahanpur to the appellant Mt. Chandi Devi for Rs. 7000. The suit for pre-emption was filed by Deokinandan, who is a junior member of the joint Hindu family, along with his unoles Kedar Nath & Raja Ram, & it is said that Kedar Nath is the Karta of the family. The plff. heard of this sale & it was claimed on his behalf that immediately on coming to know that the property had been sold he performed the first talab & then took out a sum of Rs. 4000 which he had been informed was the sale price, & went to the house in suit & in the presence of Kanhai, Badhey Shyam, Raja Ram & Goberdhan performed the second talab. He said in his deposition that he had said on the spot :'I had already performed the first demand & that I was the pre-emptor & am performing the second demand & am ready to pay the price & that the witnesses were to bear testimony to ...

ZahinuddIn HusaIn Vs. Chokhey Lal and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1952All662

Walli Ullah, J.1. This is an appeal by a, judgment-debtor against the order passed by the Court below dismissing his objections with costs.2. The facts necessary for appreciating the objections filed by the appellant are not in controversy and are briefly these. 3. One Alimuddin Husain owned 20 biswas of village Nagla Khyali. On 7-4-1916 he executed a deed of mortgage in favour of one Lala Talewar in respect of five biswas out of the 20 biswas owned by him in this village. Alimuddin Husain died in 1921 leaving his son named Aminuddin Husain and two daughters, named Amir Jan and Wazir Jan. In the result, therefore, the equity in the half of the five biswas mortgaged to Lala Talewar devolved upon the son Aminuddin Husain. On 2-1-1925 Aminuddin Husain made a wakf-alla-aulad of the entire 10 biswas share in village Nagla Khyali which he had inherited from his father Alimuddin Husain. He died in 1927 leaving two sons, viz. Hasinuddin and Zibinuddin, minors, and throe daughters, viz. Zahina ...

Reliance Development and Engineering Ltd. Vs. Bhabani Charan Banerjee ...

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : AIR1950Cal342,54CWN372

Harries, C.J. 1. This is a petition for revision of an order of a learned Subordinate Judge, made in a claim case.2. Certain property had been attached before judgment and the property was claimed by the petitioners in this case. They made their application under the provisions of Order 38, Rule 8, Civil P. C. That rule provides that where any claim is made to property attached before judgment the claim is to be investigated in the manner provided for the investigation of claims to property attached in execution of a decree for the payment of money. In other words, the claim is to be investigated under the provisions of Order 21, Rule 58, Civil P. C.3. The learned Judge came to the conclusion that the company were not in possession of certain bricks which had been attached before judgment. The company claimed to be in possession of these bricks under a document which purported to transfer the bricks to them. The learned Judge, however, was not satisfied that this document really transf...

Jubilee Bank Ltd. Vs. Sm. Santimoyee Debi and ors.

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : AIR1950Cal487

R.P. Mookerjee, J.1. This is an appeal on behalf of defendant 2 directed against the decision of the Subordinate Judge decreeing the plaintiff's claim that the properties in suit are trust properties and that Defendant Bank be restrained from getting possession thereof or from interfering with the plaintiff's possession in any way and granting further consequential reliefs. 2. The plaintiff's case is that premises No. 21/A/1 and 21/A/2, Satis Mukherjee Road, Calcutta, belonged to the estate of Upendra Lal Banerjee who had during his life-time executed a Deed of Family Settlement in May 1933. It is alleged that under that deed the properties in suit vested in the third son of the settlor, Dhirendranath Banerjee who is defendant 3 in the present suit and for his life only. The property had so vested subject to the rights of maintenance and residence of the settlor's surviving daughters and their children. Plaintiff 1 is the wife of defendant 3 and plaintiffs 2-11 are either the minor son...