Allahabad Court March 1934 Judgments
In Re: Jagmandar Das Vaish and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-30-1934
Reported in: AIR1935All378
Bennet, J.1. This is a reference by the Income-tax Commissioner at the instance of an assessee, a Hindu undivided family. The two questions referred are : (1) Whether the unrealized decree of Rs. 23,269 against Talatuf Husain and others entered in the interest Khata is taxable income for the purpose of Income-tax, while in fact the amount has not been received at all, and whether the assessment of the applicants is correct under the law and (2) Whether the system of keeping the account adopted by the assessee is simply for the purpose of ascertaining the financial state of the family in a particular year or is open to the interpretation put by the Income-tax Officer2. The assessment was made according to the income-tax authorities on the books of the assessee, and it is claimed that the amount of a decree, Rupees 23,012-6-0, which the assessee obtained in the account year and which was on account of the balance of interest on a certain mortgage, should be shown income of the assessee. ...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Prasad Vs. Bishambhar Nath and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-29-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All772; 150Ind.Cas.1035
Bennet, J.1. This is a first appeal from order brought by a defendant Ram Prasad against an order of the learned Subordinate Judge of Agra in the following terms:The order dated 12th October 1932 is therefore affirmed to the effect that the tenantry shall henceforth make deposits in Court. Those deposits will be made over to the J.D. Bam Prasad on his giving security. The money shall remain in Court's deposit to be made over to the rightful man when the appeal is decided.2. The facts are that defendants 1 to 4 executed a simple mortgage on 19th February 1921 in favour of the plaintiff and defendant 13 for a period of two years, the mortgage money being Rs. 8,000. On this mortgage the plaintiff brought a suit on 16th January 1931 for sale and that suit was decreed on the 4th August 1932. Subsequently to that decree for sale the plaintiff made an application on the 27th August 1932 to the Court in the following terms : That the plaintiff had obtained a hypothecation decree under Order 34...
Tag this Judgment!Peare Lal Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-29-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All853; 152Ind.Cas.500
ORDERNiamatullah, J.1. This is an application for revision of an order passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Pilibiut, under Section 145, Criminal P.C. The proceeding' was started on a complaint dated 26th April 1933 presented by Abdul Waheed Khan, the 'agent of a lady framed Badri Jahan Begum. It was alleged that the lady had obtained a decree or order dated 19th April 1933 in respect of a grove and that she sold its produce to certain persons who on proceeding to take possession of the grove found that the produce had been sold on behalf of Sahu Har Prasad to certain other persons who had taken unlawful possession thereof. It was also alleged that a breach of the peace was imminent. The Magistrate recorded the statement of Abdul Wahoed Khan and called for a report from the officer in charge of the police station. That officer reported that there was an apprehension of a breach of the peace between the parties. The report also mentioned the name of one Sheo Prasad, the manager of t...
Tag this Judgment!Ali Bux and anr. Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-28-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All877; 150Ind.Cas.1006
ORDERNiamatullah, J.1. This is an application for revision of an order passed by a Magistrate having appellate powers upholding the conviction and sentence of 2 months' rigorous imprisonment passed by a Magistrate of Second Class in a case in which the applicants were prosecuted for an offence under Section 297, Penal Code. The only ground that has been argued in revision is that the applicants having been once acquitted by the trying Magistrate, the latter was incompetent to try and convict the applicants on a fresh complaint. Stated as a proposition of law, this contention appears to be sound but taken in relation to the facts of the case, I have no hesitation in rejecting it.2. It appears that one Razaq Husain filed a complaint against the applicants, Gulab Shah Ali Bux and Inayat Ullah under Section 297, Penal Code, alleging that they had dug up a certain grave-yard situate in Shahgunj and were guilty of other acts punishable under Section 297, Penal Code. The complaint was filed i...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Das Vs. Dist. Judge
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-28-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All885
1. This is an appeal by one Ram Das against an order of the District Judge of Jhansi refusing to grant letters of administration to him under Section 219(f), Succession Act of 1925. That sub-section lays down:When there is no person connected with the deceased by marriage or consanguinity who is entitled to letters of administration and willing to act, they may be granted to a creditor.2. This sub-section shows that before letters of administration can be granted to a creditor, it must be shown that there is no person connected with the deceased by marriage or consanguinity who is entitled to letters of administration and willing to act. In the present application learned Counsel relies merely on the statements made in the application itself. Para. 2 of that application sets out as is required by the Succession Act the allegation that the deceased left no relatives or persons connected with him by marriage or consanguinity who were entitled to letters of administration and willing to a...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Dass Vs. District Judge of Jhansi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-28-1934
Reported in: 150Ind.Cas.748
1. This is an appeal by one Ram Das against an order of the District Judge of Jhansi refusing to grant letters of administration of him under Section 219 (f) of the Indian Succession Act of 1925. That sub-section lays down:When there is no person connected with the deceased by marriage or consanguinity who is entitled to letters of administration and willing to act, they may be granted to a creditor.2. This sub-section shows that before letters of adminstration can be granted to a creditor, it must be shown that there is no person connected with the deceased by marriage or consanguinity who is entitled to letters of administration and willing to act. In the present application learned Counsel relies merely on the statements made in the application itself. Paragraph 2 of that application sets out as is required by the Succession Act the allegation that the deceased left no relatives or persons connected with him by marriage or consanguinity who were entitled to letters of administration...
Tag this Judgment!Shankar Lal and ors. Vs. Shyam Sunder Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-23-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All730
Sulaiman, C.J.1. This is an appeal by certain persons who claimed to be the relations on the father's side of the deceased judgment-debtor, Mt. Ram Devi. The decree-holder, in execution of his decree against Mt. Ram Devi who was alleged to be in possession of her estate as a Hindu daughter had sought to execute the decree by sale of her assets and had impleaded these applicants as well as the husband of the deceased, namely, Shyam Sundar. The decree-holder was not concerned with the question who was the real heir to the estate of the deceased because all that he was interested in was the realisation of the amount due to him out of the assets of the deceased.2. Shyam Sundar put forward the case that the deceased had left a minor son on her death and therefore the estate devolved on him and after him on the husband of the deceased. The relations on the father's side of Mt. Ram Devi put forward the case that the minor son had predeceased Mt. Ram Devi and that accordingly on her death her ...
Tag this Judgment!P.L. Jaitley Vs. Kailash NaraIn Gupta
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-23-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All907; 150Ind.Cas.750
1. This is a first appeal from order on an application made by Jaitley and Co., against an advocate who was a receiver of the shop belonging to the appellant. The appellant alleges that the receiver caused damages to the extent of Rs. 1,00,000 during the period that the receiver was in charge of the shop by not discharging his duties properly and by disregarding the directions of the Court and by wilful default and gross negligence. The lower Court held that the receivership had terminated and the execution Court had no legal jurisdiction to call upon the receiver to answer such charges and that no application lay. If the applicant desired any remedy, he should file a regular suit. We consider that the lower Court was correct asunder Order 40, Rule 4, Civil P.C., the language used is 'the Court may direct, etc.' That shows that a judicial discretion is given to the Court to take action under that section or not against a receiver. In the present case, apart from the fact that the oppos...
Tag this Judgment!Mt. Bhagwati Devi and anr. Vs. Gajadhar Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-23-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All940
ORDERKisch, J.1. This reference which has been made by the learned Additional Sessions Judge of Aligarh arises out of an order under Section 489, Criminal P.C., made by a First Class Magistrate. In a previous proceeding the opposite party had been ordered to pay maintenance to the applicant, his wife and his minor son, at the rate of Rs. 50 per mensem. After a couple of years the husband applied to the Court to have the rate of maintenance reduced. He allowed this application to be struck off once in default, but subsequently renewed it. Thereupon the two parties agreed that the matter should be referred to the arbitration of B. Huthra Prasad. B. Muthra Praaad, although he served notice on the husband, was unable to secure his attendance, and after waiting for several months he gave Ms award ex parte to the effect that there is no substance in the husband's application and the rate of maintenance of Rs. 50 per month should be maintained. Thereafter the husband applied to the arbitrator...
Tag this Judgment!Padam Prasad Vs. Shambhu Dayal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-22-1934
Reported in: AIR1934All699; 153Ind.Cas.851
Kendall, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal against a decree and order of the Subordinate Judge of Meerut, confirming the decision of the trial Court. The plaintiff sued for a declaration that certain property was his property and not attachable in execution of a decree in the following circumstances : The appellant had sued in the Small Cause Court to recover some money from two persons on the basis of a bond, and the present plaintiff-respondent was joined as a third defendant on the ground that there had been a partition between him and the appellant and that the bond had fallen to the share of the appellant. The suit was duly decreed in the Small Cause Court, the present plaintiff-respondent Shambhu Dayal being described as a pro forma defendant. Subsequently the decree-holder, that is the present appellant, attached the property which is now in dispute in execution of the decree, and the plaintiff-respondent made an objection in the executing Court to the effect that the property w...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »