Allahabad Court October 1940 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Behari Lal Bhargava Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-15-1940
Reported in: AIR1941All135
Collister, J.1. This is a reference under Section 66(2), Income-tax Act, (11 of 1922). The assessee is Behari Lal Bhargava, proprietor of the Central Book Depot at Allahabad. For the assessment year 1937-38 the Income-tax Officer assessed him to tax upon an income of Rs. 11,607. The account of profit and loss was as follows:(1) Property ... Rs. 425.(2) Interest ... Rs. 12,708.(3) Dividends ... Rs. 24.(4) Royalty ... Rs. 250.___________Rs. 13,407.(5) Business loss ... Rs. 1,800.___________Rs. 11.607.2. It will be observed that one of the items of profit is a sum of Rs. 12,708 under the head of 'interest,' and it is with this sum of money that the reference now before us is concerned. It appears that two houses belonging to the assessee's father, Ramji Das Bhargava, were acquired by the improvement trust under the Land Acquisition Act in 1927, and possession was taken on 11th November 1927. The amount awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer was Rs. 13,225; but Ramji Das Bhargava did not ...
Behari Lal Bhargava Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, C.P. and U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-15-1940
Reported in: [1941]9ITR9(All)
This is a reference under Section 66(2) of the Income-tax Act (XI of 1922).The assessee is Behari Lal Bhargava, proprietor of the Central Book Depot, at Allahabad. For the assessment year 1937-38 the Income-tax Officer assessed him to tax upon an income of Rs. 11,604. The account of profits and loss was as follows :Rs.(1) Property425(2) Interest12,708(3) Dividends24(4) Royalty250 13,407(5) Business loss1,800 11,607It will be observed that one of the items of profit is a sum of Rs. 12,708 under the head of 'Interest,' and it is with this sum of money that the reference now before us is concerned. It appears that two houses belonging to the assessees father Ramji Das Bhargava, were acquired by the Improvement Trust under the Land Acquisition Act in 1927, and possession was taken on November 11, 1927. The amount awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer was Rs. 13,225; but Ramji Das Bhargava did not accept this as adequate and referred his claim to the Tribunal which has seisin of such matt...
Bhagwati Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, C.P. and U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-15-1940
Reported in: [1941]9ITR31(All)
COLLISTER, J. - This is a reference under Section 66(2) of the Income-tax Act (XI of 1922).The assessee is Mst. Bhagwati, widow of Kalyan Singh, who died on October 18, 1918. On her husbands death, Mst. Bhagwati applied for mutation, alleging that Kalyan Singh has been a separate Hindu. She was opposed by the collaterals, who contended that Kalyan Singh died a member of the joint family. The mutation court found in favour of the collaterals; but ultimately the matter was compromised, the necessity for litigation in the civil courts being thereby obviated. Under a deed of agreement dated October 10, 1939, the assessee accepted the position that her husband had dies as karta of the undivided family and she gave up all right and interest in the family property except such as was embodied in deed of agreement; and the co-parceners agreed to pay the assessee an allowance of Rs. 1,000 per mensem by way of maintenance for the remainder of her life. They agreed to other conditions also about c...
Kishori Lal Makundi Lal, in Re,.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-15-1940
Reported in: [1941]9ITR193(All)
This is a reference under Section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act and the statement of the case has been prepared at the instance of Messrs. Kishori Lal Makundi Lal, a Hindu undivided family, by the learned Commissioner of Income-tax, Central and United Provinces. Notice of the reference went to the Department and to the assessee and there is a report of our office dated July 25, 1940 that the notice has been served on the Advocate-General but the notice issued to Kishori Lal Makundi Lal assessee has 'been received back undelivered with a report dead'. It is not quite clear as to who died, but it is fairly clear that the Hindu undivided family could not have died. The Advocate-General took some time to consider the position and ultimately he made a statement that he did not propose to take any steps in the matter.The case was listed before us on October 4, 1940 when counsel for the Department took us through the statement of the case prepared by the Commissioner and he submitted tha...
Karan Singh Vs. Ram Sahai and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-14-1940
Reported in: AIR1941All41
Thom, C.J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of a suit for possession of zamindary property. The plaintiff alleged that he attached the property in suit on 30th March 1930. The attachment was made before judgment in a suit which was filed on 29th March 1930. The defendant alleged that he had entered into an agreement with the owner of the property Mt. Kalawati to purchase it. This agreement was concluded according to the defendant on 26th March 1930. The learned District Judge has found that there was no oral agreement on 26th March 1930 but that there was a written agreement to purchase the property of 3lst March 1930. In other words the agreement to purchase was entered into upon the day after the alleged attachment of the property. Despite the order of attachment which certainly was issued on 29th March 1930 and which was proclaimed by beat of drum and affixed upon the property in suit on 30th March 1930 the learned District Judge has dismissed the suit. He has done so upon...
Ram Daur Rai and ors. Vs. Lachhmi Prasad and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-04-1940
Reported in: AIR1941All51
Iqbal Ahmad, J.1. The subject of dispute in the suit out of which this appeal arises was an area of 15.427 acres of land described as 'Ahata Godam Nil' situated in village Bahadurpur in the district of Azamgarh. The plaintiff-respondents originally claimed a declaration that they were the owners of the land in dispute and were entitled to have their names recorded in the khewat. This relief was however not granted to the plaintiffs by the trial Court and, in the lower appellate Court, the plaintiffs confined their claim to a declaration that they were entitled to possession and to make collections and appropriate the produce of the plots in dispute. They also prayed for an injunction restraining defendants' second and third parties from causing interference in the plaintiffs' collection of rent and appropriation of the produce of the plots in dispute. In the alternative the plaintiffs had claimed possession of the area in dispute. The plaintiffs claimed to be entitled to the reliefs me...
Khairati Lal Babu Lal, Vs. Re.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-04-1940
Reported in: [1941]9ITR627(All)
This is a reference under Section 66(2) of the Income-tax Act (XI of 1922). The assessee is a Hindu undivided family which does business in cloth, money-lending and property. For the assessment year 1938-39 the assessee returned an income of Rs. 9,128. The Income-tax Officer examined the books of account and added to the assessable income a sum of Rs. 2,814 from property and Rs. 8,919 from business. The last named sum included an amount Rs. 1,850 on account of interest which had been received from Kunjamal Banwari Lal and it is in respect of this sum of money that a reference has been made to us.It appears that on November 29, 1927 the assessee advanced a loan of Rs. 15,000 on the security of house property, to Trilokinath Sansarnath, and on March 16, 1929 a further loan was advanced security of the same property for a sum of Rs. 5,000, which included Rs. 1,354 on account of January 30, 1932 the assessee instituted a suit and he ultimately obtained a decree for Rs. 32,000. Meanwhile an...
B. Ramman Lal Vs. Raghunath Shanker and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-03-1940
Reported in: AIR1941All56
Iqbal Ahmad, J.1. This appeal is directed against an order passed by a special Judge, first grade, in proceedings under the U. P. Encumbered Estates Act (Act 25 of 1934) and arises under the following circumstances. Raghunath Shanker and his minor son, Girish Prasad, the respondents in the present appeal, filed an application under Section 4, U.P. Encumbered Estates Act, before the Collector who, in accordance with the provisions of Section 6 of the Act, in due course, forwarded that application to the special Judge. After the receipt of the application by the special Judge, the applicants filed a written statement on 12th February 1937 containing the particulars enumerated in Section 8 of the Act. In their written statement the applicants alleged that B. Ramman Lal, the appellant in the present appeal, was one of their creditors. The learned Judge then directed the publication and the service of the notices prescribed by Section 9 of the Act. There was however this irregularity that t...
Ahmad Ullah and anr. Vs. Sriniwas Joshi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-02-1940
Reported in: AIR1941All42
ORDERGanga Nath, J.1. This is an application in revision by Ahmadullah and Mt. Khanamunnisa against an order passed under Section 145, Criminal P.C. by the Sub-divisional Magistrate of Baramandal, Almora. A litigation was going on for some time between the applicants and the opposite party, Pandit Srinivas Joshi. An application was made by Srinivas Joshi under Section 145, Criminal P.C. against Ahmadullah. A report was called for from the Sub-Inspector, who reported that there was some apprehension of breach of peace if Ahmadullah was not prevented from going on with his construction. A notice was issued to Ahmadullah and in compliance with it he appeared. The parties agreed to refer their dispute to the arbitration of Rai Bahadur Pandit Laxmi Datt Pande. He made an award to the effect:Now after duly considering the matter and in view of the scale given in the settlement map of Mr. Beckett, I fix the boundary line as being on the eastern side of the line XY on the map, Ex. C (of Civil ...
Radhey Lal Vs. Niranjan Nath
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-02-1940
Reported in: AIR1941All95
Bajpai, J.1. Lala Radhey Lal, a moneylender of Agra, is the applicant before us. He prays (1) that Niranjan Nath, the opposite party, may be dealt with and punished according to law for contempt of Court of the insolvency Court of Agra which is seized of the insolvency case filed by the petitioner against Ram Chand Niranjan Nath and (2) that the proceedings in the criminal case under Section 500, Penal Code (Seth Niranjan Nath, complainant versus Lala Radhey Lal, accused) pending in the Court of the City Magistrate of Agra be stayed till the decision of this application. The facts seem to be that Niranjan Nath carries on business at Agra as a bookseller and is also a military contractor. He had occasion to borrow money on negotiable hundis in the market of Agra. The hundis were drawn in favour of creditors and such hundis sometimes used to be endorsed in favour of other persons. In the month of April 1940, some of the hundis drawn by Niranjan Nath fell due and although some of them wer...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »