Allahabad Court February 1945 Judgments
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Shrimati Shingari Bai
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-23-1945
Reported in: AIR1945All102
Iqbal Ahmad, C.J.1. This is a reference by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Central and United Provinces, under Section 66(2), Income-tax Act (11 of 1922) and the question referred to this Court is:Whether on the facts of this case the Income-tax Officer was justified in taking the assessee's gross income from money-lending to be Rs. 31,081.2. The facts that led to the reference, and as. they appear from the statement of the case submitted by the Income-tax Commissioner, are very simple. Shrimati Singari Bai, the assessee, a professional money-lender, regularly kept her accounts according to what is known as the 'mercantile accountancy system' or the 'book profits system of accountancy' or the 'complete double entry book-keeping.' Under this system the net profit or loss is calculated after taking into account all the income and all the expenditure relating to the period, whether such income has been actually received or not and, whether such expenditure has teen actually paid or not. T...
Tag this Judgment!Sahu Joti Prasad Vs. Bahal Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-23-1945
Reported in: AIR1945All433
Malik, J. 1. This appeal has been filed by the plaintiff whose suit for a large amount of money Rs. 24,995, and for possession of certain properties was dismissed by the learned Additional Civil Judge of Bijnor. According to the plaintiff, the bonds mentioned in lists (a), (b) and (c), the zamindari properties in lists (d) and (H) and the house properties in list (w) belonged to one Gulzari Mal, who died on 3rd July 1914. The plaintiff claimed that he was the adopted son of Gulzari Mal having been adopted by his widow, Mt. Bhagirathi, on 25th January 1939, and had thus ' become the owner of these properties. The following pedigree will be helpful in understanding the facts of this case:PADAM SEN = MT. GOMTI (D. Feb. 1875) ||___________________________________________________________ | | | |Hardeo Singh. Darbari Mal Behari Lal Gulzari Mal. (D. July 1914)(D. Deo. 1926) (D. 1915) (D. 1895) = | | | Mt. Bhagirathi (def. 2)Mt. Jamuna ____________ ____________ |(daughter) | | | | || Karori Ma...
Tag this Judgment!Emperor Vs. Kesri Chand
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-22-1945
Reported in: AIR1945All207
Iqbal Ahmad, C.J.1. This is an application in revision by the Provincial Government and the prayer contained in the application is that the sentence passed on Kesri Chand, opposite party, be enhanced. Kesri Chand was tried under two charges and convicted by a Magistrate of the first class for offences punishable under Section 116 read with Section 161 Penal Code. The charge against Kesri Chand was that he on two different dates, viz., 31st July 1942 and 10th August 1942, paid Rs. 2000 and Rs. 1500 respectively to one Capt. Martin as an illegal gratification with a view to have the inferior stores supplied by firms in which Kesri Chand was interested passed at the Agra Ordnance Inspection Depot. The Magistrate sentenced Kesri Chand to six months' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500 on each count and ordered the sentences of imprisonment to run concurrently. On appeal by Kesri Chand, the Sessions Judge of Agra, while affirming the conviction of Kesri Chand with respect to both th...
Tag this Judgment!Mt. Chauli Vs. Mt. Meghoo and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-21-1945
Reported in: AIR1946All61
Allsop, J.1. These appeals arise out of a suit instituted by Mt. Chauli in order to recover possession of three properties, an enclosed piece of land known as a gher with the buildings thereon, the whole of the village of Somli and the half of an area of 518 bighas 12 biswas in the village of Nandpur, which, we understand, represents a share of 5 biswas out of 20 biswas in this village. The property in suit admittedly belonged at one time to Amolak Ram, a Vaish Agarwal Saraogi Jain, who died in the year 1880 leaving him surviving a widow, Mt. Bir Kunwar, and three daughters, Mt. Permeshwari, Mt. Lachhmi and Mt. Barfi. Mt. Bir Kunwar died in 1880, Mt. Parmeshwari in 1905, Mt. Laehhmi in 1910 and Mt. Barfi in 1922. The plaintiff, Mt. Chauli, is the daughter of Mt. Lachhmi who also left her surviving two sons, Lalta Prasad and Durga Prasad. The plaintiff alleged that Mt. Bir Kunwar became the absolute owner of the properties in suit on the death of her husband, Amolak Ram, in accordance w...
Tag this Judgment!Major Mistri Vs. Mt. Binda Debi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-1945
Reported in: AIR1946All126
Braund, J.1. This is an appeal which has come before us as a Pull Bench. The facts are simple. In 1935, the plaintiff lent a sum of four hundred rupees to the defendant. Simultaneously with the loan, the defendant gave the plaintiff an ordinary promissory note. In 1938, at the moment of the expiration of the period of limitation the plaintiff brought a suit before the Munsif of Mirzapur claiming her money with interest. We shall refer to the form of the plaint in a moment. In the meanwhile it suffices to say that the plaintiff did not exhibit the promissory note to the plaint and the learned Judges in the Courts below have found as facts first that, in certain somewhat unusual circumstances, the note is, or must be presumed to be, still in the possession of the plaintiff and, secondly, that it was insufficiently stamped. In those circumstances, by a judgment of 24th April 1939, the Munsif, acting, we think, on a cause of action based on the debt, gave judgment for the plaintiff for pri...
Tag this Judgment!Behari Lal Vs. Ganga Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-1945
Reported in: AIR1945All117
Iqbal Ahmad, C.J.1. This and the connected E.F. A. No. 46 of 1943 are decree-holder's appeals and are directed against an order of the Court below dismissing an application for execution as time-barred. The facts are not in controversy and are as follows: One Nand Lal instituted a suit against certain defendants amongst whom was Behari Lal, the appellant in both the appeals before us. The suit was dismissed with costs by the trial Court. Nand Lal filed a first appeal in the High Court against the decree of the trial Court and during the pendency of that appeal, applied for stay of execution of the decree for costs passed by the trial Court. The execution was ordered to be stayed conditional on security being furnished. Krishan Lal, the father of Ganga Prasad respondent in appeal No. 45 and Hukam Chand, respondent in the connected appeal No. 46, executed a security bond and filed the same in Court. Nand Lal's appeal was ultimately dismissed by this Court. Behari Lal then made several ap...
Tag this Judgment!Banwari Lal Vs. Roop Kishore and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-1945
Reported in: AIR1945All332
Yorke, J. 1. This is a defendant's second appeal in a suit for dissolution of partnership and for accounts. The plaintiff Roop Kishore alleged in his plaint that he had been a partner with the defendants Banwari Lal (appellant) and Bhola Nath in a registered firm going by the name of Ram Sarup Roop Kishore. He alleged that the partnership was a partnership at will, that his own share was eight annas and that the two partners Bhola Nath and Banwari Lal had shares of four annas each. In his plaint he stated that 2f years earlier, that is to say, in about February 1937, the defendant Banwari Lal, who had worked in the firm and maintained accounts, stopped working in the firm saying that he did not wish to be a partner in the firm. Shortly before this date, Banwari Lal had made an application under the Encumbered Estates Act and had made no mention of his being a partner in the firm in that application. The application became Suit No. 93 of 1936 of the Court of the Special Judge, second gr...
Tag this Judgment!NaraIn Das and ors. Vs. Alla UddIn Khan and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-1945
Reported in: AIR1945All401
Sinha, J. 1. These are two applications for leave to appeal to His Majesty in Council against an order of this Court, dated 3rd May 1944, by which it remanded the case to the Court below with the direction that a certain application, presented by the judgment-debtors, be restored to its original number and tried according to law. The facts briefly are these: On 27th October 1921, Alla Uddin Khan and Sayeed Uddin Khan granted a simple mortgage in favour of Narain Das and others for a sum of Rs. 10,000. The suit was brought on the basis of that mortgage and, on 15th February 1932, a preliminary decree was passed. The final decree followed on 31st July 1933, for a sum of Rs. 26,759-15-0. In execution of this decree, on 24th January 1934, three houses and eight shops belonging to the mortgagors were sold and purchased by the decree-holders themselves for a sum of rupees 15,325. On 2lst January 1934, i.e. three days before the auction-sale, an injunction had been issued, at the instance of ...
Tag this Judgment!Radha Kishan and ors. Vs. Devi Das Alias Devi Ram and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-19-1945
Reported in: AIR1945All298
Allsop, J.1. This second appeal arises out of a suit on the basis of a mortgage. The learned Munsif disallowed interest and costs. under the provisions of the Agriculturists' Relief Act on account of a failure on the part of the plaintiff to keep and furnish accounts. The learned Judge upset this finding upon the ground that the plaintiff was not a creditor within the meaning of the Agriculturists' Relief Act. He seems to have thought that no person can be a creditor unless he is in the habit of advancing loans to an agriculturist. In my judgment that is> not the true interpretation of the provisions of the Act. According to the Act a creditor means a person who in the regular course of business advances a loan defined in this Act. The term used is a 'loan and not 'loans'. It, seems to me that a creditor is one who carries on business as a money-lender and in the course of that business advances a loan to an agriculturist. There can be no doubt as found by the learned Munsif and indeed...
Tag this Judgment!Chaudhari Rukun UddIn And, After His Death, His Major Son BurhanuddIn ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-15-1945
Reported in: AIR1945All113
Verma, J.1. The material facts, about which there is no controversy, are as follows: On 26th May 1931, a simple mortgage was executed by one Habib Baksh in favour of respondent 2, Ram Charan Lal. Zamindari shares in two villages were hypothecated. The principal mortgage money was Rs. 3000 and the interest agreed upon was 12 per cent, per annum, compoundable yearly. Sometime later, the appellant, Chaudhri Ruknuddin, purchased from Habib Baksh the hypothecated zamindari shares in one of the two villages and he undertook to pay off the entire amount due to the mortgagee under the deed of 26th May 1931. He, however, made no payments to the mortgagee. On 19th May 1936, Bukn-uddin instituted a suit (No. 41 of 1936) against Ram Charan Lal in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Budaun under Section 33, U.P. Agriculturists' Relief Act (27 of 1934) for an account of the money advanced by Ram Charan Lal raider the mortgage deed of 26th May 1931, and asked for a declaration of the amount which w...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »