Allahabad Court February 1945 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.
Harish Chandra Bagla Vs. Emperor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-07-1945
Reported in: AIR1945All90
ORDERMalik, J.1. The applicant, Harish Chandra Bagla, has been convicted under Rule 81 (4), Defence of India Rules, and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months, and to a fine of Rs. 500 or two months' rigorous imprisonment in default. The accused is the proprietor of a firm known as Durga Prasad Harish Chandra in Generalganj, Cawnpore. The charge against the accused was that on 7th March 1944 the accused sold 48 pieces of malmal cloth No. 6772 of Swadeshi Mills, Bombay, at the rate of Rs. 14 per piece when the control price of the same was only Rs. 13-4-6, fixed by the Textile Commissioner under the provisions of Clause 12 (4) of the Cotton Cloth and Yarn (Control) Order of 1943. It is not denied that the control price of this quality of cloth was Rs. 13-4-6 and it is further not denied that the price charged was Rs. 14 per piece. The defence of the applicant was that on 4th March 1944 the applicant had left for Bombay in connexion with a marriage and did not re...
Ram Rakhan and anr. Vs. Mahant Govind Das and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-07-1945
Reported in: AIR1945All352
Allsop, J.1. There were proceedings under Section 145, Criminal P.C., between the parties to this appeal. The property in dispute was a temple and the appellants alleged that the temple belonged to the Rewa State, that the respondent, Mahant Govind Das, had been employed by the State to look after the temple, that he had been dismissed and that the appellants had been appointed in his place. Mahant Govind Das alleged that he was entitled to possession over the temple in his own right. The Magistrate put a receiver in possession and ultimately passed an order that the, receiver should deliver the property to the Rewa State or its representatives. The respondent then instituted the suit out of which this appeal has arisen. He made an application that the Court should appoint a receiver pending the decision of the suit., The Court, therefore, appointed one Ram Charan Das, who took over the property from the receiver who had been appointed by the Magistrate. We mention these facts because ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›