Allahabad Court November 1949 Judgments
Abdul Aziz Vs. Rex
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-30-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All364
ORDERBind Basni Prasad, J.1. The petitioner, Abdul Aziz, and one Asghar Ali were found in possession of one seer 4 chhataks and 1 seer 12 chhataks respectively of crude opium on 26th May 1948, at about 9 A. M. at the entrance of an opium smoking den. They were arrested on the spot and were prosecuted under Section 9, Opium Act. Learned Magistrate convicted them under Section 9, Opium Smoking Act, and sentenced them each to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three mouths. In appeal the learned Sessions Judge upheld the conviction and sentence. The conviction recorded by the Sessions Judge, however, is under Section 9, Opium Act. The trying Magistrate committed an error in recording the conviction under Section 9, Opium Smoking Act. Section 9 of that Act provides for presumption raised by presence of opium and of opium smoking apparatus. It does not provide for any offence. On the other hand, Section 9, Opium Act makes the illegal possession of opium an offence. Learned Sessions Judge was...
Tag this Judgment!Sripat Rai and ors. Vs. Narbadeshwar Prasad NaraIn Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-28-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All384
Malik, C.J.1. A preliminary objection has been taken to the hearing of these six appeals on the ground that the other creditors have not been impleaded and the appeals cannot proceed in their absence.2. These six cases arise out of two applications under Section 4, United Provinces Encumbered Estates Act. Application No. 10 of 1936 was filed by Narbadeshwar Prasad Narain Singh alias Bachchu Babu son of Parmeshwari Prasad and the other application No. 15 of 1936 was filed by Chandreshwar Prasad Narain Singh, Dharmeshwar Prasad Narain Singh and Rameshwar Prasad Narain Singh, all sons of Ishwari Prasad Narain Singh. Ishwari Prasad Narain Singh and Parmeshwari Prasad were brothers and were members of a joint Hindu family. In the year 1922 Ishwari Prasad Narain Singh and Narbadeshwar Prasad executed three mortgages, Parmeshwari Prasad being dead. The first mortgage was dated 24th May 1922, and was for a sum of Rs. 9,999-15 0 and it was executed in favour of Inderdeo Rai. First Appeals NOS. ...
Tag this Judgment!Murli Singh Vs. Tika Ram
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-24-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All401
ORDERSapru, J.1. The applicant in this revision is a tenant of about eleven years' standing. He was, under an agreement in writing, dated 14th November 1944, bound to pay a rent of Rs. 3-8-0 per month for the house he was occupying. Before that date he was paying a rent of Rs. 2-8-0. According to the municipal assessment of April 1942 the rental value of the house is Rs. 3 p. m.2. The landlord applied to the Court under the U. P. Control of Rent and Eviction Act (Act III [3] of 1947) to enhance the rent which the applicant had been paying to him from and about the year 1944. The suit which was brought by him purports to be under Section 8 (4) of the said Act. By its order dated 15th May 1948, the Court enhanced the rent of the house in suit to Rs. 10 p. m. It is against that order of the learned. Munsif that the applicant has come up in revision to this Court. Section 5 (1) of the Act layer down that'the rent payable for any accommodation to which this Act applies shall be such as may ...
Tag this Judgment!Gabdulal Tulsiram Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-22-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All302
Malik, C.J. 1. The two questions of law raised in this case are similar to the question raised in Misc. case No. 221 of 1947. As a matter of fact no separate arguments were advanced by learned counsel in this case. The questions referred to us for answer are as follows:'(1) Whether in circumstances of the case the benefit of Section 25 (4), Income-tax Act is admissible on the income, profits and gains of the assesses from all sources for the period from the end of the 'previous year' to the date of succession, namely 8th October 1941.(2) Whether in the circumstances of the case the benefit of Section 25 (4), Income-tax Act, is admissible on the income, profits and gains of the assesses from the cloth business at Kanpur, for the period from the end of the 'previous year' to the date of succession, namely 8th October 1941.'2. The assessee, a Hindu undivided family, was carrying on business of (1) pawn brokers and sharrafa business at Farrukhabad, (2) cloth business at Kanpur and (3) shar...
Tag this Judgment!Surya Datt Dubey Vs. Provincial Government and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-21-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All307
Raghubar Dayal, J. 1. Suraj Datt Dubey was ordered by the Provincial Government on 4th June 1949, under Clause (c) and (f) of Sub-section (1) to Section 3, U. P. Maintenance of Public Order (Temporary) Act IV [4] of 1947, to reside and remain within the limits of Chandausi town and to take no part directly or indirectly in any activities subsersive of law and order. It also required him under Sub-section (3) of Section 3 of the said Act to execute a bond in a sum of Rs. 500 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the District Magistrate of Allahabad for the due performance and enforcement of the aforesaid restrictions and conditions. It further ordered that in case of failure to furnish the necessary bond and surety within forty-eight hours of the service of the order he be committed to prison or to be detained in prison, if he be already there, until the expiry of the order or until such time as he furnished the required bond and surety in accordance with Section 123...
Tag this Judgment!The Jwala Bank Ltd. Vs. Shitla Parshad Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-21-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All309
Malik, C.J. 1. This purports to be an appeal Under Section 10 of our Letters Patent read with the United Provinces High Courts (Amalgamation) Order 1948. There was a private Bank in Agra known as the Jwala Bank carrying on banking business. In 1938 it was incorporated as a limited liability company under the name of the Jwala Bank Limited. The Memorandum and Articles of Association show that the primary object of the company was to carry on banking business in India and outside. In the year 1946 an Ordinance known as the Banking Companies (Inspection) Ordinance, 1946, (NO. IV of 1946) was issued by the Government of India in which a banking company was defined as meaning a banking company as defined in Section 277-F, Companies Act, 1913. Section 3 of the Ordinance provided for inspection and was as follows:'Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in Section 138, Companies Act 1913 (VII of 1913), the Central Government may at any time direct the Reserve Bank to cause an inspe...
Tag this Judgment!Kumar Chandra Bajpai Vs. Rex
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-21-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All376
Malik, C.J. 1. These are three applications under Section 491, Criminal P. C. filed on behalf of Kumar Chandra Bajpai, Shaukat Ali Khan and Ram Bharosey Lal. Kumar Chandra Bajpai and Shaukat Ali Khan were detained for fifteen days under orders passed by the District Magistrate on 19th February 1949, under the U. P. Maintenance of Public Order (Temporary) Act 1947. On 28th February 1949, the U. P. Government passed an order under Section 3 of the aforesaid Act detaining them for a period of six months. ON 21st June 1949, the District Magistrate purported to pass an order under Section 3, Sub-section 1 (f) preventing them from taking part in any activities subversive of law and order and requiring each of them to execute a bond for Rs. 500 under Sub-section (3) of Section 3. The facts are exactly similar; in the case of Ram Bharosey Lal only the dates are different. Hs was detained by an order of the District Magistrate dated 21st February 1949, the order of the Provincial Government was...
Tag this Judgment!Baiju Singh and ors. Vs. Kanh Kumar and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-21-1949
Reported in: AIR1952All626
1. One Akber Singh owned a 2 bis was & 10 biswansis' share in Patti Rohan Singh, in village Bhawanipur, district Hardoi, & 4 biswas, 3 biswansis & odd share in Patti Akber Singh in the same village. On 29-5 1905, Akber Singh mortgaged 2 biswas & 10 biswansis of Patti Rohan Singh to Pancham Singh. He delivered possession over 15 plots measuring 22 Bighas 2 biawansis in order to satisfy the interest on the principal sum, namely, Rs. 1700.2. On 25-8-1908, he mortgaged 2 biswas & 10 biswansis out of his share in Patti Akber Singh to the same person for a sum of Bs. 1800, Interest was to run at the rate of 6 per cent per annum & the property was not to be redeemed within ten years. It was further provided that if there was a default in payment of interest the mortgagee would be entitled to obtain possession, & it is agreed, that he did obtain possession in 1915. Other debts also were incurred & then Akber Singh died leaving a widow Mt. Sheo Rani & two sons, Bhudhar Singh & Bhola Singh. On 2...
Tag this Judgment!Dhurub Deo Mal and ors. Vs. Jai Mangal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-18-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All305
Bind Basni Prasad, J. 1. I agree with my learned colleague and desire to add a few words.2. The specific question for decision before us is whether a proprietor, who has obtained a permission under Section 24, U. P. Regulation of Agricultural Credit Act of 1940 for making the gift, can, instead of making the gift, make a sale, or, to put it in more general words, whether a proprietor who obtains permission for making one kind of permanent alienation can make another kind of such alienation. As already stated in the judgment of my learned brother, the permission obtained from the Assistant Collector, in charge of the sub-division, was for making a gift. Learned counsel for the appellants has urged that the object of the U. P. Regulation of Agricultural Credit Act was to protect agriculturists from themselves and to save for them sufficient land for their livelihood and that being so, if permission has been granted for gift, it should be interpreted to contain in itself a permission for ...
Tag this Judgment!In Re: Sonbarsa Kuer
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-18-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All319
Harish Chandra, J. 1. This case purports to be a reference Under Section 57, Stamp Act, 1899 (II [2] of 1899) according to which the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority may, in certain circumstances, state a case and refer it to the High Court with its own opinion thereon. The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority in this Province is the Board of Revenue.2. The papers submitted to this Court, however, do not contain any order of reference by the Board or any opinion expressed by it on the case which has been referred to this Court. The reference is contained in a letter from the Personal Assistant to the Junior Secretary to the Board of Revenue, United Provinces, to the Registrar of this Court. This letter states that the writer has been directed to make a reference Under Section 57, Stamp Act for the orders of this Court. At one place it mentions that the Board of Revenue is inclined to hold the view that the case falls under Article 7, Stamp Act. But the actual statement of the case by...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »