Allahabad Court November 1949 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.
Kalyan Singh Vs. L. Kunwar Sen
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-09-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All366
ORDERSeth, J.1. This is a defendant's application in revision arising out of a suit brought Under Section. 5(4), U. P. (Temporary) Control of Rent and Eviction Act (III [3] of 1947) for fixation of rent. The defendant was occupying the accommodation on an agreed rental of Rs. 15/- per month. The lease was for a period of three years. The plaintiff was not satisfied with the agreed rent, and, therefore, he instituted the suit. The Court below has fixed the rent at Rs. 18/- per month.2. It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the suit was not maintainable, because if a landlord desires to enhance the rent, he may do so by giving a notice Under Section 5 (2) of the Act, and that a suit is maintainable only when a landlord claims that the reasonable annual rent is too inadequate or when a tenant claims that the reasonable annual rent is excessive.3. The learned counsel has overlooked another portion of Clause (4), according to which, where there is no municipal assess...
Tajju Khan Vs. Mazhar Khan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-09-1949
Reported in: AIR1952All614
Kidwai, J.1. On 25-1-1941, Tajju Khan, plff. executed a deed of gift in favour of Mazhar Khan, deft. who is his own brother & delivered possession of the property to the donee. Subsequently plff. instituted the suit out of which this appeal arises to obtain possession of the gifted property by, among other things, revocation of the deed of gift. The deft, pleaded that the gift was not revocable. The trial Court accepted the plff's, claim & decreed the suit. On appeal, the learned Civil Judge of Fyzabad held that the parties were within the prohibited degrees of relationship & that, consequently, the gift could not be revoked. He accordingly allowed the appeal &dismissed; the suit. The plff. has now come up in second appeal.2. The only contention pressed by Mr. Hyder Husain, for the appellant, was that the donor & the donee being both of the same sex could not be said to be related within the prohibited degrees & that, therefore, the gift was revocable. The only case relating to this po...
Debi Bux Singh Vs. Rex
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-08-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All299
ORDERHarish Chandra, J.1. A revision application was filed on behalf of the applicant on 3rd August 1949. At the request of learned counsel for the applicant, an order was made that the record be sent for at the applicant's expense. When the case was listed again on 10th August 1949, it was discovered that the cost had not been paid. Counsel was also not present. I then examined with care the judgment of the Court and came to the conclusion that there was no force in the application and rejected it. Later on, an application was made on behalf of the applicant for the restoration of the revision application. That was rejected by me on 8th September 1949. Thereafter, a second revision application was filed on behalf of the applicant and that too was rejected by me on 19th September 1949.2. A fresh application has now been presented praying that the revision application be restored. I have perused the affidavit which shows the circumstances in which counsel for the applicant had no inform...
M.A. Jalil Vs. Rex
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-08-1949
Reported in: AIR1952All550
Misra, J.1. An office report has raised the question whether these two revision applications can be heard & disposed of by the Lucknow Bench of the High Court.2. One M. A. Jalil was convicted in two cases for offences under Sections 420, 420/511 & 420, 406, Penal Code & sentenced to imprisonment as well as fine. He preferred two appeals which were dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge of Bareilly. These two revision applications, were filed by M. A. Jalil against the orders passed by learned Sessions Judge in his appeals. The revision applications were filed at Allahabad, & the petitioner engaged Sir Iqbal Ahmad to argue them on his behalf.3. Sir Iqbal Ahmad was a Judge of the old Allahabad High Court for a number of years, & retired as the Chief justice of that Court. Since his retirement he resumed practice at the Bar. At the time of his appointment as a Judge of the old High Court, he had to give an undertaking that after his retirement he would not practise in that Court or in a ...
Ram Chander Vs. Rex
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-07-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All386
Desai, J.1. This is an appeal from a judgment of the Sessions Judge of Agra convicting the appellant under Section 20, Arms Act and sentencing him to rigorous imprisonment for two years.2. The appellant arrived at Agra Cantonment Railway Station by train on 26-6-1948 at about 3 P. M. Two Excise peons, Sughar Singh and Tilak Singh were on duty at the station checking suspicious luggage of passengers. Sughar Singh noticed the appellant with a hand-bag walking through the crowds. His suspicion was excited and he stopped him on the platform and asked him what the bag contained. It was a canvass bag and locked The appellant stated at first that there was nothing in it and later that there was a pistol or something dangerous in it, Sughar Singh asked for the key which he refused to give at first. He was threatened and then he took out a ring containing two keys, one of which opened the lock. Inside the bag there was a pistol. The appellant could produce no licence, Sughar Singh prepared a se...
Dalsukhrai Jaidayal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and C.P. and Berar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-04-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All255; [1950]18ITR546(All)
Malik, C.J.1. This is one of the many cases that have recently come up before us, in which a great deal of difficulty has been caused by reason of the Appellate Tribunal not having clearly found the facts in its appellate order or not having clearly set out the facts in the statement of the case.2. The assessee, a Hindu undivided family, has been carrying on business for many years The head office of the business is at Banaras with two other branches in the same city. The assessee has also a branch in Calcutta. At the head office at Banaras wholesale business is done in Benarsi cloth in the name of Dalsukhrai Jaidayal. At Lakhi Chabutra branch, Banaras, wholesale business is done in cotton cloth in the name of Jaidayal Gajanand. The other branch at Thatheri Bazar, Banaras, does business in silk in the name of Gajanand Balmukund. The branch in Calcutta does business in the name of Jaidayal Gajanand. In the words of the Tribunal, this branch launched forth in fairly large speculations in...
Durga Prasad and ors. Vs. Ghasi Ram
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-04-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All314
Malik, C.J. 1. This is a plaintiff's appeal One Sirdhari had four sons and he left four houses. Munni alias Munna, the eldest of the four sons, executed a mortgage on 27th January 1927, in favour of one Ghasi Ram. The mortgagor purported to mortgage his one-fourth share in the four houses left by his father, Girdhari, Sibhoo, another son of Girdhari, made a mortgage on 23rd July 1928 of one whole house in favour of Mt. Rukmani. This mortgagee filed a suit No. 195 of 1931 on the basis of the mortgage, obtained a decree, had the house sold and purchased it herself. She is dead now and is represented by Durga Parshad, Gopi Nath and Zalim Ram. When Ghasi Ram filed his suit No. 30 of 1939 on the basis of the mortgage elated 27th January 1927, he impleaded, besides his mortgagor, the other descendants of Girdhari and also the legal representatives of Mt. Rukmani. The case of the mortgagee was that his mortgagor had a one-fourth share in the four houses and the mortgagee was therefore entitle...
Jagannath Ram Dayal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, C.P. and Berar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-04-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All322; [1950]18ITR375(All)
Malik, C.J. 1. These two references are Under Section 66 (2), Income-tax Act, in the matter of the income-tax assessment of Messrs. Jagannatb Ramdayal of Kanpur. 2. The same question has been referred to us for opinion in both these cases. The question referred is as follows: 'Whether, in all the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 92,188/- being the balance of Rs. 1,56,657/- less Rs. 64,469/- already taxed, or any part thereof may be deemed in law to be the income, profits or gains of the 'previous year' which can be assessed to income-tax in the assessment year 1938-1939?'3. The assessee is a Hindu undivided family. The assessment year in question is 1938-1939 and the account year began on 28th September 1936 and ended on some date in September 1937. The assessee carries on business in Kanpur. 4. This Hindu undivided family was a partner in the Upper Indian Ghorwari Collieries at Hirdaigarh in the Central Provinces (hereinafter referred to as 'the Collieries'). The share of the...
Surendra Nath Koley Vs. A.R. Sinclair Day and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-03-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All285
ORDERMalik, C.J.1. This is an application for issue of notice of contempt against Mr. A. R. Sinclair pay, District Magistrate of Banaras, and Mr. Krishna Narain Johiri, Assistant Bent Controller and Eviction Officer, Banaras. There is a house No. D47/192 in Ramapura, 'Banaras City; The house had been allotted by the Deputy Town Rationing Officer to one Mr. J. S. Misra, Assistant Engineer, P. W. D. Banaras, on 19th July 1947. The house had been under certain previous orders allotted to other persons but we are not concerned with the orders previous to the order dated 19th July 1947. Mr. Misra was transferred from Banaras and the Assistant Bent Controller and Eviction Officer, Mr. K. N. Johiri, purported to allot the house to Mr. D. Goyal, Assistant Engineer, P. W. D. Banaras, who was probably the successor of Mr. Misra. The landlord, who is the applicant before me, protested against the allotment of the house to Mr. Goyal on the ground that Mr. Goyal was already living with his wife, wh...
Harchanda and anr. Vs. Rex
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-03-1949
Reported in: AIR1950All355
Raghubar Dayal, J.1. Harchanda and Babu appeal against their conviction under Section 302, read with Section 34, Penal Code.2. Five other persons tried with these two appellants were acquitted by the Sessions Judge.3. The prosecution casa is that Atar Singh deceased asked Babu and Gopi to remove the earth which had been placed by them in order to construct a small platform or step to climb up the main platform, as this collected earth obstructed the passage. Harchanda and four other persons, all relations, arrived on the spot. Atar Singh spread over the earth, This led to exchange of abuses. The seven persons then went inside their house and returned armed and attacked Atar Singh with a spear, kirpan and lathis. The two appellants and three other persons are said to have been armed with lathis, Durga Das with a spear and Sukhbir with a kirpan.4. Atar Singh died the next day.5. Dr. Khan, Civil Surgeon, conducted the postmortem examination and found five injuries on the deceased, Two wer...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »