Allahabad Court October 1950 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.
Chunni Lal Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-24-1950
Reported in: AIR1952All178
ORDERSapru, J. 1. This is an application in revision against an order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge of Budaun, confirming an order of a learned Magistrate of the first class, convicting Shri Chuni Lal of an offence under Section 182, Penal Code, and sentencing him to a fine of Rs. 200 or in the alternative one month's simple imprisonment. 2. The facts which have given rise to this application in revision are of a fairly simple nature. The applicant is a resident of village Mundia, P.S. Bisauli in the Badaun district. This village is a Town Area and it has a Town Area Committee, the election of which was to be held on 25.9.1948. The applicant was a candidate for the Chairmanship of the Committee. On the date in question members of the Town Area Committee were to be elected as also the Chairman. The applicant was being opposed by a gentleman, called Narendra Deo. It would further appear that on the date in question Section 144, Criminal P. C., was in force, orders under that s...
Vijaya Ramraj Vs. Dr. Sir Vijaya Ananda
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-24-1950
Reported in: AIR1952All568
Agarwala, J. 1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit for recovery of two sums of money which the plff. respondent claimed were payable to him under two deeds one of 1912 & the other of 1928. 2. The appellant is the present holder of an impartible estate known as the Vizyanagram Raj or Samasthanam in the State of Madras. The plff. resp. is his uncle usually residing at Banaras. A pedigree of the family will be of help in understanding the narration of events to be made hereafter:-- PEDIGREE Vijayram Raj iii-Alakh Rajeshwari d.1879 | d. July 1902 _______________________|______________________ | | | | Narayanna Ananda Gajpati Chitti Babu Rewa Gajpati d. d.23 5 1987 alias Vijay Maharani before his (died without ram Raj IV d.14.12.1912 father. leaving widow (adopted by Alakh Raje- shwari in Dec. 1897 d. 11-9-1922 | | ____________________|_______________ | | Maharaja Alakh Narayan Maharaja Kumar Vijay d. 25-10-37 Anand(Plff.) | | _________|____________ __________|__________ | ...
Mt. Qayumunissa Vs. Rashidul Malik
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-13-1950
Reported in: AIR1952All200
Chandiramani, J.1. This is an application in revision against the decree of the learned District Judge, Lucknow, dated 11-13.1948.2. The applicant Mt. Qaiyum-in-nisa was owner of grove No. 412 in qasba Malhiabad known as Terhwa grove. She mortgaged it without possession with Mt. Hamid Jehan Begam on 8-9-1923, for Rs. 2000, with interest at 10 per cent. per annum. On 11-9-1923, she created a further charge on the property by borrowing another sum of Rs. 500 from Mt. Hamid Jehan Begam, the rate of interest being 10 per cent. per annum.3. Mt. Hamid Jehan Begam sold all her rights in the grove under the mortgage and the charge to Mt. Bahali Begam on 27-2-1925. After some negotiations carried on by Maqbul Ahmad, son of the mortgagor applicant, the present opposite party, Rashidul Malik, bought all the rights of Mt. Bahali Begam for RS. 2600 on 8-11-1927. The applicant then apparently found it difficult to pay up the interest stipulated in the mortgage and the charge and made no payment of i...
Bishambhar Nath Vs. Janki Ballabh Tripathi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-13-1950
Reported in: AIR1952All402
P.L. Bhargava, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit, which was originally instituted by Shri Bishambhar Nath Khazanchi, against Shri Janki Ballabh Tripathi, the Official Receiver of Agra defendant 1 who will hereafter be referred to as the Official Receiver, representing the estate of two insolvents. Khwaj Bux and Riazuddin, who will hereafter be referred to as the insolvents, Nawal Kishore (defendant 2), a creditor of the insolvents, and Khaliluddin (defendant 3), a tenant of the insolvents' property. The suit was for obtaining a declaration that a certain building consisting of 17 shops and a hall and printing press known as 'Abdul Ulai Electric Press', established in the building, was not liable to attachment by the Official Receiver as the property of the insolvents. The property admittedly at one time belonged to the insolvents; but, in the year 1925, they mortgaged the same to Ram Charan and subsequently, on 28-7-1928, they mortgaged it to the plaintiff, Bishambhar Nath Khazanch...
Ratee Ram and Sons, Kanpur Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, United Prov ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-12-1950
Reported in: [1951]19ITR233(All)
The questions referred by the Tribunal to this Court are printed at page 5 of the paper-book. Having given our thought to them we are of opinion that question No. (2) really does not raise any question of law and that the only point to be considered by us is what is contained in question No. (1). That question is :-'Whether the scheme of Income-tax Act, particularly the provisions contained in Section 14(2)(a), 23(5)(a) and their proviso to Section 30(1), Income-tax, are such as to bar the assessment of a partner in regard to his share of profits in a partnership business one of the partners of which had been subjected to assessment within the jurisdiction of an Income-tax Officer of a different circle ?'The assessees in this case were a partner in two forests, one known as the Bandal and the other as Kankai forest. Their share in the former was ten out of sixteen annas and in the latter one-half. There is no dispute in this case with regard to the latter forest, Kankai. The point refe...
Nihori Lal Prabhudayal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U.P., Lucknow.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-12-1950
Reported in: [1951]19ITR240(All)
A family consisting of a father and his six sons was assessed as a Hindu undivided family. The family carried on money-lending business in the name and style of Nihori Lal Prabhu Dayal and cloth business in the name of Nihori Lal Hiralal. The accounting period relevant to the assessment year 1946-47 for the money-lending business was from September 27, 1944, to October 15, 1945. And for the cloth business from April 21, 1944, to some date in April, 1945.The case of the assessee was that there had been a partition in the family, that the money-lending business had been divided on the September 26, 1944, between Nihori Lal and his six sons, three of whom were majors and three were minors, that the cloth business had been partitioned on the April 20, 1945, and the assets divided into seven parts in the same way as the assets of the money-lending business. The case of the assessee was that after these divisions on April 20, 1944, and September 26, 1944 respectively the clothe business and ...
Municipal Board Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-11-1950
Reported in: AIR1952All249; [1951]19ITR21(All)
Malik, C.J. 1. In this reference under Section 66(1), Income-tax Act, the following four questions have been referred to this Court :'(1) Whether on the facts stated, the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner refusing to admit the appeal in exercise of his discretion under last part of Section 30 (2) was an order under Section 30 (2) or should be treated as an order under Section 31, Income tax Act? (2) Whether where the figures of an assessment are corrected under Section 33 (4), Income-tax Act, without having the effect of enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund and a corrected notice of 'demand is issued, such a notice of demand amounts to notice of demand under Section 29 of the Act and confers a right of appeal on the applicant from the date of its receipt? 3. Whether Rule 21, Income tax Rules, framed under Section 59 of the Act is ultra vires of the powers of the Central Board of Revenue inasmuch as it prescribes the attachment of the notice of demand to the memo of...
Ram Bali and ors. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-10-1950
Reported in: AIR1952All289
Desai, J.1. Ram Bali Singh, Harbans Singh and Param Sukh Lal appeal from a judgment of a Civil and Sessions Judge of Banaras convicting them under Section 302, Penal Code, and sentencing the first to death and the others to transportation for life. The appellants live in village Thana and are said to be friends. The first two are Thakurs but no relationship exists between them, and the third is a Kayastha. Achaibar Singh, mukhia of the village, is a collateral of Harbans Singh and has disputes with him over joint land. The disputes were referred for arbitration of a Panchayat consisting of five men. Harbans Singh claimed the right to nominate all the five panches himself but was made to agree that one Panch at least should be nominated by Achaibar Singh. Accordingly Harbans Singh nominated four Panches one of whom was Uma Shankar while Achaibar Singh nominated Nankoo Singh deceased. There is a Gram Sudhar and Panchayat in the village of which Param Sukh Lal was the Vice-President and P...
Harihar Kesholal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-09-1950
Reported in: AIR1951All498; [1951]19ITR52(All)
V. Bhargava, J.1. This is a reference under Section 21, Excess Profits Tax Act read with Section 66, Income-tax Act. The following two questions have been referred to us :'1. Whether, in the circumstances of the case, the third proviso to Section 5, Excess Profits Tax Act prevents the applicability of the provisions of Section 10A of the Act to the assessment in the fourth chargeable accounting period ?2. Whether the Tribunal was competent to deal with the question of set off of losses in the cotton business at Wankaner in the appeal arising from an order under Section 10A '2. No one has appeared in this reference to argue on behalf of the assessee. The facts stated by the Tribunal show that the assessee had been carrying on business for a number of years at Kanpur and shifted the business temporarily to Wankaner. This business was shifted, according to the Tribunal, for the specific purpose of avoiding liability to excess profits tax. These are questions of fact on which there is no r...
Vishwapal Sharma and ors. Vs. Brijendrapal Sharma
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-06-1950
Reported in: AIR1952All223
Malik, C.J. 1. This is an appeal under Sections 13 and 15, U. P. High Courts Amalgamation. Order, 1948,read with Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of the Allahabad High Court. An application was filed by Brijendrapal Sharma for the winding up of a company known as Sukh Sancharak Co., Ltd. The matter came up before the learned Company Judge and the case was heard by him at some length. The learned Judge took the view that it was eminently a case in which the parties shouldreach some sort of a settlement. He, therefore, granted time upto the first Friday after the vacation, or upto such further date as the Judge exercising company jurisdiction might determine, for a settlement. The caae had, however, been argued at great length. The learned Judge, therefore, recorded his findings on the various points raised before him, but he did not pass any winding up order under Section 166, Companies Act. So long as the winding up order is not passed, it cannot be said that the rights of the parties h...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »