Allahabad Court May 1951 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.
Bachchu Lal and anr. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-12-1951
Reported in: AIR1951All836
Misra, J.1. This is a bail application in case of triple murder. The petitioners Bachchu Lal and his servant Debi Dayal along with thirty others were sent up by the Kamlapur police and the case is at present pending inquiry in the Court of a Judicial Magistrate, Sitapur, under Chap. XVIII, Criminal P. C. The prosecution witnesses have been examined and the remaining formalities have still to be gone through.2. The applicants were, we understand, not named in the first information report or during the course of the police investigation. This was presumably because their identity was not known to the complainant and the prosecution witnesses. They were arrested in the third week of September, 1950, and identified at a jail parade held in the District Jail, Sitapur, on 10-10-1950. Out of eighteen witnesses who were seat up nine spotted Bachchu Lal and three pointed to Debi Dayal. Both these persons moved the learned Sessions Judge Sitapur, for bail. The offence which the petitioners were ...
Keshawdas Wadhumal Advani Vs. Murtaza Ali Khan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-10-1951
Reported in: AIR1953All82
ORDERGhulam Hasan, J. 1. These are two revisions under Section 115, Civil P. C., and arise out of proceedings for fixation of rent under the U. P. Temporary Control of Rent and Eviction Act (Act 3 of 1947). The former is a revision by the plaintiff and the latter by the defendant. 2. The plaintiff, Dr. Keshodas Wadhumal Advani, according to the plaint allegations, is a displaced person from Sind, Western Pakistan and is a bona fide registered refugee in Lucknow. He needed accommodation for his residence and for his family members and relations. The defendant, Syed Murtaza Ali Khan is the owner of house styled as Crown Gate, No. 2393, Jagat Narain Road, Lucknow. The plaintiff took a portion of this house consisting of 8 rooms with necessary quarters on 14th February 1948, at a rent of Rs. 170 per mensem and gave cheque of Rs. 900 in advance. He paid this rent to the defendant for nearly 15 months upto 12th May 1949. The defendant told him that Rs. 170 per mensem was the monthly reasonab...
Raja Suryapalsingh and ors. Vs. the U.P. Govt.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-10-1951
Reported in: AIR1951All674
Malik, C.J.1. These are applns. under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the constitutionality of an Act known as the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition & Land Reforms Act, 1950 (U. P. Act No. I of 1951).2. On 8-8-1946, the United Provinces Legislative Assembly passed the following resolution :'This Assembly accepts the principle of the abolition of the zamindari system in this Province which involves intermediaries between the cultivator & the State & resolves that the rights of such intermediaries should be acquired on payment of equitable compensation & that Govt. should appoint a Committee to prepare a scheme for this purpose.' 3. A Committee was appointed to give effect to the resolution & to prepare the necessary scheme. It made its report in July 1948. A Bill was introduced in the United Provinces Legislative Assembly on 7-7-1949. After some amendment it was passed by the State Legislature on 16-1-1951, & it received the assent of the President on 24-1-1951. 4. Although ...
Asiatic Engineering Co. Vs. Achhru Ram and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-10-1951
Reported in: AIR1951All746
Malik, C.J.1. These are two applications under Article 226 of the Constitution praying that this Court might be pleased to issue writs in the nature of certiorari, prohibition & mandamus for different acts alleged to have been done by the respondents. The first of these applications has been filed by the Asiatic Engineering Co. Ltd. (hereinafter called the Company) & its writ application number is 287 of 1950. The second application has been presented to this Court by a foreign Company, the Amin Agencies Ltd., & its number is 288 of 1950. Broadly speaking, the main facts which have given rise to them are the same, but we propose first of all to set out in brief the salient features of application No. 287 & thereafter deal with those distinguishing facts on which application No. 288 of 1950 is founded.2. The Company was incorporated as a private company under the Indian Companies Act in 1941 & has its registered office at 25/26 Waterloo Street, Calcutta, in the State of West Bengal. It ...
The District Board Vs. Ford and Macdonald Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-10-1951
Reported in: AIR1952All418
Chandiramani, J. 1. This is the defendant's second appeal against the appellate decree of Sri B.N. Chaudhri, Civil Judge, Mohanlalganj, Lucknow, dated 2nd November 1945.2. It appears that the plaintiffs manufacture and sell bricks within the jurisdiction of the District Board, Lucknow. The District Board, Lucknow has made certain bye-laws regulating the manufacture of bricks tiles etc. and lime. The regulations provide for the places where such kilns shall be located. Bye-law No. 6 relates to the fees and is in the following terms :'The following fees shall be charged : (a) for burning lime for purpose of trude--annas four per 100 cubic feet of lime sold ; (b) for burning bricks, floor-tiles etc. for trade--annas two per thousand bricks or floor tiles sold; (c) (Not relevent for the present purposes); (d) for burning lime for, private use--Re. 1. (a) for burning bricks, floor tiles, etc. for private use- (i) upto 15,000--Rs. 2. (ii) over 15,000--Rs. 5.' The plaintiffs had before t...
The New Victoria Mills Co. Vs. Jiwan Lal Tribhuvan Das Modi and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-04-1951
Reported in: AIR1951All715
Agarwala, J.1. This is a deft's appeal arising out of a suit for ejectment. The pltf. resp. is the owner of the house in dispute. The applt., the New Victoria Mills Co., was the tenant of the house in dispute. It had taken it for purposes of accommodating its servants. The pltf. obtained permission of the Dist. Mag. to eject the applt. Later on the Dist. Mag. ordered that in a portion of the house one Mr. Verma be accommodated. The pltf. then sued for the ejectment of the deft. from the remaining portion. The deft. contested the suit on various grounds. One of the grounds was that the permission granted by the Dist. Mag. was no longer of any validity after the Mag. had allotted a portion of the house to Mr. Verma. Both the Courts below have repelled the deft's pleas & decreed the suit.2. In this second appeal it has been urged by Mr. S.N. Verma, the learned counsel for the applt., that the permission granted by the Dist. Mag. came to an end as soon as it was found that the house was no...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›