Allahabad Court March 1952 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.
inderchand Hari Ram Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and C.P. and Berar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-04-1952
Reported in: AIR1952All706; [1952]22ITR108(All)
V. Bhargava, J. 1. These two references arise out of the assessment of the same assessee Messrs. Inderchand Hari Ram, Gorakhpur, in respect of two different assessment years, viz., 1940-41 and 1941-42. Since the question, that arose, was common to both the references, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, made one consolidated order of reference and, by it, referred the following question to this Court for opinion:'Whether, in the circumstances of the case, the income derived by the applicant firm both as Managing and Sole Agents of Messrs. Shankar Sugar Mills, Limited, Captainganj, Gorakhpur, was rightly assessed under Section 10 or whether the income is assessable under Section 7 of the Indian Income-tax Act?'2. The facts relating to these references, as given in the statement of the case, are that theassessee is a firm registered under the Indian Partnership Act, having come into existence through a deed of partnership which mentioned that it was being constituted with a vie...
Lila Singh Vs. Chajju Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-04-1952
Reported in: AIR1952All877
Malik, C.J.1. This revision under Section 25, Provincial Small Cause Courts Act (IX [9] of 1887) has been filed by the plaintiff.2. The plaintiff filed a suit in the Court ofSmall Causes at Moradabad to recover Rs. 980-8-0.The allegations in the plaint were that on 23-8-1944,the defendant borrowed from the plaintiff a sumof Rs. 900 in cash and it was agreed between theparties that the amount would be repayable ondemand and would carry interest at Re. 1 percent. per month. That the defendant had paid asum of Rs. 80 only and the claim was for thebalance. The plaintiff alleged that a promissorynote and a receipt were executed but the promissory note was misplaced and it could not, therefore, be filed. The receipt was filed in Court.3. The defendant denied the execution of thepromissory note or the receipt. He further deniedthat he had borrowed any money from theplaintiff.4. At the trial a suggestion was made to theeffect that one Tori Singh might have handedover a blank paper bearing one ...
Panna Lal Vs. East Indian Railway Administration and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-04-1952
Reported in: AIR1952All880
ORDERDesai, J.1. This is an application by a plaintiff whose suit for damages against a railway has been dismissed with costs. The applicant is the consignee. The consignment was received at the destination and goods are still in possession of the railway. The case of the applicant is that he went to take delivery of the goods at the destination but the goods were not delivered to him. The case of the railway is that the applicant never went to take possession of the goods. It is admitted that the railway did not give the notice contemplated by Section 56 to the applicant. The trial Court held that the applicant never went to take possession of the goods, that the goods are still in possession of the railway and that consequently the applicant was not entitled to sue for damages. It observed that the applicant was at liberty to take possession of the goods from the railway after paying the necessary charges.2. There is nothing illegal in the judgment of the lower Court. A notice under ...
Khair Ullah Vs. B. Jai Ram Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-03-1952
Reported in: AIR1953All201
Wali Ullah J. 1. This is an appeal by the judgment-debtor. It arises out of the dismissal of certain objections filed by the appellant.2. It appears that a decree for Rs. 1486/-was passed on 7-10-1936, in favour of Suraj Prasad Singh, father of the respondents, against the appellant, Haji Khairullah. It was passed by the Court of the Additional Munsif. That Court appears to have been abolished soon after, namely, on 3-1-1937. It was, however, again revived after sometime and was in existence at the time when the first application for execution was made on 7-10-1939. That application was made to the Court of the Additional Munsif. Eventually, the application was dismissed for want of prosecution on 18-10-1939.3. The next application for execution was made on 19-2-1943, which was dismissed on 30-3-1943. A third application for execution was made on 5-4-1943. It was dismissed on 25-5-1943. A fourth application for execution was made on 11-5-1946, and it was dismissed on 18-7-1946.4. A fif...
Radha Kishun and ors. Vs. Hari Prasad and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-03-1952
Reported in: AIR1953All575
Mushtaq Ahmad, J. 1. The appeal first mentioned was filed by the landlords-applicants against certain claimants in a case under the Encumbered Estates Act and the appeal next mentioned was filed by another, set of claimants in respect of another property against the same landlords under the said Act in the same proceedings. I propose to deal with and dispose of these appeals seriatim, F. A. No. 479 of 1942:--2. It would be convenient to preface this judgment with two short pedigrees. The landlords' pedigree stands as follows: RAGHUNATH SINGH ____________________|______________________ | | Ram Bahadur Singh Bir Bahadur Singh | | Shamsher Bahadur Radha Kishan ________|____________________ Singh | | | Bijai Bahadur Balram Bahadur Sri Ram Singh The claimants' pedigree stands as follows : Raghubar _______________|_____________________ | | Salik Lalit _______|____________ | | | Puran=Mt. Balraji Sarl Hari Prasad3. The landlords-appellants are either the sons or grandsons of Bir Bahadur in t...
Babu Vs. Dewan Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-03-1952
Reported in: AIR1952All749
ORDERDesai, J.1. This is an application by a defendant in revision against an order of the courts below dismissing his application for the setting aside of an 'ex parte' decree.2. The opposite party filed a suit against the applicant. On 15-4-1950, which was the date for the filing of the written statement by the applicant, the applicant was absent and the court ordered that the suit would proceed 'ex parte' against him' and fixed 3-5-1950 for 'ex parte' evidence. When the suit was called out for hearing on 3-5-1950, neither the opposite party nor the applicant was present and the court dismissed the suit in the absence of the parties.Later, at the request of the opposite party, the suit was restored but without any notice having been given to the applicant. After restoring the suit, the court again proceeded 'ex parte' against the applicant, gave him no notice of the next date fixed for recording 'ex parte' evidence and on 12-7-1950 passed an 'ex parte' decree against him. The applica...
Badri Prasad Tripathi Vs. District Magistrate and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-03-1952
Reported in: AIR1952All832
Agarwala, J. 1. Both these applications arise out of allotment orders passed by the Bent Control and Eviction Officer, Allahabad, in respect of a portion of house No. 83, K. P. Kacker Road, Allahabad. The facts briefly are as follows :2. House No. 83, K. P. Kacker Road, Allahabad, is a big house. A portion of it was in the occupation of one Sri Sri Nath Pathak, advocate. It is said that Sri Sri Nath Pathak was building another house of his own, intended to shift in it and to vacate the portion in dispute occupied by him. Before, however, he had vacated the house, applications were made to the Rent Control and Eviction Officer for its being allotted to the respective applicants. It appears that there were three applicants in the field. One was Badri Prasad Tripathi, the applicant in case No. 7815 of 1951. The second was one Sri Banwari Lal and there was a third applicant also. The Rent Control and Eviction Officer passed an order on 12-3-51 allotting the portion occupied by Sri Sri Nath...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›