Allahabad Court April 1952 Judgments
Lakhan Singh Vs. Balbir Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-30-1952
Reported in: AIR1953All342
Agarwala, J. 1. This is an application praying that the opposite parties be committed for contempt of Court and be dealt with according to law. The opposite parties are two persons, Chau-dhari Balbir Singh and Sri Balswarup Gupta. Chaudhari Balbir Singh is the Managing Editor, publisher and printer of an Urdu Weekly known as 'Hindustan Weekly, Meerut' and opposite party 2, Balswarup Gupta is alleged to be the Editor in charge of the paper. The applicant is a thekedar of a country liquor shop at Muzaffar-nager. He acquired the theka at a public auction held on 22-3-1951, for a period of one year. He was the thekedar of country liquor in the previous year also. On 6-2-1951, the Tahsildar seized some bottles containing liquor on suspicion that the liquor was diluted. As dilution of liquor was in contravention of the terms of the licence, a case under Section 64, Excise Act, was started on 6-4-1951against the applicant after permission had been obtained for the same from the District Magis...
Tag this Judgment!U.P. Union Bank Ltd. (In Liq.) and Ali Ahmad Jafri Vs. Akhtar HussaIn ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-30-1952
Reported in: AIR1952All848; [1952]22CompCas318(All)
Malik, C.J.1. The U. P. Union Bank Ltd. having its Head Office at Utraula was compul-sorily wound up under the Indian Companies Act by an order of this Court dated 16-12-1949. The application for winding up had been filed on 13-9-1949.2. One Ali Ahmad Jaffri had deposited a sum of Rs. 10,000 as a fixed deposit in the Delhi Branch of the Bank. The fixed deposit matured on 1-3-1948. On maturity, however, Ali Ahmad Jaffri did not get the amount paid to him and, after several attempts for its realization had failed, he came to the Head Office at Utraula and approached Akhtar Husain Eizvi who was the General Manager of the Bank and his brother Mehdi Hasan who was the Chief Secretary. The General Manager and the Chief Secretary', it is said, assured Ali Ahmad Jaffri that payment would be made, and ultimately on 11-7-1949 they issued thirteen demand drafts on the Allahabad Branch of the Bank. When Ali Ahmad Jaffri presented these drafts at the Allahabad Branch the Branch was not able to pay t...
Tag this Judgment!Behari and ors. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-29-1952
Reported in: AIR1953All203
Agarwala, J. 1. Behari, Kaddey and Tota, all residents of Aghapur, police station Milakpur, district Rampur, have appealed against their conviction under Section 302, IPC and sentence of death. There is also before us a reference for the confirmation of the sentence of death. 2. The prosecution case against the appellants was that Tota appellant, aged 20 years, a gardener, was on visiting terms with the deceased Khargi,a barber. For some time past Tota started to associate with Behari and Kaddey, appellants, and severed his connection with Khargi deceased. This was not liked by Khargi and he asked Tota to pay visits to him. Upon this there was an exchange of abuse between the deceased and the appellants and the relations between the parties became strained. On 22-8-1950 a little after sunrise the three appellants went to the choupal of the deceased armed with lathis and started belabouring the deceased. A river flows below the choupal of the deceased. After receiving injuries the decea...
Tag this Judgment!Mohammad Matteen Qidwai Vs. the Governor-general in Council
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-28-1952
Reported in: AIR1953All17
Sapru, J. 1. Those are two cross-appeals and arise out of the same judgment. Second Appeal no. 751 of 1949 was filed by the Governor-General of India in Council (now Union of India) through the Oudh and Tirhut Railway. Second Appeal no. 2029 was filed by the plaintiff, Mohammad Matin Qidwai. It is proposed to dispose of the two appeals by a common judgment. 2. The suit out of which these appeals arise was brought by the plaintiff for a declaration that the order of his removal from service dated 20-12-1944 was void, illegal and ineffective and he is, therefore, entitled to he regarded as continuing in his post. Also included in the reliefs claimed, was a prayer for a sum of us. 1,024-12-0 as arrears of pay and allowance from the date of his removal till the date of the suit. The defendant contested the suit on the grounds that the plaintiff was never appointed by the General Manager, Oudh and Tirhut Railway, that the Chief Engineer was authorised to remove the plaintiff, that the order...
Tag this Judgment!D.P. Halwasiya Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-26-1952
Reported in: AIR1953All45
ORDERMisra, J. 1. This is an application under Section 561-A, Criminal P. C., for quashing certain proceedings pending in the Court of the City Magistrate, Lucknow so far as they relate to the applicant, D. P. Halwasiya, 2. The case arose on the complaint made by the senior inspector of the Bent Control and Eviction Department under Section 8, U. P. (Temporary) Control of Rent and Eviction (Amendment) Act, 1947, for contravention of Sections 7 and 9 of that enactment. Section 8 says that : 'Any person who contravenes any of the provisions of this Act or any order made in pursuance thereof shall be punishable on conviction with simple imprisonment for a terra which may extend to six months or with fine up to Rs. 1000 or with both.' Section 7 lays down that : 'The District Magistrate may, by general or special order, require the landlord to give intimation that any accommodation of which he is the landlord is or has fallen vacant and to let or not to let such accommodation to any person....
Tag this Judgment!Raja Ram Kumar Bhargawa Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-26-1952
Reported in: AIR1953All324
ORDERP.L. Bhargava, J.1. The applicant, Raja Ram Kumar Bhargava is the 'occupier' of a factory known as the Upper India Couper Paper Mills Company Limited, Lucknow. He was prosecuted for an offence, punishable under Section 92, Factories Act (63 of 1948) for contravention of the provisions of Section 54 of the same Act. Section 54, Factories Act is in these terms :'Subject to the provisions of Section 51, no adult worker shall be required or allowed to work in a factory for more than nine hours on any day.'2. The case for the prosecution was that, on 12-4-1950, an Inspector of Factories discovered that, on 18-2-1950, five persons were 'allowed' to work in the factory, of which the applicant is the occupier, for more than nine hours.3. Learned counsel for the applicant opened his arguments with reference to a letter from the Chief Inspector of Factories, Uttar Pradesh, addressed to the District Magistrate of Lucknow, which is not on the record of the case before me but which has been fi...
Tag this Judgment!Swami Dayal Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-26-1952
Reported in: AIR1953All353
ORDERBeg, J.1. The applicant Swami Dayal was employed as a, gaternan at a Eailway level crossing at Gunti No. 251/C near Motiganj Railway Station. During the night between 15 and 16--1949, a police party headed by the Circle Inspector Shri Sukhbir Singh went in search of some dacoits to village Nibhwa. They had an encounter with the dacoits who fled away and were chased. In the early hours of the morning the police party happened to pass by the outpost where the accused Swami Dayal was posted. The Circle Inspector made a search of the room occupied by the accused and recovered a country made pistol (EX. II) from there in the presence of the search witnesses. Thereupon the applicant Swami Dayal was prosecuted under Section 19 (f), Arms Act.2. The accused admitted that the room from which the pistol was alleged to have been re-covered belonged to him. According to his state, ment, nothing incriminating was recovered from the room and the case was launched against him as a result of his e...
Tag this Judgment!The Deputy Commr. Vs. Raja Ram
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-25-1952
Reported in: AIR1952All805
1. Rai Krishnapal Singh was a taluqdar of taluqa Birapur in the district of Partabgarh. On 21-10-1939, the estate was taken over by the Court of Wards under the U. P.Court of Wards Act (No. IV [4] of 1912). Section 37 of the Act provides that :'A ward shall not be competent. (a) to transfer or create any charge on, or interest in, any part of his property which is under the superintendence of the Court of Wards. . . .' Rai Krishnapal Singh executed three documents dated 1st December 1939, Ext. A3, 23rd December 1939 Ext. A2, and 16th January 1941, Ext. A1 under which he granted certain plots of land to the defendant for planting trees and to remain in possession thereof generation after generation and utilise the fruits and the wood of the trees. The third document was registered, the first two were unregistered.2. The Court of Wards filed the suit out of which this appeal has arisen for possession of the plots given to the defendant by removing the trees planted by the defendant. It c...
Tag this Judgment!Radha Kishen Vs. Madho Krishna and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-25-1952
Reported in: AIR1952All856
Bind Basni Prasad, J.1. These two appeals arise from the same order passed by the learned First Civil Judge of Meerut on 5th February 1948. The parties to the dispute are step brothers. There was a family dispute between them and they referred it for arbitration on 5th November 1945. The award was made by the arbitrator on 18th March 1947. On 23rd August 1947 Madho Kishan who was one of the parties to the agreement of reference made an application purporting to be under Section 17 read with Section 28, Arbitration Act, 1940, praying that a judgment might be pronounced according to the award and a decree framed in accordance with it.His step brother, Radha Kishan, raised several objections to this petition and himself made an application under Section 30, Arbitration Act praying that the award might be set aside. The learned Civil Judge repelled Radha Kishan's objections and pronounced a judgment in accordance with the award granting Madho Kishan a decree for Rs. 8,018-8-0. Radha Kishan...
Tag this Judgment!Ganga Prasad Vs. Mt. Saeedan and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-24-1952
Reported in: AIR1952All801
Agarwala, J. 1. This is an execution appeal against a decree of the lower Court rejecting an application for execution. One Sm. Ram Piari obtained a decree against the predecessor-in-interest of the respondents in 1934. This decree was made final in 1937. Sm. Ram Piari applied for execution in 1941. During the pendency of the execution proceedings she died on 14-2 1943. The execution application was then dismissed for default. The appellant; Ganga Prasad applied for the execution of the decree and for substitution of his name in place of the decree-holder on the ground that he was the adopted son of Sm. Ram Piari's son Madan Lal. He could not prove his adoption to the satisfaction of the execution Court which rejected the application upon the finding that the appellant was not the adopted son of Madan Lal and therefore not an heir of Sm. Ram Piari. The appellant then applied for a succession certificate in respect of the decretal amount. The succession certificate was granted to him. O...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »