Allahabad Court June 1952 Judgments
Hindustan Biologicals Ltd. Vs. Jagat Narain
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-26-1952
Reported in: AIR1953All715; [1953]23CompCas58(All)
ORDERBeg, J. 1. This is a reference by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lucknow, recommending that the order of Sri C. P. Srivastava, City Magistrate, Lucknow, refusing to entertain the complaint filed by the applicant under Section 282A, Indian Companies Act should be set aside.2. On 14-3-1950 the complainant applicant, The Hindustan Biologicals Limited through Amaresh-war Ghosh filed a complaint against the opposite party Sri Jagat Narain Rohatgi purporting to be under Section 282A, Indian Companies Act. The allegations in the complaint inter alia are that from September, 1946 to 12-4-1949 the accused opposite party was the managing agent and managing director of the complainant company, that in such capacity the accused wrongfully obtained possession of properties of the company detailed in the complaint, that by dishonest and fraudulent representation (including express assurances that the accused would return all properties held by him on behalf of the company) the accused i...
Tag this Judgment!Dalla Singh and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-18-1952
Reported in: AIR1952All941
ORDERBeg, J.1. This is a revision on behalf of three applicants, namely Dalla Singh, Ujagar Singh and Purai Singh who have been convicted under Sections 147 and 325, Penal Code, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge of Hardoi. Under the former section each of them has been sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 25 or in default to undergo 2 months' R. I. Under the latter section each of them has been sentenced to imprisonment till the rising of the Court and to pay a fine of Rs. 40 or in default to undergo 3 months' R. I.2. The prosecution case was that one Amar Nath, a Brahman of village Asa, was assaulted on 1-6-1950, at about 11 A. M. in village Asa by the three persons mentioned above. Two other persons named Hori and Pancham are also alleged to have arrived on the scene and incited the three applicants mentioned above to beat Amar Nath. Pancham and Hori were also convicted by the trial Court but they were acquitted in appeal by the lower Court.3. The learned counsel for the applicants ...
Tag this Judgment!Tajjamul Vs. Mohd. Ismail
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-12-1952
Reported in: AIR1952All925
Beg, J.1. This is an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India by one Tajammul Khan, who has heen convicted under Section 506, Penal Code by the Panchayati Adalat of Rasulpur Tikunia Mau in a case Muhammad Ismail v. Tajammul Khan and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 10.2. A revision was filed against the said order before the Sub-Divisional Officer of Mohanlalganj and was dismissed by him. Aggrieved by the said order, the applicant has filed this application.3. The main point urged by the learned counsel for the applicant is that a bench of five punches was formed to try this case but only four out of the five punches have signed the judgment. Section 49 (1), U. P. Panchayat Raj Act provides that 'the Sarpanch shall, for the trial of every case, suit or proceeding, form a bench of five punches from the panel; provided that at least one of the punches in the Bench shall be a person who is able to record evidence and proceedings.In accordance with the aforesaid provision a...
Tag this Judgment!Pyare and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-09-1952
Reported in: AIR1953All327
Beg, J. 1. This is an appeal by Pyare, Basantoo, Nanhoo, Tika, Jabba and Kundan who have been convicted and sentenced under various sections of the Penal Code. Under Section 304, Penal Code, all of them except Nanhoo have been sentenced to four years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of RS. 30 each, or in default one month's farther rigorous imprisonment. Under that section Nanhoo has been sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 30 or in default one month's further rigorous imprisonment. Under Section 325 and 323, Penal Code, all the appellants were sentenced to three months' and and six months' rigorous imprisonment each respectively. Under Section 147, Penal Code, all the appellants except Kundan were sentenced to three month's rigorous imprisonment. Kundan was convicted under Section 148, Penal Code, and sentenced to six months' rigorous imprisonment. All the sentences passed on each of the accused were to run concurrently. Two other persons, Mulla and Mangoo...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Dass Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jun-05-1952
Reported in: AIR1952All926
ORDER1. This is an application by one Ram Dass purporting to be under Section 561A, Criminal P. C. On 1-4-1952, he filed a revision in this Court against his conviction under Section 325, Penal Code, and sentence of one month's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200. At the time of filing this revision he had not surrendered. His learned counsel stated that the applicant was suffering from tuberculosis and was bedridden. He undertook to file a certificate of the Civil Surgeon of the place where the applicant was at that time and for this he was granted a week's time. The case then came up on 9-4-1952 before Dayal J. It was directed that it should be listed on Monday following. The next date was 14-4-1952 when the case came up before P. L. Bhargava J., but it was left out. It was then listed for hearing on 21-4-1952 but was passed over on account of the illness slip of Sri D. C. Asthana. For the same reason it was passed over on 22nd April when it came up before Dayal J. On 23-4-19...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›