Allahabad Court December 1953 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.
Zahid HussaIn Vs. B. Khairati Lal JaIn and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-23-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All419
Malik, C.J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 75 of the Provincial Insolvency Act (Act No. V of 1920), A creditor Khairati Lal applied on the 30th July, 1931, that Sh. Zahid Husain be adjudicated an insolvent. On the 14th November, 1931, an order of adjudication was passed. The creditors were all paid up in full and on the loth March, 1948, the insolvent was discharged. A sum of Rs. 22,000, however, after payment of all the debts in full, remained in the hands of the Official Receiver and the creditors claimed that interest from the date of adjudication at the rate of 6 per cent. per annum might be allowed to them in accordance with the provisions of Section 48 of the Act. The creditors also claimed that prior to the date of adjudication they should be given interest at the contractual rate.2. The learned Insolvency Judge granted the request that interest at 6 per cent. per annum should be allowed from the date of adjudication. As a matter of fact, he had no option in the matter as th...
The State Vs. Padma Kant Malviya and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-22-1953
Reported in: AIR1955All377
Mootham, J. This is an application filed by the City Magistrate, Allahabad, against the opposite parties Sri Padma Kant Malviya and Sri Ganesh Prasad, for taking such proceedings for contempt of the Court of the City Magistrate, as this Court may deem fit.1. The facts of the case briefly are that Sri Padma Kant Malviya, opposite party No. 1, owns two houses situated in the same compound in Lukerganj, Allahabad. He himself is residing in one of them and had let out the other to Sri Harjiwan Das Nagar, a dealer in fountainpens. The main gate in the boundary wall of the compound is towards the south, and there are two gates towards the west. One of these two gates used to remain closed but the other one, which is nearer the residence of Sri Harjiwan Das Nagar, used mostly to remain open for egress and ingress. Close to this gate is the bungalow of Sri Baij Nath Kapoor, who in August 1949 was the President of the Allahabad City Congress Committee. Sri Nagar was a friend of Sri Kapoor, and ...
Lalta Prasad Vs. Inspector General of Police and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-22-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All438
Mootham, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. In March 1951 the petitioner was the Station Officer, P. S. Neoria in the district of Pilibhit. On 1-6-1951, the dead body of a newly born child was found; the petitioner made an investigation, and on 9th June he instituted proceedings under Section 318, Penal Code against one Srimati Hulaso. On the 6th July he was transferred to police station Kotwali in the city of Pilibhit. On the 13th July he was placed under suspension, and proceedings were taken against him under Section 7, Police Act on the allegation that he had extorted money from Sri Pitam Lodh, the father-in-law of Srimati Hulaso, by wrongfully confining him and two other persons on the 2nd and 3rd June. The enquiry was conducted by the Superintendent of Police of Pilibhit, the second respondent, who recommended the petitioner's dismissal from the police force.In September, 1951, the petitioner was called upon by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, N...
Hafiz Mohammad Yusuf Vs. the Custodian General, Evacuee Properties, Ne ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-22-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All433
M.L. Chaturvedi, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.2. The case of the petitioner as set out in the petition is that one Abdul Hakim was the tenant, along with his brother, of a shop in the Vegetable Market, Bisheshar Ganj, Banaras. Abdul Hakim's brother died about 10 years ago, and in 1948 the petitioner became a partner of Abdul Hakim in the fruit business carried on in the shop. The petitioner says that he contributed a sum of Rs. 5,000/- and that a deed of partnership was executed on the 25th October, 1943. Subsequently Abdul Hakim went to Pakistan, and a notice was issued to him in April 1950 under Section 7 of the Administration of Evacuee Property Act of that year to show cause why he should not be declared an evacuee and his property as evacuee property. No objection was filed by Abdul Hakim, and the movable property in the shop was in due course declared to be evacuee property. Subsequently however, Abdul Hakim returned to India, and, on an objection...
Mst. Allah Bandi and anr. Vs. Govt. of Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-21-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All456
Malik, C.J. 1. This is an application on behalf of two young women, Allah Bandi, aged 20 years, and Khatopn, aged 16 years, under Article 226 of the Constitution that they were being illegally deported to Pakistan. 2. The facts of the case now more or less admitted by counsel and established from the affidavits are that Allah Bandi was the daughter of one Abdul Latif, resident of village Gonchi in the district of Gurgaon, and Khatoon was the daughter of Shan Mohammad, brother of Abdul Latif, of the same village. These two girls were married, while minors, to two persons of Usmanpur, district Bulandshahr. Allah Bandi was married to Abdul Sattar and Khatoon was married to Abdul Jabbar. In the year 1947 Abdul Latif and Shafi Mohammad left for Pakistan and they have settled there. At that time Allah Bandi and Khatoon were both minors, being aged 16 years and 12 years respectively. When their parents left for Pakistan they were with their parents and left with them. They were, however anxio...
Mohanlal Vs. Kanwar Sen
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-18-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All480
Malik, C.J. 1. These two special appeals are connected and can be disposeu of by one judgment. Letters Patent Appeal No. 4 of 1952 is against the decree in Second Appeal No. 855 of 1946 and Letters Patent Appeal No. 3 of 1952 is against an order in Execution Second Appeal No. 231 of 1950. 2. The facts are not complicated but some difficulty has been created by reason of a recent enactment. The defendant had taken a house on rent under a registered lease dated 27-4-1938, for a period of one year. On the expiry of the year the defendant continued to remain in possession, The plaintiff alleged in the plaint that after the expiry of the year the tenancy became a month to month tenancy according to the Hindi calendar and the defendant was liable to pay to the plaintiff rent at the rate of Rs. 55/- per month. These averments were admitted by the defendant in the written statement. The fact being admitted in the pleadings, it is not possible for learned counsel now to urge that the tenancy wa...
T.B. Mukerji Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-18-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All501
Desai, J. 1. The following question has been referred to us by our brother Chaturvedi for our opinion:'Are the different clauses of Section 239, Cr. P. C.mutually exclusive or can recourse be had to twoor more of them for the purposes of jointly tryingmore than one person?'The question arose before our learned brother when he was hearing an appeal filed by Mukerji and Chotey Lal against their convictions under Sections 120B, 420 and 477A, I. P. C.2. The case against the appellants is as follows: Chotey Lal is a partner of a firm carrying on business in Hardoi. Mukerji is a railway employee in charge of a railway grain shop at Allahabad. There was a contract between the railway and Chotey Lal for the supply of grains to the railway grain shop. According to the contract, the grains had to be booked at Hardoi for Allahabad by 25-1-1947. The firm, however, booked the grains after 25-1-47. Under the contract it was liable to pay a penalty to the railway for the delay in booking them. Chotey...
Mohan Lal and ors. Vs. Gokaran Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-15-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All716
Malik, C.J. 1. This is a Special Appeal against the decision of a learned single Judge. The facts of the case are that Bhola Singh and his son Hakim Singh had mortgaged certain properties to Mohan Lal and others in the year 1926. On 1-2-1932, Bhola Singh sold his half share in one of the villages to Subedar Singh. A suit, No. 35 of 1932, was filed by Mohan Lal and others against the mortgagors but Subedar Singh was not impleaded. The preliminary decree was passed on 21-4-1932, and the final decree on 4-3-1933. In the year 1936 Bhola Singh and Hakim Singh applied under the Encumbered Estates Act. Mohan Lal and others claimed that they were creditors and they proved their debt. On 11-3-1939 a decree under Section 14 of the Encumbered Estates Act was passed in their favour against the landlord applicants. In the year 1940 Subedar Singh sold the 8 Biswansi share purchased by him in 1932 to Gokaran Singh. This share had been included, by Bhola Singh and Hakim Singh in the list of properties...
Chhatkun and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-15-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All721
ORDERMukerji, J. 1. This is a revision by four persons who have been convicted under Section 323, I. P. C. by a Special Magistrate of Faizabad and have been sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- each, or in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months each. Out of the fines, if realized, a sum. of Rs. 150/- was ordered to be paid to the complainant as compensation under the provisions of Section 545, Criminal P. C. for the loss which he had suffered.2. The complaint was originally filed in the court of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, who transferred the case to the file of a Special Magistrate for disposal. The Special Magistrate apparently discovered that the case was triable by the Panchayati Adalat and he, therefore, sent the case to the District Panchayat Officer so that he may allocate the case to the file of the proper Panchayati Adalat for disposal. After the case had gone on to the file of the Panchayati Adalat, the complainant moved the Sub-Divisional Magistrate for...
Nata Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-14-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All600
ORDERHarish Chandra, J. 1. The question that arises in this case is whether the case has or has not been properly tried by a Magistrate. It is said that it should have been tried by the Panchayati Adalat inasmuch, as the value of the property which is said to have been the subject-matter of the alleged theft was below Rs. 50. It appears that the question was raised before the Magistrate. But he foundthat the applicant had been previously convicted under Sections 148, 332 and 326, Penal Code which offences are punishable with imprisonment up to a maximum period of three years or more. He thought that in view of Section 59(a), U. P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 (No. 26 of 1947), the Panchayati Adalat had no jurisdiction to try the offence. Section 59(a) runs as follows: '59. No Panchayati Adalat shall take cognizance of any offence in which the accused. (a) has been previously convicted of an offence with imprisonment of either description for a term of three years or more.' 2. The contentio...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »