Allahabad Court April 1953 Judgments
Shiv Dayal Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-30-1953
Reported in: AIR1953All664
Mootham, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.2. On 2-6-1951 the petitioner, who was a member of the Municipal Board of Lalitpur, was elected chairman of the Board in the casual vacancy caused by the removal of the former chairman, Sri B. N. Kiledar. On 14-7-1951, the election of the petitioner was notified in the official Gazette. On 5-6-1952, written notice of an intention to make a motion of non-confidence in the petitioner as chairman of the Board was presented to Sri C. M. L. Bhatnagar who on that date was officiating as District Magistrate and Collector, and on 8th July the non-confidence resolution was passed by the Board. By a notification published in the Official Gazette on 6-9-1952, the petitioner was removed from office. The petitioner now comes to this Court and seeks relief on the ground that his removal from office was in contravention of the provisions of the U. P. Municipalities Act, 1916, as amended by the U. P. Municipalities (Supplementary a...
Tag this Judgment!Bankey Lal Vs. Babu and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-29-1953
Reported in: AIR1953All747
Randhir Singh, J.1. These two applications in revision have been heard together as they arise out of execution proceedings in respect of the same decree. Application No. 5 of 1949, came up for hearing before a learned Judge of this Court who found that the question involved was of some importance and doubted the soundness of the decision of a Division Bench in -- 'Durga Baksh Singh v. Umanath Baksh Singh AIR 1944 Oudh 90 (A). He, therefore, directed that the application may be placed before a Full Bench for hearing. The other application for revision, No. 180 of 1951, was also subsequently ordered to be put up along with revision application No. 5 of 1949.2. One Mulhay obtained a decree under Section 183 of the U. P. Tenancy Act against Mathura and others on 11-9-1946. As Mathura was in doubt as to whether an appeal lay to the Commissioner or to the District Judge he instituted two appeals -- one in the Court of the Commissioner and another in the Court of the District Judge.3. Both th...
Tag this Judgment!Sm. Dulari Vs. Addl. Custodian, Evacuee Property and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-28-1953
Reported in: AIR1953All718
Mukerji, J. 1. This is an application tinder Article 226 of the Constitution by Shrimati Dulari praying that this Court may issue a writ of prohibition or in the alternative appropriate directions, or orders under Article 226 of the Constitution of India prohibiting opposite party 1, i.e., the Additional Custodian Evacuee Property, Lucknow from reviewing his 'Judgment' dated 30-1-1951, passed in Appeal No. 276 of 1950. There is a further prayer that opposite party 2, namely, the Custodian Evacuee Property at Lucknow be prohibited from issuing any notification under Section 7 of Act 31 of 1050 in respect of a certain house, details of which are given in the petibion, and treating it as 'Evacuee Property'.2. The facts, briefly stated, which gave rise to this petition, were that op1 n 16-10-1947, the appli-qant purchased the property in dispute, which is situate at Ghaziabad, from one Shubratan, who made a sale of the property to the applicant for a sum of Rs. 2,500/- on her behalf and on...
Tag this Judgment!Tunda and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-27-1953
Reported in: AIR1953All621
ORDERDesai, J.1. This is an application by Tunda etc. challenging their conviction under Section 447, I. P. C. by a Magistrate, 1st class. They plead that the learned Magistrate had no jurisdiction to try the case because the offence of Section 447, I, P. C. is exclusively triable by a Panchayati Adalat. The land upon which the applicants have been found guilty of trespassing is situated in village Dharampur which formed part of the territory of Bharatpur State. It was transferred to Uttar Pradesh and included in Mathura District by a notification dated 25-1-50. On 12-10-1950 the applicants are said to have committed the offence. On 23-6-1951, they were found guilty and convicted by the learned Magistrate. After that on 30-7-1051, the village Dharampur was included in a certain Panchayati Adalat. Till then there was no Panchayati Adalat having jurisdiction over it. Panchayati Adalats had been formed in Mathura district previously, but they were formed for villages which were included i...
Tag this Judgment!Babu Ram Sharma Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-27-1953
Reported in: AIR1953All641
Mootham, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution in which the petitioner prays, first for the issue of a writ of certiorari to quash two orders of the Regional Transport Authority, Meerut, dated respectively the 21st July and the 3rd November, 1951, and an order of the State Transport Tribunal dated 6-8-1952, and secondly, for a writ of mandamus to issue to the State Transport Authority, Lucknow, to compel it to accept the replacement of one motor vehicle by another.2. The petitioner is engaged in the business of plying stage carriages and he has been doing so since the year 1930. The facts upon which the petitioner relies are set out in the affidavit which accompanies his petition; and it is of importance to observe that no counter-affidavit has been filed. He states that in September, 1949, the Provincial Transport Authority was prepared to sanction the issue to him of a temporary permit, but as the petitioner had sold the vehicle which previously he had owned a...
Tag this Judgment!Shabd Saran Vs. Haji Mohd. Zulfiquarulla
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-25-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All496
ORDERBrij Mohan Lal, J.1. These two civil revisions have been filed by the same applicant. He is a tenant of anaccommodation situate in 22, Queens Road, Allahabad. He has been in arrears of rent for overthree months.The opposite party took proceedings against him under Section 7B of the Temporary Control of Rent and Eviction Act, 1947 (Act No. 3 of 1947). This section permits a landlord to serve a notice of ejectment through the Munsif s Court on a tenant who has not paid rent for more than three months. The Munsif, while serving the notice, calls upon the tenant to pay up the arrears within fifteen days or to show cause within the said period whyan order directing him to be evicted from the accommodation be not passed against him.Sub-section (7) of this section provides that it is open to the tenant to file an objection (other than an objection in respect of costs) and in theevent of such an objection being riled the landlord can, on payment of court-fee, convert the proceedings into ...
Tag this Judgment!U.P. Union Bank Ltd. Vs. Dina Nath Raja Ram
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-24-1953
Reported in: AIR1953All637; [1953]23CompCas433(All)
Brij Mohan Lall, J.1. This is a suit by the Official Liquidators of the U.P. Union Bank Limited to recover a sum of Rs. 2,677-5-8 from Messrs. Dinanath Raja Ram, a firm of cloth merchants, at Budaun. The bank being in liquidation, the suit has been instituted, by virtue of the provisions of Section 453 of the Banking Companies (Amendment) Act (20 of 1950), in this Court.2. The defendant firm had a current account with the bank when it was a going concern. The defendant had overdrawn that account. The suit has been instituted to recover the amount of the overdrafts together with interest due to the bank from the defendant firm.3. Two pleas have been put forward in defence. In the first place, it is contended that no interest is chargeable on the overdrafts. Secondly, it is contended that the bank had wrongly refused payment of a cheque for Rs. 1,500/- to the defendant firm and the amount of that cheque should be set off against the bank's claim.4. The first plea can be easily disposed o...
Tag this Judgment!Sunni Central Board of Waqf, U.P. Vs. Sirajul Haq Khan and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-22-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All88
Bandhir Singh, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal from the judgment and decree of the Civil Judge of Bahraich and the subject of dispute in this case is an endowment described as waqf Syed Salaar Masood Ghazi.2. The facts of this case are a trifle complicated and the endowment has been the subject of litigation for a long time. In order, therefore, to understand the nature of the controversy between the parties it is necessary to set out in brief a history of the institution, various proceedings, and the prolonged litigation extending almost over three quarters of a century. The origin of the shrine is shrouded in antiquity but a record, more or less authentic, is to be found in the Gazetteer of the Bahraich district, as also in the judgment of the Chief Court in an appeal case.3. Syed Salaar Masood Ghazi was said to be a nephew of Mohammad Ghazi and while on a visit to Bahraich met his death at the hands of a local chieftain. His remains were buried in village Singha Parasi by his devo...
Tag this Judgment!B. Gajadhar Singh Vs. State Through Sadhe
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-21-1953
Reported in: AIR1953All684
ORDERDesai, J. 1. This is an application in revision against an order of the Sessions Judge of Banaras rejecting the applicant's application for being restored to possession of property attached in proceedings under Section 145, Cr. P. C.2. The applicant started proceedings under 3. 145, Cr. P. C. against the opposite party some time in February, 1945, in respect of the property in dispute. That property was attached during the pendency of those proceedings.3. The Magistrate holding the proceedings passed an order under Section 145(6), Cr. P. C. on 18-5-1945 holding that the applicant was in possession of the property on the date on which the preliminary order under Section 145(1) had been passed, (its date is not known) and declaring him to be entitled to remain in possession until evicted therefrom in due course of law. The exact order passed by the Magistrate is not before me, but it should have been in the form mentioned by me. The Magistrate also ordered that the property should b...
Tag this Judgment!Basdeo Vs. John and Co. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-20-1953
Reported in: AIR1953All717
Agarwala, J.1. This is an appeal arising out of execution proceedings. The facts may be briefly stated as follows:2. In a suit filed in the Court of the Civil Judge, Agra by one Loonkaran Sethiya against I. E. John and others for recovery of money and for a declaration of a charge over the movable properties of the defendants who own a group of mills at Agra which are called the Johns Mills, an order for attachment before judgment was made and receivers were also appointed for running the mills. There was an appeal to this Court against that order. This Court modified the order appointing receivers and directed that the receivers shall act for the protection of the interests of Loonkaran Sethiya and shall be in possession of the moneys that may be received from certain sources mentioned in the order. The receivers in this manner came to be in possession of a certain sum of money which they deposited in the Imperial Bank at Agra. While the suit of Loonkaran Sethiya was pending in the Ci...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »