Allahabad Court July 1953 Judgments
Abdul Ghafoor and ors. Vs. Abdus Salam and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-31-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All65
Malik, C.J. 1. Learned counsel had raised a short point and that is whether the plaintiffs who had. not filed an objection under Section 11, U. P. Encumbered Estates Act, could ignore the proceedings before the learned Special Judge and come to the civil court for a declaration that the property which had been included by the landlord in his written statement under Section 8 belonged to the plaintiffs. The learned single Judge before whom the case came up referred it to a larger Bench but in view of the Pull Bench decision in -- 'Krishnapal Singh v. Mst. Babban', AIR 1952 All 227 (A), the learned Judge changed the order and said that instead of a Full Bench the case may be listed before a Division Bench. Today, however, the learned counsel has raised a slightly different point. He has urged that he had made a mistake in urging before the learned single Judge that the plaintiffs had filed no objection under Section 11 and he referred us to the replication filed by the plaintiffs to show...
Tag this Judgment!Gaya Prasad and ors. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-31-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All59
Randhir Singh, J. 1. This is an appeal on behalf of Gaya Prasad, Ram Sundar, Ram Ratan and Sheo Shankar, who have been convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge of Partabgarh and have been sentenced to seven years rigorous imprisonment under Section 307 and to one year's rigorous imprisonment under Section 323, Penal Code. 2. The case for the prosecution was that there was long standing enmity between the appellants on one side and Rameshwar and his son Bindeshwari on the other side so much so that the appellants and Rameshwar had ceased to be on speaking terms. Ultimately a complaint was filed by Ram Ratan and Gaya Prasad against Rameshwar in the Court of a Magistrate in Partapgarh. 11-4-1951 was fixed for the hearing of this case at Partabgarh. The parties are residents of a place about 22 miles away from Partabgarh, and there was a lorry service which touched Derwar bazar and persons of the village, to which the parties belonged, used to catch the lorry plying between Derwa bazar a...
Tag this Judgment!Gunda and anr. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-31-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All127
Beg, J. 1. These are two appeals by three appellants. Criminal Appeal No. 299 of 1951 has been need on behalf of Gunda alias Basudeo and Buddha through counsel. Criminal Appeal No. 984 of 1952 has been preferred by Ram Autar from jail. All the three appellants mentioned above have been convicted under Section 395, Penal Code, & sentenced to four years' rigorous imprisonment each. Along with them four other persons were sent up for trial by the Committing Magistrate. Their names are Jagjit, Ram Rup, Manni and. Srimati Mahrania. Jagjit, Ram Rup and Manni were charged with the abovementioned appellants under Section 393. Srimati Mahrania was charged under Section 412, Penal Code. The trial court acquitted Ram. Rup, Manni and Srimati Mahrania. The remaining lour accused, namely, Gunda alias Basudeo, Buddha, Ram Autar and Jagjit were convicted by the trial court and sentenced to four years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 395, Jagjit does not appear to have filed any appeal and I am not...
Tag this Judgment!Sheo Dulare Lal Sah Vs. Anant Ram and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-31-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All475
Malik, C.J. 1. The facts of this case are given in the judgment of the lower appellate Court but it may be convenient to state them briefly here. Lala Saheb Dayal was the owner of the house in suit. He got indebted and there was a decree against him in favour of one Devendra Nath for about Rs. 1,200/-. On 15-8-1932, Sahib Dayal executed a sale-deed of the house in favour of Sri Krishna Das for Rs. 1,260/-. Sahib Dayal was related to Sri Krishna Das and was also working as his servant. This document was presented for registration and was registered on 17-8-1932. On the date of the registration of the document Sahib Dayal executed a 'sarkhat' in favour of Sri Krishna Das to the effect that he would continue to remain in possession of the house for one year and pay him rent at the rate of Rs. 13/- per mensem. Sri Krishna Das, after he purchased the property, paid off Davendra Nath and satisfied the decree. Sahib Dayal and his two sons, who are the defendants-respondents, continued to live...
Tag this Judgment!Brij NaraIn Vs. Ram Dayal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-30-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All8
ORDERR. Singh, J.1. This is an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India invoking the powers of this Court for quashing the conviction of the applicant by an Adalati Panchayat,2. A complaint was made by Ram Dayal to the Panchayati Adalat of village Raukarna alleging that one day Ram Dayal had gone to the market to sell his wares when Dulli alias Brij Narain applicant met him. Ram Dayal told him that he was not getting sufficient sugar for sale and Dulli told him that he could get a permit for sugar if he paid him Rs. 50/- for engaging a lawyer to apply for the permit. Ram Dayal paid the money but Dulli did not do anything to get him the permit. He definitely alleged in the application that Dulli was in the habit of cheating people in this manner and that the applicant .was also cheated by him. Thereupon the matter was taken up by the Panchayati Adalat and the accused was summoned. The accused denied having taken any money from Ram Dayal. The Panchayati Adalat, however,...
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Waqar Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-30-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All12
ORDERRandhir Singh, J.1. This is a reference by the SessionsJudge of Lucknow recommending that the conviction of Abdul Waqar under Section 112, Indian Railways Act and the sentence of fine of Rs. 50/- imposed on him be set aside.2. It appears that Abdul Waqar was found travelling in a railway special train meant to convey railway servants holding passes or token, without a proper pass or ticket. He was detected by the special squad and was then produced before a Magistrate. A charge under Section 112, Railways Act was framed against Abdul Waqar and he was convicted as he pleaded guilty to the charge. Abdul Waqar went in revision to the Sessions Judge. In his application for revision he stated that he was a railway servant and had left his token at his house and could not therefore produce it to the railway squad when he was asked to produce a pass or a ticket. He further stated that he had mentioned all these facts to the learned Special Magistrate who did not record his statement. He ...
Tag this Judgment!Maiku Lal and ors. Vs. Munni Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-30-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All43
Malik, C.J. 1. This is an application under Section 115 of the Code. A decree was passed on 5-11-1941 in favour of Lalta Prasad and Manni Lal for Rs. 36,545/5/- with costs and interest. The judgment debtor deposited the whole of the decretal amount on 13-1-1942. After the deposit Manni Lal made an application that half of the decretal amount may be paid over to him. The other decree-holder Lalta Prasad, however, made attempts to get the entire decretal amount attached toy the Income Tax authorities in lieu of the Income tax payable by the firm Messrs. Bhagwandas Manni Lal. After some delay in the enquiry whether income-tax was really due and whether the income was payable by the decree-holders the application for refund of half of the decretal amount came up for hearing. Lalta Prasad then raised no objection that the money did not belong to either Manni Lal or himself but that the whole of the decretal amount belonged to Bhagwan Daswho had advanced the money to the judgment-debtor, Ram...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. S. Chaturvedi Vs. Central Railway Through General Manager, Bombay
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-30-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All122
ORDER1. The applicant was a temporary substitute working in a hospital at Jhansi. There was a case started against him for bribery and he was suspended on 11-8-1949. He was convicted by the Magistrate on 3-2-1951, but was acquitted on appeal by the learned Sessions Judge on 7-4-1952. Even before his conviction by the Magistrate, however, on 2-9-1949, the railway authorities terminated the services of the applicant while he was under suspension.2. The applicant being a temporary servant and not having been appointed either permanently or for a definite period his services could be terminated at any time in accordance with the terms of his appointment, and, if his service was so terminated he cannot claim against his employer that he had a right to continue in service and that his removal from service was, therefore, illegal. There is nothing in the application or in the affidavit to show how the order dated 2-9-1949, terminating the services of the applicant was in contravention of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Prabhu and ors. Vs. Satya Narain
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-29-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All38
ORDERRandhir Singh, J.1. This is a reference by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bahraich, recommending that an order passed by a Magistrate first class under Section 133, Cr. P. C., be set aside.2. It appears that Prabhu and others made an application under Section 133, Cr. P. C., against Sat Narain praying that proceedings against Sat Narain be taken under Section 133, Cr. P. C., as he had obstructed the way which lay through plots Nos. 2154 and 3717 of village Sheikhdaheer, pargana Rakharpur, district Bahraich. Thereupon a conditional order was passed under Section 133, Cr. P. C., and notice was issued to Sat Narain to show cause why he should not be ordered to remove the obstruction. Sat Narain appeared before the Magistrate and alleged that there was no public way on any of the plots in dispute and that Prabhu and others had no right to maintain the application. The learned Magistrate then held an inquiry and made his order absolute in respect of plot No. 2154 but rejected the praye...
Tag this Judgment!Debi Das Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-28-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All9
ORDERB.D. Mukerji, J.1. This revision has had a chequered career in this Court inasmuch as it came up for hearing on several dates. On 12-5-1953, it came up before me and on that date I heard counsel on both sides and came to the conclu-tion that on the facts and circumstances of the case I could not, sitting in revision disturb the decision of the Court below. Sri Darbari appearing on behalf of the applicant prayed that instead of sentencing the applicant to any punishment I should exercise my powers under the U. P. First Offenders Probation Act. On behalf of the State it was argued that before I could exercise my powers under that Act it was the duty of the applicant to satisfy me in regard to certain matters provided for by Section 4 (1) of that Act. Sri Darbari thereupon took time to file an affidavit disclosing the circumstances which would entitle the applicant to have the benefit of the First Offenders Probation Act. Such an affidavit was filed on 5-6-1953, and thereafter the ca...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »