Allahabad Court July 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.
inder Chand Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-23-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All55
ORDERRandhir Singh, J.1. This is a reference by the Sessions Judge of Lucknow recommending that the conviction of Index Chand under Section 7, Essential Supplies Act for infringement of Clause 25 and 26, U. P. Foodgrains Rationing Order, 1949. and the sentence of fine of Rs. 75/- be set aside.2. It appears that Inder Chand was the Manager of Consumers Co-operative Society shop in Mansoornagar. This Co-operative society held a licence as an authorized retail dealer and used to sell rations to card holders. On 4-12-1951, an Inspector of the Rationing Department inspected the shop and found certain irregularities. He found that rations had been given to some persons and not entered on the cards and also that certain rations entered on the cards were not given to the card holders. He also found that the accounts had not been kept correctly. Inder Chand and Lalta Prasad. were prosecuted for breach of certain provision of the U. P. Foodgrains Rationing Order, 1949, under Ss. 7 and 8 Essentia...
Madanlal Haweliwala and anr. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-22-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All27
ORDERR. Singh, J. 1. This is a reference by the Additional Sessions Judge of Bahraich recommending that the order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Nanpara, convicting and sentencing Madan Lal Haweliwala & another to pay a fine of Rs. 50/-under Section 92 of the Factories Act of 1948 be set aside.2. The facts of this case are simple. Sri Madan Lal Haweliwala is the proprietor and occupier of Janki Rice Mills Rupaidiha and Sarju Prasad is his son and manager of the mill. An inspector of Factories inspected the mill on 10-7-1950 & found that a certain register required to be maintained under the Factories Rules could not be produced. This involved a breach of Rule 130(b) of the Factories Rules of 1935. The Chief Inspector of factories sent a complaint bearing date 7-10-1950 against the owner and manager of the factory to the City Magistrate of Bahraich. This complaint seems to have reached the City Magistrate on 10-10-1950, and the City Magistrate passed an order for the first time on 12...
Parmatma and ors. Vs. State and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-22-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All24
ORDERRandhir Singh, J.1. This is a reference by the Sessions Judge of Gonda recommending that an order passed under Section 145, Criminal P. C., by a Magistrate, first class, Gonda, ordering delivery of possession to Debi Prasad and Mata Prasad who were applicants in a case under S, 145, Criminal P. C. be set aside.2. It appears that an application under Section 145 Criminal P. C., was made by Debi Prasad and Mata Prasad on 24-9-1952, on the allegations that the jondhri crop in three acres of plot No. 1238/5 had been raised by them and that the opposite party were threatening to dispossess them, and also that there was a likelihood of a breach of the peace. On receipt of this application the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Tarabganj, made an order asking the station officer to make a report. 6-10-1952 was fixed for the receipt of this report of the station officer. Meanwhile on 29-9-1950, the Sub-Divisional Officer, Tarabganj, happened to go to Colonelganj police station and there seems to ...
Richhpal and anr. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-22-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All69
ORDERDesai, J.1. This is an application by two men who are being prosecuted under Section 110, Cr. P. C., in the Court of the Magistrate, for transfer of the case to another Court. Before coming to the main ground I would deal with other grounds which can be dealt with shortly. One allegation made by the applicants is that the station officer always stands by the side of the Assistant Public Prosecutor in the Court during the proceedings and that the witnesses are thus influenced. The learned Magistrate writes in his explanation that the station officer generally comes for the 'pairvi' of the cases, that it is possible that he stood by the side of the Assistant Public Prosecutor, that he himself never permitted him to stand by his side, that the applicants never objected to his standing by his side and that he has been transferred and another station officer has taken charge of the case.If the station officer stands by the side of the Assistant Public Prosecutor during the trial of the...
Basheshwar Nath Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-21-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All28
ORDERB.D. Mukerji, J. 1. This is an application for the transfer of a case pending in the Court of Sri A. N. Singh, Judicial Magistrate 1st class, Hardoi, to some Magistrate at Allahabad, competent to try it.2. On behalf of the State a preliminary objection is taken to the hearing of this application by this Court on the ground that this Court has no jurisdiction under the provisions of the U. P. High Courts (Amalgamation) Order, 1948, inasmuch as the case in respect of which relief is claimed from this Court is pending within the jurisdiction of the Lucknow Bench or is one in respect of which the Lucknow Bench alone can exercise jurisdiction.3. The relevant clause in the Amalgamation Order is Clause 14. Clause 14 is in these words : 'The new High Court, and the Judges & Division Courts thereof, shall sit at Allahabad or at such other places in the United Provinces as the Chief Justice may, with the approval of the Governor of the United Provinces, appoint :Provided that unless the Gov...
Smt. Maiki Vs. Hemraj
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-20-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All30
ORDERRandhir Singh, J.1. This is a reference by the Sessions Judge of Lucknow recommending that the order refusing to grant maintenance to Smt. Maiki should be set aside as the view taken by the learned Magistrate was not proper in this case. It appears that Smt. Maiki was married to her husband some 8 or 9 years ago when she was hardly 5 or 6 years of age. She is said to be 16 or 17 years of age at present and her husband has admittedly taken a second wife. After the remarriage of her husband the applicant moved the Magistrate under Section 488, Cr. P. C., that he should order payment of maintenance to her. The learned. Magistrate threw out the application on the ground that Smt. Maiki had been living with her husband for some time at least amicably even after the husband had taken a second wife. The Magistrate has also submitted his explanation along with the order of reference. It appears to me that the learned Magistrate was of the opinion that it was at the discretion of the Magis...
Sm. Chameli Vs. Gajraj Bahadur Gupta
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-20-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All33
ORDERRandhir Singh, J. 1. This is an application in revision against the order of the Sessions Judge of Hardoi dismissing an application in revision against an order passed by a Magistrate, first class Hardoi refusing to order payment of maintenance on an application made by one Smt. Chameli against her husband under Section 488, Criminal P. C.2. Srnt. Chameli who claims to be the wedded wife of the opposite party made an application to a Magistrate, first class Hardoi, asking for an order against the opposite party for maintenance as the opposite party had neglected to maintain her. The applicant was married to the opposite party more than 25 years ago, but shortly after the marriage the opposite party refused to keep the applicant in his house and agreed to pay maintenance to her. An agreement dated 19-3-1928, was executed by the applicant in favour of the opposite party relinquishing her rights against the opposite party who agreed in return to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs. 150...
Dr. Rajnath Vs. L. Vidya Ram and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-20-1953
Reported in: AIR1953All772
ORDERAgarwala, J.1. This is an application for transfer of a suit pending in the Court of the Civil Judge, Agra to the Court competent to try it in Mainpuri. The parties belong to the same family. L. Vidya Ram, plaintiff-opposite party 1 filed the suit which has given rise to this application for partition of family property in the Court of the Civil Judge Agra. The applicant and the other two opposite parties, L. Kedar Nath and Srimati Attar Dei, are defendants to the suit. The property in dispute is situated partly in the district of Agra and partly in the district of Mainpuri. The issues in the case were framed on 21-2-1950. The applicant did not object to the suit proceeding in the Civil Judge's Court at Agra up to that time. Then six months later, i. e. on 30-8-1950 he made the present application to this Court for the transfer of the case on the ground that the suit could have been instituted at Mainpuri and it would be convenient to both parties that it be tried there.The ground...
Pandey Parshotam Prasad Vs. Balram Prasad Misra
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-17-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All1
Malik, C.J.1. This appeal has been filed on behalf of a creditor whose claim under Section 9, U. P. Encumbered Estates Act (No. 35 of 1934) was rejected on the ground that it was time-barred. The landlord-applicants filed an application under Section 4, U. P. Encumbered Estates Act, before the Collector which, in due course, was sent to the learned Special Judge, second grade, Basti. The landlord applicants then filed an application under Section 8. U. P. Encumbered Estates Act, before the learned Special Judge and on 12-6-1937, notices were published in the U. P-Gazette in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the creditors were required to put in their claims within three months from the date of the notification. According to Section 9. before its amendment in 1939, the Special Judge could on sufficient cause being shown grant onlytwo months extension and no more. The last date for the creditors putting in their claims could not thus be extended beyond 12-11-1937.The claim wa...
Jhallar Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-15-1953
Reported in: AIR1954All17
ORDERR. Singh, J. 1. This is an application in revision by one Jhallar who was convicted under Section 456. Penal Code and was sentenced to three months' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 50/-by a Magistrate and whose appeal against his conviction and sentence was dismissed by the Sessions Judge of Rae Bareli. 2. It appears that Jhallar had entered the house of one Ram Nath on the night between17th and 18th January, 1952 when an alarm was raised & Jhallar was apprehended. He was then taken to the police station and a report was lodged. The defence of Jhailar was that he had gone to the house on the invitation of one Srimati Jaggi with whom he had illegitimate intimacy and that Ram Nath, who seems to have been lying in wait, caught hold of him while he had come out of the house. The story that the applicant had presumably some intimacy with Srimati Jaggi has been accepted by the lower Courts but the applicant was convicted on the ground that he had entered the house of Ram Nath wi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »