Allahabad Court January 1954 Judgments
Ram Charan and anr. Vs. Devendra Kumar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-29-1954
Reported in: AIR1954All648
ORDERRoy, J. 1. This is a reference by the SessionsJudge of Bijnor recommending that the trial court's order assuming jurisdiction to try the case, be set aside. 2. The complainant Devendra Kumar is a partner in a cloth firm of Najibabad in the district of Bijnor, styled as Yogendra Kumar Devendra Kumar, while the firm of the accused works as commission agents in cloth business at Delhi. The complainant's case was that it had been agreed upon between the two firms that the accused firm was to purchase 60 bales of cloth from the Delhi Cloth Mills at Delhi as agents of the complainant & deliver the same to the complainant's firm at Najibabad; that the accused was to render accounts to the complainant's firm at Naji-babad, that in consequence of the agreement the accused had first received the sum of Rs. 6,000/-by means of a draft at Delhi, whereafter 63 bales; had been dispatched by them from Delhi to the complainant at Najibabad under a railway receipt 'to self' through the Bharat Bank,...
Tag this Judgment!Nan Vs. Zamindar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-28-1954
Reported in: AIR1954All587
Beg, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal. It arises out of a suit brought by the plaintiff for arrears of rent and ejectment. The ejectment of the defendant was sought on the ground that the defendant had caused substantial damage to the accommodation under Section 3(b), U. P. Control of Rent and Eviction Act.2. The defendant admitted his liability for arrears of rent but resisted the relief of ejectmenton the ground that he had not caused any damageto the building.3. The trial Court decreed the suit for arrears of rent. It, however, dismissed the suit for ejectment holding that the defendant had not caused any damage. Dissatisfied with the judgment of the trial Court on the question of ejectment, the plaintiff filed an appeal which came up for hearing before Sri T. N. Chatterji, Civil Judge, Gonda. Before the lower appellate Court, it was argued that the permission to file a suit for ejectment having been given by the rent control and eviction officer the civil court was bound to decree...
Tag this Judgment!Unnao Commercial Bank Ltd., Unnao Vs. Kailash Nath and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-27-1954
Reported in: AIR1955All393
Randhir Singh, J.1. This appeal has been referred to a Bench by a learned Single Judge as it appeared to him that some points of importance on which, in his opinion, the law was not uniform, arose in the case and required consideration by a Bench,2. The appeal arises out of a suit brought by the Unnao Commercial Bank, Ltd., for a partition of a half share in two houses situate in Muhalla Bashiratganj in the city of Lucknow. Baiju and Lachman Prasad, who were brothers, owned two houses and certain other property. Lachman Prasad died in 1930 leaving a son Ram Prasad who is defendant 1. Baiju died in November, 1934, without any issue. His widow Smt. Janaka, is, however, alive.3. On the death of Baiju, Bam Prasad executed a sale deed in favour of Batan Chand in respect of a half share in two houses and some moveable property which belonged to him and Baiju jointly. This sale deed was executed for obtaining money for filing a suit against Smt. Janaka and two others, Smt. Jasrath Dei and Mah...
Tag this Judgment!Najib Khan Vs. State Through D.M., Meerut
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-27-1954
Reported in: AIR1954All458
ORDERV. Bhargava, J. 1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner seeks the Issue of a writ, order or direction to the opposite party, the State of Uttar Pradesh, in the nature of certiorari and/or mandamus and/or prohibition so that the petitioner may not be deported to Pakistan. 2. It appears from the petitioner's own affidavit that he went to Pakistan some time in the year 1948 before the permit system was introduced between India and Pakistan regulating movement of persons from one country to the other. Thereafter the petitioner was unable to return to India for a month. He, however, obtained a temporary permit and returned to India. The period of that temporary permit lapsed and thereafter the petitioner was prosecuted under the provisions of the Influx from Pakistan (Control) Ordinance, 1948 and was convicted and fined. Proceedings are now being taken to arrest the petitioner in order to deport him to Pakistan. The proceedings for deportation are chall...
Tag this Judgment!Najib Khan Vs. State Through D.M.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-27-1954
Reported in: 1954CriLJ962
ORDERV. Bhargava, J.1. By this petition under Article 228 of the Constitution the petitioner seeks the issue of a writ, order or direction to the opposite party, the State of Uttar Pradesh, in the nature of certiorai and/or mandamus and/or prohibition so that the petitioner, may not be deported to Pakistan.2. It appears from the petitioner's own affidavit that he went to Pakistan some time in the. year 1948 before the permit system was introduced between India and Pakistan regulating movement of persons from one country to the other. Thereafter the petitioner was unable to return to India for a month. He, however, obtained a temporary permit and returned to India. The period of that temporary permit lapsed and thereafter the petitioner was prosecuted under the provisions of the Influx from Pakistan (Control) Ordinance, 1948 and was convicted and fined. Proceedings are now being taken to arrest the petitioner in order to deport him to Pakistan. The proceeding's for deportation are chall...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Dass Vs. Board of Revenue U.P., Allahabad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-22-1954
Reported in: AIR1954All515
ORDERV. Bhargava, J.1. The petitioner by this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution prays for the issue of a writ of certiorari quashing the orders of the Board of Revenue dated 9-10-1953 and 16-10-1953 and for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the Board of Revenue to decide Second Appeal No, 137 of 1948-49, which was instituted before it, on merits. A further direction or injunction was sought directing the opposite -party, Ramji Lal restraining him from taking possession over the land in dispute in pursuance of the order of the Board of Revenue referred to above.The grounds on which these writs and direction or injunction are sought have been mentioned as only being two in number. The first ground is that Rules 4 and 5 framed under the U. P. Zemindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act of 1950 are 'ultra vires', being in contravention of the rule making power of the State government under Section 26 of that Act, and consequently the order of the Board of Revenue abating ...
Tag this Judgment!Sita Ram Vs. Mool Chand and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-22-1954
Reported in: AIR1954All672
Harish Chandra, J.1. This is an appeal from the decision of a Tribunal under the Displaced Persons(Debts Adjustment) Act, 1951, on an application made by a displaced creditor under Section 13 of the Act.2. There were four respondents and notices were issued to them. Three of them did not appear. Only one of them appeared and said that he had no objection to the decree being passed as claimed. He was in the nature of a 'pro forma' respondent. A date was then fixed for the hearing of the application 'ex parte'. On that date the tribunal was of the view that the claim was not maintainable inasmuch as the three respondents who did not appear were residing in a place to which the Act did not apply. It accordingly rejected the application.3. The question is what court-fee is payableIon the appeal. The appellant has paid a court-fee as on an appeal from an order not having the force of a decree under Article 11 of Schedule II of the Court-fees Act, 1870. The ques-tion is whether the court-lee...
Tag this Judgment!Badrul Islam Vs. the Sunni Central Board of Waqf, U.P., Lucknow
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-21-1954
Reported in: AIR1954All459
Raghubar Dayal J. 1. Hafiz Abdul Karim executed three waqf deeds in 1917 and 1918. Notification was issued by the Central Board constituted under the Muslim Waqfs Act (U. P. Act NO. 13 of 1936) on 26-2-1944, under Section 5, Sub-section (1) of the Act, that the provisions of the Act would apply to these three waqfs. Badrul Islam, the mutwalli under the three waqf deeds, instituted a suit against the Sunni Central Boards of Waqfs for a declaration that these waqfs were exempt from the operation of the Muslim Waqfs Act. The Civil Judge did not agree with the contention for the plaintiff and dismissed the suit. 2. The plaintiff submits to the decree with respect to one of the waqfs, which was created by a deed, dated 11-5-1917. He challenges the decree of the court below with respect to the other two deeds executed on 20-3-1917, and 11-6-1918, respectively. 3. Badrul Islam, the plaintiff, has migrated to Pakistan and the Custodian of Evacuee Property has been given notice of this appeal i...
Tag this Judgment!Mewa Ram Ram Charan Vs. United Provinces
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-21-1954
Reported in: AIR1954All487
Randhir Singh, J.1. This is a plaintiff's appeal arising put of a suit for a declaration that the order of dismissal passed against him by the Inspector General of Police was wrongful, illegal & ultra vires & for a decree for damages to the extent of Rs. 14,000/-. An alternative prayer asking for a decree for Rs. 2,653/8/-on account of arrears of salary together with station allowance had also been asked for in case the order of dismissal against the plaintiff was held to be 'ultra vires' and void.2. The plaintiff was a Sub-Inspector of Police in U. P., having been appointed by the Inspector General of Police in the year 1921. He was posted at police station Payagpur in 1943 and was suddenly transferred to police station Sujauli on 24-3-1944. Some confidential enquiry was made against him presumably on receipt of some information by the Superintendent of Police. On 17-4-1944 an order of suspension of the plaintiff was passed by the Superintendent of Police and this order was served on ...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Bharosey and ors. Vs. Lachmandas and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-21-1954
Reported in: AIR1954All715
Gurtu, J. 1. The main question which arises in this appeal is as to the nature of the estate which passed on to Smt. Gopi under the will of Nanak Chand. 2. It is conceded before me that if Smt. Gopi was given an absolute estate then the plaintiff will be out of court and the suit would have to be dismissed. 3. The will in question, after reciting the testator's interest in the properties bequeathed, states as follows: 'Bad mere Musammat Gopi ..... Malik howe,our usko har ek tarah ka ikhtiyar hoga ki jo chahe so khairat den wa dan waghirah karen. Koi uska Mazahim na howe.....'.The will then makes certain provisions of thetestator's sister and her husband. 4. Lastly, the will recites that upon the death of Smt. Gopi, the testator's property would go according to his directions to his two daughters. 5. Prom the discussion on the subject in Mulla's Hindu Law, 10th Edition (1946) at pages 486 to 489 it appears that a bequest to a woman as 'Malik' imports a full proprietary right, unless the...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »