Allahabad Court November 1954 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.
J. K. Charitable Trust Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U. P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-22-1954
Reported in: [1955]28ITR110(All)
MALIK, C.J. - This is a reference under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act and the question referred to us is as follows :-'Whether on a true construction of the deed of trust dated 24th January, 1944, the Tribunal was right in holding that the trust was a void one for uncertainty and ambiguity ?'The assessee, J. K. Charitable Trust, made an application for a refund of tax paid under section 48 read with section 4 of the Indian Income-tax Act. The application was rejected by the Income-tax Officer on 27th February, 1950. An appeal against that order was dismissed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner on 31st July, 1950, and a further appeal to the Tribunal was dismissed on the 21st January, 1952, on the ground that it was not a valid trust, its terms being vague and uncertain. The reason given in the statement of the case for holding that the trust was not valid is that under the terms of the deed very wide powers were given to the trustees who could utilise the income for an...
Ram Prasad Vs. Banwari and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-19-1954
Reported in: AIR1956All12; 1956CriLJ3
ORDERRoy, J. 1. Criminal Revision No. 459 of 1954 & Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 1425 o 1954 relate to the same matter. They have been heard together and will be disposed of by a common judgment. On 22-3-1953, an application was moved by Ram Prasad for the taking of proceedings under Section 145, Cr. P. C., against Banwari Lal and others. That application was sent to the police for inquiry and report. The police made a report to the effect that a dispute likely to cause a breach of peace existed. Thereupon the learned Magistrate issued notices required under Section 145 of the Code. Throe days later, namely, on 25-3-1953, Ram Prasad filed a suit in the civil Court for establishing his title to the property in respect of which proceedings under Section 145, Cr. P. C. were instituted. After the filing of that suit Ram Prasad moved the Magistrate on 20-6-1953, for the stay of the proceedings under Section 145 and the ground advanced by him was that since the civil suit will determine t...
Devi Prasad Vs. Chairman of the Court of Election Tribunal, Gorakhpur ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-19-1954
Reported in: AIR1956All19
ORDERM.L. Chaturvedi, J. 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution praying for the quashing of the order passed by an Election Tribunal on 13-1-1953 dismissing the election petition filed by the petitioner. 2. The petitioner was a candidate for membership of the Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly and he was nominated as a candidate from the Tanda Constituency of Faizabad district. The elections were held in January 1952 and this Constituency was a double member constituency one of the seats being reserved for the scheduled caste. As a result of the counting of the votes Ram Sumer respondent was declared as elected in the seat reserved for the scheduled caste and respondent 2 Sri Mohammad Nasir was declared as elected to the general seat. The result of the election was published in the Official Gazette on 26-2-1952 and the return of expenses by the elected members was published on 3-5-1952. The election petition was presented by the petitioner personally in the office ...
Raja Baldeo Das Birla Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U. P., Lucknow.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-18-1954
Reported in: [1955]27ITR467(All)
This is reference under section 66 (2) of Indian Income-tax Act. The assessee its Raja Baldeo Das Birla. The assessment year is 1940-41 with relevant account period, the financial year 1939-40. The assessment order was made by the Income-tax Officer on the 30th January, 1941. Later, a notice was issued under section 34 that a sum of Rs. 3,30,000 was brought into British India from an Indian State and that amount had escaped assessment. The Income-tax Officer held that the whole of this amount was income which had escaped assessment, but on appeal the Assistant Commissioner held that two items of Rs. 75,000 and Rs. 50,000 were not taxable income. The assessee appealed and the Appellate Tribunal dismissed the appeal. Two questions that have been referred to us for decision are as follows :1. Whether the notice issued under section 34 was valid.2. Whether there is any material on the record to prove that the sum of Rs. 2,05,000 was the assessees income which accrued or arose to him within...
Mohd. Haneef Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-17-1954
Reported in: [1955]27ITR447(All)
This is a reference under section 66 (2) of the Indian Income-tax Act and the two points that have been referred to us for decision are as follows :-'1. Whether in the facts and circumstances of this case the notice issued to Mohd. Hanif under section 34 was bad in law and whether it is necessary to mention that the notice issued to him represented himself and others, i.e., to an association of individuals 2. Whether on the above facts and circumstances of this case, it was open to the Tribunal to convert an assessment made against Mohd. Hanif as representing an association of individuals composed of Mohd. Husain and Mohd. Jan and assess him as representing an association of individuals composed of himself, Mohd. Zahir, Anwar Ali and Abdul Hasan ?'The facts of the case are not complicated though some difficulty has been created by reason of the way the case was dealt with at its various stages by the Income-tax authorities and further by reason of the fact that certain papers, which we...
F.S. Abdulqayum Vs. Manindra Land and Building Corpn. Ltd. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-16-1954
Reported in: AIR1955All192
Agarwala, J. 1. This is a judgment-debtor's appeal arising out of execution proceedings. A suit was filed by Manindra Banking Corporation, Ltd., and it was decreed in that name. During the pendency of the suit, however, Manindra Banking Corporation Ltd., changed its name to Manindra Land and Building Corporation, Ltd. A certificate incorporating the company in the altered name was granted to the company. After the decree, the Company wanted to file an application for execution of the decree by stating its name as 'Manindra Banking Corporation, Ltd., now known as Manindra Land and Building Corporation, Ltd.' The judgment-debtor raised an objection that since the decree was not passed in the new name, the Company could not execute the same. This objection was overruled and execution was allowed to proceed by the court below. Against that order the judgment-debtor has come up in appeal to this Court. 2. Two points have been raised before us. The first point was the same as was raised in t...
Sheo Kumar and ors. Vs. Gyan Nath Raina and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-16-1954
Reported in: AIR1955All408
Raghubar Dayal J. 1. This appeal arises out of a suit for the specific -performance of a contract. The plaintiffs' suit for the specific performance of the contract was dismissed and their claim for damages for Rs. 32,000 on account of breach of contract was decreed for Rs. 7,000 only. The plaintiffs have appealed against the dismissal of their claim. 2. Defendant-respondent 1 has filed a cross-objection against the decree for damages in favour of the plaintiffs. 3. It may also be mentioned that the decree in favour of the plaintiffs is also for the undisputed claim for Rs. 5,000 on account of the refund of the earnest money which had been paid by the plaintiffs to the defendant-respondent. 4. The plaintiffs' case is that on 3-1-1943, an agreement was arrived at between them and defendant 1 with respect to the sale of bungalow. No. 13/5 in Civil Lines, Kanpur, with the proprietary and lessee rights in the appurtenant lands for a sum of Rs. 58,000 excluding all costs of stamp and regist...
Sundar Singh and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-15-1954
Reported in: AIR1955All232; 1955CriLJ898
Malik, C.J.1. I have read the judgment of my brother Mukerji. Criminal Revision No. 27 of 1953 came up before nay brother Brij Mohan Lall. He referred the case to a Bench as the question had been frequently mooted before him whether if X is found to be a member of an unlawful assembly which assembly has committed an offence punishable under Section 323, he could be convicted and sentenced both under Section 147 and Section 323/149, Penal Code, if it had transpired that the prosecution had failed to prove that X himself caused the hurt with his own hands. There was a decision of my brother Brij Mohan Lall J. in -- 'Tiny v. State' : AIR1952All92 , where it was held that X could be so convicted, while there was a later decision by my brother Kidwai J. in -- 'Abdur Rashid Khan v. The State' : AIR1953All315 where he had taken a contrary view. The case came up before Mr. Justice Agarwala and myself and for the reasons given in the referring order we thought it necessary that the case should ...
Rahmat Ali Fatehullah Vs. Calcutta National Bank Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-11-1954
Reported in: AIR1955All169; [1955]25CompCas112(All)
Malik, C.J. 1. On a difference of opinion between brothers Desai and Brij Mohan Lall, the following point of law was referred to a larger Bench for decision:'Where a winding up order was made in respect of a company after it had obtained a decree in a suit instituted by it and after an appeal preferred by it against an order allowing defendant's objection under Section 47, Civil P. C., had been decreed, can an application for review of the .aforesaid judgment of the appellate Court be made by the defendant without obtaining leave of the Company Court under Section 171, Companies Act (VII of 1913)?'2. It is not necessary to set out the facts in detail. All that we need mention is that the Calcutta National Bank Ltd. had brought a suit against Qudratulla and his son Rahmat Ali Fate-hulla for recovery of a large sum of money on the allegation that the principal debtor was the father and the son had guaranteed repayment of the debt. During the pendency of the suit the bank had applied for ...
Jagdish Prasad Mathur and ors. Vs. United Provinces Government
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-08-1954
Reported in: AIR1956All114
Mukerji, J. 1. This is an appeal by a plaintiff whose suit was dismissed by the trial Court on two grounds, namely-(1) on the ground of limitation: and (2) on the ground that the money which was in the nature, of arrears of salary was not recoverable. 2. The facts giving rise to this litigation briefly stated were these -- the plaintiff, Dwarka Prasad, was appointed a Junior Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, on 15-10-1921. After serving for some years he got into trouble with the result that he was dismised on 4-9-1939 by an order of the Registrar. He preferred an appeal to the Governor, who, by his order of 3-5-1940 set aside the earlier order of dismissal of Dwarka Prasad, the plaintiff. This is what was said in the order namely-'Babu Dwarka Prasad will now be treated as under suspension with effect from the date of his removal till such time as Government pass orders in this matter. During the period of his suspension he will draw subsistence allowance equal to 1/6th of ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »