Allahabad Court July 1954 Judgments
Shankar Lal and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-30-1954
Reported in: AIR1954All779
Brij Mohan Lal, J. 1. This is an appeal by four persons, viz., Shankar Lal, Narain, Ram Sarup and Tulshi, who have been convicted by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge of Kanpur under Section 302, Penal Code. They have been sentenced to undergo transportation, for life and to pay a fine of rupees one hundred each. The first three appellants are brothers while the fourth is their servant. They have been found guilty of having committed the murder of one Janki on 7-3-1952. 2. The prosecution version is that about twenty days before the incident Janki's wife Shrimati Jai Devi was molested by Shankar Lal and Tulshi while she was in the 'Har'. She complained to her husband in the evening. The latter, accompanied by his brother Mewa Lal, went to Shankar Lal and Tulshi to protest against their misbehaviour towards his wife. Both Shankar Lal and Tulshi denied the charge. Narain and Ram Sarup, the other two appellants, also arrived and an altercation took place between the appellants on the one h...
Tag this Judgment!Durga Prasad Vs. the State and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-27-1954
Reported in: AIR1955All9
Malik, C.J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution by one Durga Prasad who is a resident of village Sisaiya, Police Station Izatnagar, District Bareilly.2. The affidavit in support of the petition has been filed by one Murari Lal, a resident of village Kesarpur, police station Isatnagar, district Bareilly. A riot took place in village Kesarpur on 23-3-1951. A large number of Hindus, including the petitioner, was arrested and the papers were sent to the Additional District Magistrate (Judicial), Bareilly for enquiry. We are, however, not concerned with those proceedings. As a result of the riot, a notification was issued under Sub-section (1) of Section 15, Police Act, 1861 (5 of 1861), declaring village Kesarpur and certain other villages in Police Circle Izatnagar and village Saidpur within Police Circle Earadari in the district of Bareilly to be in a disturbed state. This proclamation was to remain in force for a period of five months.As a result of this notificat...
Tag this Judgment!Angnu Vs. Mahabir and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-27-1954
Reported in: AIR1954All768
ORDER1. This is a reference under Section 289 (2), U. P. Tenancy Act, by the Judicial Officer, sub-division Sidtiauli, through the Deputy Commissioner, Sitapur. 2. It appears that a suit for the possession of a plot of land, and for some other reliefs which included the removal of certain constructions standing on this plot and a permanent mandatory injunction to require the defendant to close a certain door and damages, was instituted in the Court of the Munsif, Sitapur. 3. The defendants contested the suit and also raised a plea of jurisdiction. This plea of jurisdiction found favour with the learned Munsif who ordered presentation of the plaint to the proper Court. Thereafter the plaint was presented in the Court of the Assistant Collector, first class. The learned Assistant Collector found that the suit did not lie in the Revenue Court and should have been instituted in the Court of the Munsif. He, therefore, made the reference, which is before us, through the Deputy Commissioner, ...
Tag this Judgment!Onkar Singh and anr. Vs. Rameshwar Minor and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-27-1954
Reported in: AIR1954All786
1. The appellants made an application under Section 4, Encumbered Estates Act, which was forwarded to the Special Judge, 1st Grade, Budaun. In the written statement which was filed by them under Section 8, Encumbered Estates Act, they mentioned the villages Deorania and Jarauna among their property which was liable for the payment of their debts. Dori Lal and others filed a joint written statement under Section 11 of the Act wherein they claimed that they were the owners of these villages and were in possession of them and this property was therefore not liable to attachment and sale in satisfaction of the debts of the landlord applicants.There is nothing in the written statement to indicate the extent of the shares of each of the persons who filed the joint written statement.The learned Special Judge after a consideration of the evidence produced by the parties found that the objectors were the owners of these two villages and that they did not belong to the landlord-applicants. He th...
Tag this Judgment!Gainda Lal Vs. Ram Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-27-1954
Reported in: AIR1954All782
Gurtu, J. 1. A suit was filed under the provisions of Order 21, Rule 63, Civil P. C., by the plaintiffs whose father had preferred an objection to the attachment of the house in suit in connection with a decree' obtained by defendant 1 as against defendant 2 in another suit No. 1455 of 1948, for Rs. 406/1/. The objection had been disallowed by the execution Court. The plaintiffs prayed for a declaration that they are the owners of the whole house or, in the alternative, of half the house. The suit was valued at Rs. 203/0/6 being half the amount of the decree (in connection with which execution had been sought) for the purpose of court-fee, and at Rs. 10,000/-, the market value of the house, for purposes of jurisdiction. 2. Along with the plaint, the plaintiffs made an application for issue of an 'interim' injunction restraining defendant 1 from executing the said decree against defendant 2 by sale of the house in suit. Notices were issued on this application and defendant 1 filed an ob...
Tag this Judgment!Bhulan Lal Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-27-1954
Reported in: AIR1954All783
Randhir Singh, J. 1. This is an application in revision on behalf of one Bhullan Lal who was convicted under Section 161, Penal Code, and sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200/- by a Special Magistrate, First Class, Anti-Corruption, U. P.2. The applicant has, since the filing of this application for revision died, but as the sentence involved a fine of Rs. 200/- also, the application for revision has been pressed on behalf of the legal representatives of Bhullan Lal.3. The case against Bhullan Lal was that he was a supervisor in the Defence Savings Branch. One Bhajan Teli ,had a deposit of about Rs. 18/-in the Defence Savings Fund which amount he wanted to withdraw and with this end in view, he went to the Defence Savings Office with an application for withdrawal. He was, however, told that according to the records of the Defence Savings Office, the depositor was entered as dead and that payment could not be made to him. He then approached the supervisor, ...
Tag this Judgment!Ghulam HusaIn Vs. District Magistrate, Fatehpur and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-26-1954
Reported in: AIR1954All785
Malik, C.J. 1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by one Ghulam Husain who has applied for a writ of habeas corpus or any other suitable writ or order so that he may be released forthwith as he has been illegally detained. 2. The undisputed facts now are that, in December, 1947, Ghulam Husain migrated to Pakistan. In June, 1950, he got a permit for permanent resettlement in India and returned to India in July 1950. On 8-7-1950, he reached his village Alamganj in the district of Fatehpur. On 9-7-1950, he deposited the permit for permanent resettlement at police station Bindki. He remained in his village for several months when, on 17-1-1951, notice was issued by the District Magistrate of Fatehpur requiring him to leave India within fourteen days. On 22-1-1951, he made an application to the District Magistrate praying that the order of 17-1-1951, be vacated. He made a representation to the State Govt. on 10-8-1951. But tnese were of no avail and, on 29...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Haseen Fatima Vs. Asst. Custodian Evacuee Property
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-22-1954
Reported in: AIR1955All97
Malik, C.J. 1. This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution which, to our minds, is entirely misconceived. The question in dispute is whether certain items of property belonged to the applicantor to her son who, we understand, is an evacuee. The Administration of Evacuee Property Act makes elaborate provisions for enquiry into the question and the decision has to be made under that Act by Tribunals named therein. Even ordinary civil Courts have been deprived of their jurisdiction to decide the question of title, whether the property in dispute belonged or did not belong to an evacuee. 2. In case Tribunals mentioned under the Act fail to exercise their jurisdiction, or exceed their jurisdiction, or act in any other manner which may be said to be on the face of it illegal or grossly improper, a writ petition may lie under Article 226 of the Constitution for issue of proper directions to the Tribunals concerned or even to correct their errors. The reliefs claimed here are...
Tag this Judgment!Mohd. Karrar Ali and ors. Vs. the State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-22-1954
Reported in: AIR1954All753
Malik C.J.1. This is an application on behalf of three minors that they have been cultivating portions of two plots Nos. 4458 and 4471 in village Ailra, tahsil Utraula, district Gonda, since 1948, and a patta was executed in their favour in August 1951, that in March, 1952, when certain labourers and servants of the applicants were felling certain mahua trees, the District Forest Officer took exception under the provisions of the U. P. Private Forests Protection Act, 1948 (6 of 1949) and prevented them from cutting down trees or from cultivating the portion of the land which had been under cultivation since 1948.2. It is urged that the Act is ultra vires as it offends against the provisions of Article 31, Clause (2) and Article 19, Clause (1)(f) of the Constitution. In the affidavit it was said that this land was banjar land and the notification No. 1927/XIV-134-47 dated 3-1-1949, by which the U. P. Government declared all forest lands in Uttar Pradesh to be forest for the purposes of ...
Tag this Judgment!Baij Nath Das Vs. Sri Ram Charan Das
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-22-1954
Reported in: AIR1954All812
Kidwai, J.1. In anticipation of the expiry of the time allowed by the Rules of the Court for the making of an application for the translation and printing of the record and for making an initial deposit the appellant applied to the Deputy Registrar for extension of time. The Office has raised two objections to this application:1. That the application has been made before the time allowed for an application for printing had expired; and2. That it should be stamped.2. No doubt the application was premature but this does not justify its rejection and it can be considered when the necessity arises. The time has now expired and orders can be passed upon the application by the Deputy Registrar.3. Secondly, applications relating to the preparation of the record made to the Registrar (or, at Lucknow, to the Deputy Registrar) are not applications for the exercise of the judicial functions of that Officer. The preparation of the record is a ministerial function and not a judicial function. It is...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »