Allahabad Court January 1955 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.
Tak Chand Fillumal Vs. Western India Match Co. Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-06-1955
Reported in: AIR1955All404
Raghubar Dayal, J. 1. The plaintiff-respondent No. 1 Instituted a suit, suit No. 50 of 1954, in the court of the Civil Judge, Bareilly, against the appellant and several other persons for the issue of a permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their servants and others on their behalf from manufacturing, selling or offering for sale or from passing off or attempting to pass off match boxes not of the plaintiff's manufacture as those of the plaintiff's manufacture by the use of the offending labels, Annexures B-1 and B-2, or any other label of asimilar design and appearance as that of the plaintiff- It was further prayed in the suit that the defendants be ordered to deliver up to the plaintiff the entire stock of the offending labels and boxes of matches bearing the offending label under their control & also all loose labels, blocks, wrappers, etc., in their possession. It was further prayed that the defendants be ordered to render an account of the profits made by them by sale ...
Shyamlal PragnaraIn Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U.P., Lucknow
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-05-1955
Reported in: AIR1955All299; [1955]27ITR404(All)
Malik, C.J.1. This case has been referred to a Pull Bench on a difference of opinion.2. Proviso (2) to Section 66-A, Indian Income-Tax Act is to the effect that when there is a difference of opinion between the Judges hearing areference the point of law upon which they differ and the case shall then be heard upon that point only by one or more of the other Judges of the High Court and such point shall be decided according to the opinion of the majority of the Judges who have heard the case including those who first heard it. By reason of this proviso we had some doubts whether one of us who was a member of the Division Bench should be on this Full Bench but Mr. Pathak on behalf of the assessee has urged that the proviso only refers to a case where a point of law has been referred for decision and, in such a case, the opinion of the Judge to whom the point has been referred has to go back to the Bench which had heard it and the order has to be passed by it. But that where the whole case...
Haji Mohd. Sayeed and ors. Vs. Abdul Ghafoor and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-05-1955
Reported in: AIR1955All688
Beg, J. 1. This is a plaintiff's second appeal. It arises out of a suit for injunction and some other reliefs. The suit was brought in a representative capacity against a number of defendants who were also sued in a representative capacity. Both the plaintiffs as well as the defendants are Muhammedans residing in the town of Mail Nath Bhanjan in the district of Azamgarh. It appears that among the Muhammedans of this town strained relations have existed between the two sects of Sunni Muslims -- one calling itself Ahl-e-Hadis and the other calling itself Hanafi.The former sect is also nicknamed as Wahabi by the latter. The present suit marks the culmination of a long-standing dispute between them. There appear to be differences between the two sects in the mode of offering prayers and rituals connected therewith. It is said that the Ahl-e-Hadis recite the 'Surai Pateha' or the first chapter of the Quran behind the Imam in a loud tone, but the Hanafis do not recite it.Further it is said t...
Moradhwaj Vs. Bhudar Das
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-04-1955
Reported in: AIR1955All353
Agarwala, J.1. These are four connected appeals and arise in the following circumstances. The parties are closely related to each other. They were originally members of a joint Hindu family. Then there was a partition between them. They now own contiguous houses. Disputes, about easemen-tary rights regarding doors 'janalas parnalas' and walls cropped up and in connection with them there was some 'marpit' between them. Several litigations were pending in the civil and criminal courts in connection with these disputes, when on 11-12-1944 an agreement of reference was entered into between them by which they referred all these litigations as well as other disputes to arbitrators. The litigations then pending were four in number. One was an appeal No. 218 of 1944 arising out of suit No. 575 of 1943 (L. Moor Dhuj V. L. Bhumandal Dass), the second was Execution Appeal No. 111 of 1944, arising out of execution proceedings in connection with the decree in suit No. 196 of 1934, filed by Moradhwa...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›