Allahabad Court May 1955 Judgments
O.N. Chauhan Vs. Collector of Central Excise, Allahabad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-23-1955
Reported in: AIR1955All528
ORDERRaghubar Dayal, J.1. These are two petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution, one by Shri O. N. Chauhan and the other by Shri G. K. Sinha, praying for a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order of the Collector, Central Excise, Allahabad, dated 10-11-1953, and a writ in the nature of mandamus ordering the Collector of Central Excise, Allahabad, the opposite party, to restore the petitioners to the cadre of Selection Grade Inspector to which they were appointed permanently by the order of 27-2-1953.2. The petitioners were permanent Inspectors in the Central Excise Department Allahabad in August 1952; Letter No. 4(98)--Ad. (CX) 51, dated 20-8-1952, from Government of India, Ministry of Finance (Revenue Division), New Delhi, to the Collectors of Central Excise said in para. 2:'The Selection grade for Inspector of Central Excise will constitute 15 per cent of the cadre strength of Inspectors, appointments thereto being made of permanent incumbents only on the basis of...
Tag this Judgment!Girja Prasad Sunder Lal Vs. Divisional Forest Officer, Dudhi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-23-1955
Reported in: AIR1955All589
Chowdhry, J. 1. This is an application under Order 45, Rule 13, C. P. C., by firm Girja Prasad Sunder Lal, whose writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution was dismissed on 3-2-1955 and a special appeal against that order was summarily dismissed on 11-4-1955. The petitioner firm then applied for a certificate for appeal to the Supreme Court and preferred at the same the present application. 2. The petitioner obtained on 8-4-1953 for a period of seven years a theka from the Raja of Singrauli for collection of tendu leaves for manufacture of bins from a forest in Mirzapur district. The provisions of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and land Reforms Act, 1951, which came into force on 26-1-1951, were extended to the area in question on 1-7-1953, and, as the right, title and interest of the Raja vested in the State under Section 6 of that Act, and as the theka had been effected after 8-8-1946, the Divisional Forest Officer concerned issued on 29-11-1953 a notification under Section 8...
Tag this Judgment!Dukhi and anr. Vs. State and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-09-1955
Reported in: AIR1955All521; 1955CriLJ1305
Desai, J. 1. The applicants applied for a writ of habeas corpus under Section 491, Criminal P. C. and Article 226 of the Constitution. They were arrested on a charge of murder and are being detained in prison under the orders of a Magistrate since 29-3-1955 in one case and 2-4-1955 in the other case. Their contention is that under Section 167, Criminal P. C. they can be detained in custody under the orders of a Magistrate only for 15 days and that their continued detention after the expiry of 15 days is unlawful and they should be released at once.Though it is not stated in the application, the applicants seem to have been arrested without a warrant by the police and the police are still investigating the matter.2. The questions that arise are, (1) Whether a person arrested by the police without a warrant must be released from custody on the expiry of the period of 15 days mentioned in Section 167 (2) of the Code unless the Magistrate having jurisdiction takes cognizance of the offence...
Tag this Judgment!Mukundji Mahraj Vs. Persotam Lalji Mahraj
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-06-1955
Reported in: AIR1957All77
Agarwala, J. 1. This is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of a suit for a declaration that proceedings in Suits Nos. 503 of 1928 and 138 of 1930 and 66 of 1937 do not bind the plaintiff and that the plaintiff may be awarded possession over the property in dispute. The plaintiff is an idol Sri Thakur Mukundji Maharaj, installed in a temple, situate in mohalla Bengali Gnat in the city of Mathura. The idol sues through its next friend Surra Chaube who claims to be its Manager. The defendant is one Goswami Purshottam Lalji who is the purchaser at auction of half of the temple in which the plaintiff idol is installed. The property in dispute is this half portion of the temple which has been taken possession of by the defendant in the following circumstances. 2. The plaintiff idol was under the Shebaitship of one Mahant Bhagwat Das who was a follower of the Vaishnavite Ramanandi Sampradaya. Earlier history of the shebaits of the idol is not known. But it is common ground that the Shebaits had...
Tag this Judgment!U.P. Government Through Collector, Allahabad Vs. J.R. Bhatta
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-06-1955
Reported in: AIR1956All439
Chowdhry, J. 1. This is an appeal by the defendant, the U. P. Government through the Collector of Allahabad, against the judgment and decree of the learned Civil Judge of Allahabad, dated 23-12-1950, granting to the plaintiff respondent, J. R. Bhatt, a declaration that he 'had a right of appeal from the order dated 27-3-1944 and his appeal could not be properly withheld under the rules then inforce', and awarding half of his cost from the defendant-appellant. The order dated 27-3-1944 was to the following effect:'With reference to his application dated 21-9-1943 for permission to return to duty after the expiry of regular leave granted to him upto 31-3-1944, Mr. J.K. Bhatt is informed that the Hon'ble the Chief Justice has decided that he cannot be allowed to resume his duties. Accordingly he will be treated to have retired from the public service from 1-4-1944, W. Broome, I. C. S.REGISTRAR'. The relief prayed for by the plaintiff-respondent was that it be declared 'that the order of t...
Tag this Judgment!State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Abdul Aziz and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-06-1955
Reported in: AIR1955All673
Mootham, C.J. 1. This is in form an appeal from an order of the learned Civil Judge of Rae Bareli dated 15-4-1953. 2. On 29-5-1952. the first respondent filed a suit against the State Government, the Assistant Engineer, Public Works Department, and two other persons. His principal claim in this suit was for the recovery of a substantial sum of money from the State Government as damages for the alleged breach of a contract entered into by him with the State Government on 25-2-1948, where under he was to supply 50,000 C. ft. of Kanpur lime to the Government at a certain price. The other reliefs sought by the plaintiff were not related to the claim founded on the alleged breach of the contract dated 25-2-1948, and with these reliefs we are not now directly concerned. 3. On 6-10-1952, the first and second defendants filed what purported to be an application under Ss, 32 and 34 of the Arbitration Act. They contended that under Clause 23 of the contract entered into between the plaintiff and...
Tag this Judgment!Noor Ali Vs. Kanpur Omnibus Service Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-06-1955
Reported in: AIR1955All707
Mehrotra, J.1. This is a plaintiff's application in revision against the order of the Small Cause Court, Kanpur, dismissing the plaintiff's suit on the ground that the suit is barred by limitation.2. The facts briefly are that the plaintiff was an employee of the Kanpur Bus Service Ltd. He was suspended by the management on 3-9-1947 on account of some theft which took place in the premises of the defendant. He was subsequently prosecuted but on 16-7-1948 he was acquitted. On 27-8-1948 alter his acquittal he was reinstated by the management. Thereafter the plaintiff brought the present suit for recovery of his arrears during the period of suspension, namely from 3-2-1948 to 26-8-1948. The case set up by the plaintiff was that subsequent to his acquittal he made several applications to the defendant asking for the payment of his wages for the period of suspension but no redress was given to him. Thereafter he took the matter to the Labour Commissioner on 17-8-1948 under Section 15, Payme...
Tag this Judgment!Vikram Cotton Mills Ltd. and anr. Vs. Jwala Pd. Radha Krishna and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-04-1955
Reported in: AIR1956All14
Brij Mohan Lall, J. 1. This is an application by Shri Vikram Cotton Mills Ltd. (hereinafter described, for brevity's sake, as the company) under Section 153 of the Indian Companies Act (VII of 1913) praying that this Court may sanction a scheme put forward by it for payment of its debts. 2. This company was registered in 1910. One of its principal objects was the manufacture of cloth. For the last six or seven years it has been in financial difficulties It approached the Industrial Financial Corporation (hereinafter described as corporation) for help and succeeded, by executing a deed of an English mortgage, in obtaining from it a loan of rupees ten and a half lakhs, repayable in certain instalments. Under this deed the corporation had a right to enter into possession of the mortgaged property and to sell it in the event of non-fulfilment of the conditions mentioned in the deed. Repayment could not be made as agreed. 3. On 12-2-1954 Messrs. Jwala Prasad Radha Krishna, who claim to be t...
Tag this Judgment!Chhanga Khan Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-04-1955
Reported in: AIR1956All69; 1956CriLJ20
ORDERMulla, J.1. This is a reference made by the learned Sessions Judge, Kheri, recommending that the order of Sr. K. M. All, a first class Magistrate of Lakhimpur, convicting Chhanga Khan under Section 3, Passport Act be quashed.2. The facts of the case are that Chhanga Khan came to India with a passport, which was issued to him on 19-11-1952. This passport was valid for five years, i. e., upto 19-11-1957 Chhanga Khan, when he came to India, had to secure visas on this passport. Several visas were made on this passport and the last visa is dated 21-4-1954. In this visa Chhanga Khan was permitted to stay in India upto 9-7-1954.It is apparent from this that Chhanga Khan has been all along trying to extend the period of his stay in India and this period was being extended repeatedly. This time, however, the period was not extended and Chhanga Khan was arrested on 28-7-1954 at Lakhimpur. He was prosecuted under Section 3, Passport Act and the learned Magistrate convicted him. Chhanga Khan...
Tag this Judgment!Anant Ram Vs. Basdeo Sahai and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-04-1955
Reported in: AIR1957All114
Raghubar Dayal, J. 1. This is an execution second appeal by the judgment-debtor against the order of the court below that the execution application by the decree-holder respondent for execution of the final decree under Order 34, Rule 5, Civil P. C., was filed within time. 2. The order for the preparation of the final decree was passed on 8-7-1937. The final decree was actually prepared on 23-7-1937. The decree mentions at the end: 'It is issued today the 23rd July, 1937 under my signatures and seal of the court.' Below this appear the signatures of the Civil Judge with the same date, 23-7-1937 as the date of his signing this decree. 3. The first execution application was presented on 17-7-1940 within three years of the date the final decree bore, but beyond three years of the date on which the order for the preparation of the final decree was passed. These 'proceedings became infructuous though the office had reported that the execution application was filed beyond time and the decree...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›