Allahabad Court September 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.
Sanker Dutt Shukla Vs. President, Municipal Board, Auraiya and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-05-1955
Reported in: AIR1956All70; (1956)ILLJ736All
ORDERMehrotra, J. 1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution praying that (a) writ of certiorari be issued quashing the order of the President dated 31-3-1955, (b) a writ of mandamus be issued directing the opposite parties not to prevent the petitioner from performing his duties as the Superintendent of the Municipal Beard. 2. The petitioner was working as the Superintendent of the Municipal Board, Auraiya, in the district of Etawah. Certain charges were framed against the petitioner by the President of the Board. After the said charges had been investigated, they were ultimately dropped on 27-9-1954. On 24-2-1955, a letter, which purports to have been received by the general clerk of the Board in the office of the Board on that date was written by the petitioner. The letter reads as follows: 'Sewa me nivedan hai ki kuchh karon bash prarthi ab Board ki sewa adhik dinon karne mebraash hai. Aisi dasha me tyag patra swikar kiye jane ki kripa ki jave.' Tne purport of ...
Haveli Ram Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-05-1955
Reported in: AIR1956All132; 1956CriLJ183
ORDERRoy, J. 1. This is an application in revision by Haveli Ram. He was charged by the Magistrate under Sections 482, 483 and 486, I. P. C. Upon the evidence that was produced before the Magistrate, the Magistrate was of the opinion (that offences under Section 482 and 483, I. P. C. were not made out, but the offence under Section 486, I. P. O. was establishedThe learned Magistrate accordingly convicted the applicant under Section 486, I. P. C. and sentenced him to six months' rigorous imprisonment. In appeal before the learned Sessions Judge the conviction and sentence were maintained. The' applicant has accordingly come up in revision to this Court.2. The facts may be briefly stated. Messrs. Lever Brothers (India) Ltd. is a joint stock company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act. They are manufacturers of certain well-known brands of soap known as the 'Sun-Light' soap, 'Lux' and the 'Lifebuoy' soap. The names and the labels of these soaps are registered under the Trade Marks...
Narendra Kumar Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-05-1955
Reported in: AIR1956All336; 1956CriLJ662
FACTS: Narendra Kumar, Basdeo, Ram Autar, Ram Prasad and Lala were convicted under Section 395, Penal Code by the Additional Sessions Judge of Kanpur and were sentenced to 5 years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 200/-. Ram Prasad and Ram Autar were also convicted under Section 412, I.P.C. and were sentenced to 2 years' rigorous imprisonment. The sentences under Sections 395 and 412, I.P.C. were concurrent. All of them perferred appeals to the High Court.It appeared that the appellants along with four other persons, namely, Mathura Singh, Rup Narain Ram Pal alias Kallu and Ram Dularey, were charged under Section 395, I.P.C. for committing a dacoity at the house of one Ram Prasad on the night between the 15th and the 16th April, 1951 in Village Maryani, P.S. Bithore, district Kanpur. Two of them, namely Ram Autar and Ram Prasad, were also charged under Section 412, I.P.C. because some of the looted property was alleged to have been recovered from their possesion.The charge under...
Chief Inspector of Stamps Vs. Jash Pal Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-02-1955
Reported in: AIR1956All168
ORDERUpadhya, J. 1. This is a revision by the Chief Inspector of Stamps from an order passed by theAdditional Civil Judge, Agra, holding that the court fee paid on the plaint in suit No. 52 of1949 was sufficient.2. The plaintiffs in the suit were the sons of one Kr. Nau Nihal Singh who had become an insolvent and the receiver appointed by the Court, defendant 1 in this case, had sold a house in which the plaintiffs alleged they had a three fourth share while only one-fourth belonged to the insolvent. The plaintiffs prayed for a declaration that the transfer by the receiver was illegal and not binding on them. The relief was claimed in the following language:--'(1) It be declared that the sale of the ancestral residential house of the plaintiffs by the Official Receiver defendant 1 in favour of Babu Lal father of defendant 2 is illegal, without authority land not binding on the plaintiffs or on their threefourth share in the said house and therefore no right, title or interest in the sa...
Munshi and ors. Vs. Chiranji Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-02-1955
Reported in: AIR1956All237
Raghubar Dayal, J.1. Two plots Nos. 62/1 and 64/3 in village Sahawali, Pargana Rajpura, Tahsil Gunnaur, District Budaun, were mortgaged in 1891 with possession. The representatives of the mortgagor applied under Section 12, U. P. Agriculturists' Relief Act (No. 27 of 1934) for an order directing that the mortgage be redeemed and that they be put in possession of the mortgaged property. They deposited Rs. 65/- alleging it to be the amount which was due on the mortgage.The representatives of the mortgagee objected to the redemption of the mortgage and the Assistant Collector enquired into the matter and held that plot No. 62/1, which corresponded to the theft plot No. 111, had not been mortgaged and that Rs. 65 was the amount due under the mortgage. He ordered redemption of the mortgage with respect to plot No. 64/3, corresponding to the then plot No. 77, payment of the money deposited to the mortgagee and delivery of possession to the mortgagor.On appeal to the District Judge under Sect...
Shyam Lal Vs. District Board of Agra and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-01-1955
Reported in: AIR1956All7
ORDER1. These are two connected petitions raising the same questions for decision and may conveniently be disposed of together.2. The petitioners in the two petitions are permit holders for stage carriages which run on the route Agra to Tantpur. On this route, two rivers intercept the highway. Khari river does it at mile 13 and Uttangan river at mile 23. There are permanent masonry bridges over these two rivers, but the bridges are somewhat low. There is no difficulty in the seasons other than rainy season and all the stage carriages and buses run over the pucca bridges while travelling on this route.The difficulty only arises sometime during the rainy season, because on some days the water flows over the bridges and if the water is sufficiently deep over them, it is not possible to cross the bridges by motor transports. On those days the passengers get down from the buses and walk down to the neigh-bouring ferries where arrangements are made to carry passengers across the river but no...
L. Behu Mal Vs. Murli Dhar and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-01-1955
Reported in: AIR1956All5
Raghubar Dayal, J. 1. Behu Mal and others had a decree against Roop Chand and Mehar Chand. In execution of this, decree certain property was attached. Murli Dhar filed a claim under Order 21, Rule 58, C. P. C., against the attachment of that property. His claim was dismissed in default on 15-4-1944.2. Murli Dhar filed an application under Section 151, C. P. C. on 11-5-1944, for the setting aside of the dismissal order. This application was dismissed on 15-9-1945.3. Murli Dhar then filed a regular suit on 2-8-1946. The decree-holders objected to the maintainability of the suit on the ground of limitation, it being urged that in view of Order 21, Rule 63, C. P. C., the suit should have been instituted within a year of the dismissal of the claim under Order 21, Rule 58, C. P. C. This objection was upheld by the trial court and the suit was dismissed.On appeal the appellate Court did not agree with this objection and remanded the suit for further progress. It is against this order that Bch...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›