Allahabad Court January 1956 Judgments
ibadat HusaIn Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-31-1956
Reported in: AIR1956All448
Mootham, C.J. 1. This is an appeal from a judgment of Chaturvedi J., dated 4-8-1955, dismissing a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The facts are these: 2. By a Notification dated 23-2-1953, made tinder Section 14 of the Criminal P. C. 1898, the Governor conferred upon the Regional Transport Magistrate, Allahabad the power to try at Allahabad all cases under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 arising within the districts of Allahabad, Mirazpur, Pratapgarh, Sultanpur and Fyzabad. In January, 1955, an enforcement Squad Officer of the State Transport Department reported that the petitioner had contravened the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act by carrying more goods and passengers than he was authorised to do, and proceedings against him were sub-sequently commenced in the court of the Regional Transport Magistrate at Allahabad. The appellant thereupon filed the petition out of which this appeal arises in which he sought the issue of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing t...
Tag this Judgment!Central Talkies and anr. Vs. Lala Dwarka Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-30-1956
Reported in: AIR1956All348
Brij Mohan Lall, J. 1. This is an application by the defendants to obtain from us a certificate to the effect that the appeal which they propose to prefer to the Supreme Court satisfies the requirements of Article 133 of the Constitution. 2. There is a big and costly building of a cinema house in Collectorganj at Kanpur. Its value at present exceeds Rs. 20,000 /-, and it is the common case of the parties that, at all material times, it has exceeded Rs. 20,000/-. In other words, from the commencement of the lease, to be shortly mentioned, till now it has been worth considerably more than Rs. 20,000/-. 3. The applicants obtained a lease of this cinema house from the opposite party. Sometime later, the opposite party brought a suit for the applicants' ejectment from that building. Before instituting the suit he had obtained from the District Magistrate of Kanpur permission under Section 3, U. P. Control of Rent and Eviction Act (3 of 1947) to institute the suit. The plea in defence was th...
Tag this Judgment!Om Prakash and anr. Vs. Sm. Sohan Devi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-30-1956
Reported in: AIR1956All435
Randhir Singh, J. 1. The point which is before us is whether the memorandum of appeal filed by the applicants in this case was presented within limitation. An application under Section 5, Limitation Act has been made by the appellants, but the learned counsel fox the appellants has argued the point of limitation without regard to the application under Section 5 inasmuch as, according to his contention, the appeal would be within time even if no benefit of Section 5, Limitation Act is given to the appellants.2. The dates which are relevant for the decision of this point are as follows. The suit whichhas given rise to this appeal was decided on 8-5-1954, an application for a copy of the decree was made on 2-6-1954. The copy was ready for delivery on 24-7-1954. Another application for a copy of the judgment was made on 31-8-1954, and this copy was ready on 11-9-1954. The period of limitation for filing the appeal against the judgment was 90 days.It is not disputed that if the period of li...
Tag this Judgment!Mohammad Amir Ahmad Khan Vs. Deputy Commissioner and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-27-1956
Reported in: AIR1956All453
Kidwai, J.1. Raja Mohammad Amir Ahmad Khan of Mahmudabad in the district of Sitapur executed a deed of waqf. Having duly signed it and got it attested, he presented it on 15-9-1948, under Section 31, Stamp Act, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') to the Deputy Commissioner (Collector) of Sitapur for his opinion as to the stamp duty with which it was chargeable.The Deputy Commissioner, being himself in doubt, referred the matter to the Board of Revenue under Section 56(2) of the Act. The matter remained pending before the Board for a considerable length of time but eventually it was held that the document was a deed of settlement as defined in Section 2(24) of the Act and as such liable to duty in accordance with Article 58.2. On 29-10-1951, the Deputy Commissioner held that Rs. 85,598/7/- were payable as stamp duty in respect of the deed and ordered that the Raja should deposit the said amount within 15 days. A notice to this effect was served on the Raja on 10-11-1951, and he moved...
Tag this Judgment!Firm Gobardhan Das Kailasnath Vs. Collector of Mirzapur
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-27-1956
Reported in: AIR1956All721
Agarwala, J.1. These are two connected appeals from a judgment of a learned single Judge of this Court upon petitions presented under Article 226 of the Constitution. The facts briefly stated are these.2. The Chief Conservator of Forests, Vindhya Pradesh invited sealed tenders for the sale of lac and lac products in the forests belonging to that state. In the notice it was stated that the tenders were to be submitted by the end of January 1952. The appellant firm which carries on business at Mirzapur submitted tenders on 31-1-1952. The tenders were opened the same day and the appellant's tenders were accepted by the Divisional Forest Officer of Vindhya Pradesh.One of the terms announced at the time of the opening of the tenders was that 25% of the price shall be deposited on the acceptance of the tender and the balance was to be paid within one month.The tenders were in respect of eight lots, six of Umaria division, one of Rewa division and one of Chhatturpur division. The price of the...
Tag this Judgment!Rama Shanker Vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-25-1956
Reported in: AIR1956All525
Desai, J. 1. This is an application for quashing the proceedings pending against the applicant in the court of a first class Magistrate or transferring the proceedings to another district. The proceedings are under Section 406, I. P. C., commenced on a report of the police. The case against him is that he embezzled a large sum of money which was entrusted to him for being carried from one placeto another. A Panchayat Raj inspector made a report against the applicant on 8-7-1954 on the following allegations :2. The Inspector encashed a cheque for the sum of Rs. 5,746/14/- at Ghazipur in the presence of the applicant who is a businessman. The Inspector was afraid of carrying such a large sum of money from Ghazipur to Dildarnagar where his headquarters are. The applicant offered to carry the money, which was kept in a purse, from Ghazipur to Tarighat across the Ganges. The applicant and the Inspector separated. When some time later the Inspector met the applicant at Tarighat and asked for...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Raj NaraIn Singh and ors. Vs. District Magistrate, Gorakhpur and a ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-24-1956
Reported in: AIR1956All481; 1956CriLJ1026
Desai, J. 1. This is an application for a writ of habeas corpus by three persons who are being prosecuted' for the offence of Section 188, I. P. C. for disobedience of an order promulgated under Section 144, Criminal P. C. by the City Magistrate, Gorakhpur. At the time when the applicants presented the application in this Court they were detained in the District Jail, Gorakhpur; they have been released by this Court on bail during the pendency of this application. This Court has also stayed further proceedings in the case under Section 188, I. P. C. (2) Applicant 1 is a member of the U. P. Legislative Assembly and leader of the opposition party in the Assembly, applicant 2 is a Trade Unionist and member of the Praja Socialist Party and applicant 3 is a member of the Praja Socialist Party and Secretary of the District Kisan Panchayat, Gorakhpur. On 25-4-1952 the police fired upon a crowd of railway workers and killed two of them. Since then 2-3 persons have been going every year on Apri...
Tag this Judgment!Rajendra Kumar Garg Vs. Shafiq Ahmad Azad and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-20-1956
Reported in: AIR1957All37; 1957CriLJ18
Beg, J. 1. This is an application under the Contempt ofCourts Act. The petitioner in the case is SriRajendra Kumar Garg, Pleader, Collectorate Saharanpur. The opposite parties arrayed in the application are (1) Syed Shafiq Ahmad Azad, Managing. Editor, 'Azad' Urdu Weeking, and (2) RashidAhmad Ghazi, Editor 'Azad' Urdu Weekly, Saharanpur. The petitioner in the said applicationprayed for action under the Contempt of CourtsAct against the opposite parties in respect of anarticle published in the 'Azad' Urdu Weekly on1-5-1955.2. In order to appreciate the arguments of the parties, it would be necessary to narrate the chain of events which culminated in the publication of the aforesaid article. It would appear that in Saharanpur there is a factory called Lord Krishna 'Sugar Mills, Saharanpur. On the night between the 28th and 29th March, 1955, the workers of that mill went on strike. The strike, appears to be the result of the strained relations between the workers and the mill owners and t...
Tag this Judgment!Gur Charan and ors. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-19-1956
Reported in: AIR1957All557; 1957CriLJ918
ORDERAsthana, J. 1. This is an application in revision byfour persons, namely, Gurcharan, Bhagwan, Jagarnath and Balram, who have been convicted under Section 379, I. P. C., by a first class Magistrate of Ghazipur. Gurcharan and Balram were sentenced to 9 months' rigorous imprisonment and Bhagwan and Jagarnath to 6 months' rigorous imprisonment. Their conviction and sentences have been upheld in appeal by the learned Sessions Judge.2. It appears that on the 13th October, 1953 a complaint was filed by Smt. Biranjia, widow of Mahadeo Koeri, against the applicants that they had cut her crop in plot No. 909 on the 23rd August 1953 at about 2 p.m. and had thereby committed theft. The applicants denied that they had cut the crop. It may be mentioned here that prior to this complaint Smt. Biranjia had filed a report under Section 145/506, I. P. C., against the applicants at the police station. Subsequent to this report Smt. Biranjia filed a complaint before the District Magistrate, Ghazipur, ...
Tag this Judgment!L. Pyare Lal Vs. Governor-general of India in Council
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-18-1956
Reported in: AIR1957All21
Mootham, C.J.1. This is a second appeal by a plaintiff from a Judgment and decree of the learned Civil Judge of Etawah dated 2-6-1947, which has been referred to a Bench by a learned Single Judge.2. The appeal arises out of a suit filed by the appellant against the Governor General of India-in-Council for the recovery of Rs. 2,691 as damage for loss of part of a consignment of ghee. On 5-5-1944, the appellant sent 319 tins of ghee from Etawah to Bardwan by the East India Railway. The goods were sent under two risk notes, in Forms A and Z respectively.When the train reached Bardwan on 17th May it was found that 7 tins were missing altogether, that 16 tins were empty and that 19 were of short weight. The trial Court gave the appellant a decree for Rs. 2,659-2-0, but on appeal the lower appellate Court modified the decree as it was of opinion that the appellant was only entitled to recover from the respondent the value of the 7 tins which had been wholly lost. It accordingly substituted f...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »