Allahabad Court December 1956 Judgments
Raja Ram Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-21-1956
Reported in: AIR1958All141
ORDERMehrotra, J.1. The present petition and a number of other petitions have been filed by the petitioners under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the order terminating their services as Lekhpals in various circles of different Districts. As many common questions arise in all these petitions, I propose to dispose of all these petitions by one common judgment. There may be certain distinguishing features in each of these cases which will be referred to when dealing with specific cases, if it is necessary to do so.2. Briefly the facts, which have been set out in the affidavit filed in support of the present petition and which are also common to most of the petitions with slight variations with regard to the dates of appointment and the examinations which were held in each case, arethat the petitioners were appointed on or about 3-4-53 as Lekhpals on the permanent cadre. In some of the cases there is a dispute whether the appointment is a permanent one or temporary one, but in ...
Tag this Judgment!Dhanno Khan Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-21-1956
Reported in: AIR1957All317; 1957CriLJ498
Mukerji, J.1. This is an appeal by Dhahnoo Khan, who has been convicted by the learned Sessions Judge of Rampur under Section 302 of the I. P. C. and has been sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 100/-.2. The facts giving rise to the incident briefly stated were these:3. On the 14th of December, 1951, the deceased went to the shop of one Tullan, who was a carpenter, about sunset time in village Kajriyee. As he went there he found several people sitting at that shop. The deceased asked as to where the Pradhan of the village was. Thereupon Tullan asked the deceased as to why he was enquiring for the Pradhan. In answer to this querry by Tullan, the deceased replied that he wanted to meet the Pradhan for he wanted to complain to him against the actions of certain people who were driving carts through the ploughed fields and thereby causing damage. Dhannoo Khan the accused immediately said that the carts would be taken through the ploughed fields as they had been. This asser...
Tag this Judgment!Lakshmi Ratan Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. J.K. Jute Mills Co. Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-21-1956
Reported in: AIR1957All311
Beg, J. 1. This is a defendant's first appeal arising out of a suit for recovery of money brought by the plaintiff-despondent, a company styled as J. K. Jute Mills Company Limited, Kanpur against the defendant appellant also a company known as Lakshmi Ratan Cotton Mills Limited, Kanpur. Both the companies are limited liability companies, and have their registered offices at Kanpur. The plaintiff company is one of the concerns owned by the family of Juggilal Kamlapat. Sir Padampat Singhania is the head of the said family. The defendant company belongs to another group of industries known as Beharilal Ram Charan group. Sri Ram Ratan Gupta is the head of that group. The defendant company was sued through two persons, namely, Sri Ram Prasad Gupta and Sri Gulab Chand Jain both of whom are the directors of the defendant company.2. The plaintiff's case was that the plaintiff company had advanced a loan of Rs. 1,50,000/-to the defendant company on the understanding that the loan advanced would...
Tag this Judgment!Damodar Pd. Vs. Byopar Sahayat Bank Ltd. Through Suraj Bal Dixit
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-21-1956
Reported in: AIR1957All353
Gurtu, J. 1. This is a judgment-debtor's appeal.2. The decreeholder obtained a decree on the 13th of January, 1938. The decree was an instalment decree whereunder a sum of Rs. 300/- bad to be paid in each subsequent year until the decretal amount was fully satisfied. In all, ten instalments had to be paid. There was a default clause in the decree that in case three instalments fell in arrears, the decree-holder would be entitled to recover the entire outstanding balance of the decretal amount. There was a default by the judgment-debtor in consequence of which an application, for execution claiming the balance of the amount due under the decree was filed on 21-2-1947. It was held in regard to that execution application that it had been filed after a period of three years had expired since the default and that it was barred by limitation. The application for execution was, therefore, dismissed, the final order of this Court being dated, the 5th of October 1950. The present application wa...
Tag this Judgment!Mst. Jaggo Vs. Kanhaiya Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-20-1956
Reported in: AIR1957All344
Beg, J. 1. These two appeals are filed by one Srimati Jaggo who was defendant in two suits, and whose application for restoration in the said suits was rejected by the trial Court. It appears that one Kanhaiya Lal had filed two suits against Srimati Jaggo who was the sole defendant in both the suits. In these suits, 8-7-1950, was fixed for recording evidence of the parties. On that date, the statement of one witness for the plaintiff was recorded. The Court then fixed 10-7-1950, as the next date for the hearing of the cases. On 10-7-1950, however, the plaintiff gave an application for filing a document. The Court allowed this application on payment of Rs. 25/- as costs by the plaintiff, and adjourned the cases fixing 28 and 29-9-1950, for further proceedings in the cases. On 28-9-1950, however, the defendant applied for adjournment. This application of adjournment was rejected by the Court. Her counsel, who was engaged for the sole purpose of giving the adjournment application also wit...
Tag this Judgment!Kuber Nath Kandu Vs. Gorakh Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-20-1956
Reported in: AIR1957All369
Upadhya, J. 1. These are defendants' appeals arising out of suits for arrears of rent and for possession of the land by removal of the constructions thereon made by the defendants. 2. The land in dispute is situate in Barhaj Bazar of which the Raja of Majhauli was the proprietor. On plot No. 90 the defendants and other persons obtained from the Raja permission to construct stalls for keeping shops by entering into agreements with the Raja. It was stated at the Bar that the agreements were all on similar terms and contained a stipulation that the defendants would construct temporary stalls for the purpose of keeping shops and that they would vacate the land if required to do so by the Raja's agent or officials. It was also stipulated that the defendants could be given one week's notice by the Raja to vacate the land and that so long as the land was used for keeping the stalls, the defendants would pay a certain amount mentioned in the document as 'baithaki' for keeping the stalls. On 27...
Tag this Judgment!Sobhnath Vs. Suraj Prasad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-19-1956
Reported in: AIR1957All286
Asthana, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a suit for possession of plot No, 1465 in village Munjhara in the district of Mirzapur which has been decreed by the lower Courts.2. The suit was brought on the allegation that the plaintiff was the fixed rate tenant of this plot; that the defendant had wrongly taken possession of it and refused to vacate it. The plaintiff, therefore, claimed possession over this plot and Rs. 30/-as mesne profits for three years prior to the suit.3. The defendant contested the suit on several grounds. He denied that the plaintiff was the tenant of his plot & pleaded that he himself was the tenant and in possession of it as such; that the plaintiff had not been in possession within 12 years and the suit was, therefore, barred by limitation; that the suit was also barred by limitation under Section 180(2), U. P. Tenancy Act, as the plaintiff had not been in' possession within three years and that the Court had no jurisdiction.4. Both the lower Cou...
Tag this Judgment!Haradwar Singh and anr. Vs. Satyendra Kumar Gupta and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-19-1956
Reported in: AIR1957All305
ORDERM.L. Chaturvedi, J.1. This is a petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution.2. The two Petitioners are tenants of a house situate in the city of Banaras, and the 1st respondent is the owner of the house. The Petitioners took possession of the house as tenants in September 1950, It is said that in some months they sent rent to the 1st respondent at the rate of Rs. 44/8/-per month, but the respondent refused to accept the rent. The reason was that, according to the respondent, the rent of the house was fixed at Rs. 100/- per month. After sending some money orders, the petitioners kept quiet with the result that no amount of rent has so far been paid at all by the petitioners to the respondent for a period of more than six years now.2. In the counter-affidavit it is stated that the agent of the respondent was instructed to file a suit for the recovery of rent against the Petitioners, and the agent took expenses for the purpose but never filed the suit and kept the landlor...
Tag this Judgment!The JaIn Transport and General Trading Co. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-19-1956
Reported in: AIR1957All320
Mehrotra, J. 1. The petitioner Jain Transport and General Trading Company and a large number of other persons, who are petitioners in the connected writ petitions, carried on the business of plying motor vehicles and stage carriages on hire in the State of Uttar Pradesh. Their rights have been regulated under the Motor Vehicles Act of 1939. The petitioner held permit Nos. 8-A and 9-A under the Act for running stage carriages on Aligarh-Iglas-Mathura route. These permits were granted to the petitioner in the year 1954 and under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act were valid upto August 1957.Sometime in the year 1947 the State Government conceived the idea of running their own buses on the public thoroughfares. In the beginning they decided to run as competitors with private bus owners but later on they decided to run in exclusion of private bus owners. This was sought to be done with the aid of the Motor Vehicles Act. Under the provisions of Section 42(3) of the Motor Vehicles Act,...
Tag this Judgment!Mohammad Sharif Khan Vs. Onkar Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-17-1956
Reported in: AIR1957All217; (1960)IILLJ279All
ORDERV.D. Bhargava, J. 1. This is an application on behalf of Mohammad Sharif Khan under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution challenging his dismissal. The petitioner was originally appointed as a constable on 12th December 1938 and later on he was confirmed as an Armed Police Constable. After about three years he was promoted to the rank of a Naik in the Special Armed Constabulary at Allahabad.In 1947 he was transferred to Bahraich and then he was deputed at Sitapur as an Instructor, He came back to Bahraich from there as a Head Constable Armed Constabulary and at the time the incident occurred, he was posted at Unnao. His immediate officer was Sri Kamta Singh a Sub-Inspector of Armed Police and it was said that rice worth Rs. 15/- was supplied by the petitioner to the aforesaid Kamta Singh and since the petitioner wanted the sum of Rs. 15/- back, he got annoyed with him. A complaint was lodged by the petitioner against the said Sri Kamta Singh to the higher authorities.2. The Ja...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »