Allahabad Court February 1956 Judgments
Mohd. Mohmood Hasan Khan Vs. Government of Uttar Pradesh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-29-1956
Reported in: AIR1956All457
Kidwai, J.1. In proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act about 873 acres of land belonging to the petitioner were acquired by the State and a sum of Rs. 1739/10/- was assessed as compensation. The petitioner made a claim for Rs. 75,000/- as compensation and eventually had the matter referred to the District Judge under Section 18, Land Acquisition Act. The District Judge held that the proper compensation was Rs. 5365/8/- but that, in view of the provisions of Section 25(2) of the Act he could award only Rs. 1739/10/- and he made an award to that effect.2. The petitioner appealed but he confined his appeal to a sum of Rs. 46,000/-. In this Court on the date fixed for hearing, one of the learned counsel for the petitioner did not appear and the two who did appear stated that they had no instructions to press the appeal. The appeal was accordingly dismissed for want of prosecution on 6-4-1954 by a Division Bench.3. On 8-4-1954 an application was presented under Order 41, Rule 17 and Sec...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. K.L. Anand Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-29-1956
Reported in: AIR1956All673; 1956CriLJ1276
Mehrotra, J. 1. Dr. Krishna Lal Anand, a member of the U. P. Medical Service was charged, under Section 161, Penal Code and Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947). The allegation against him was that on 6-10-1952, as a public servant and Medical Officer-in-Charge of the Sadar Hospital, Etawah, at about 8-30 or 9-00 P.M., at his quarter in the compound of the Sadar Hospital, Etawah, he accepted Rs. 100/- from one Shringirishi as illegal gratification as motive or reward for showing one of his injuries, No. 7, which had been examined by him earlier on 1-10-1952, as grievous in the injury report and thus rendered favour to him and disfavour to the assailants and further by corrupt and illegal means obtained pecuniary advantage by abusing his position as a public servant and he and his wile were found in possession of pecuniary resources disproportionate to his known sources of income and thereby found committing criminal misconduct falling under Section 5(1)(d) of t...
Tag this Judgment!Mongey Vs. Board of Revenue and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-28-1956
Reported in: AIR1957All47
Agarwala, J. 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution praying that a writ of certiorari or any other suitable writ, direction or order be issued quashing, the judgment of the Hon'ble Board of Revenue.2. The judgment, which is sought to be quashed, is dated 27-2-1954. The applicant comes to this Court two years after the judgment was delivered. The writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution should be filed as quickly, after the delivery of judgment of the inferior tribunal, as possible. In Ferris on Extraordinary Legal Remedies it is stated in para 176 :''Thirty days has been held a reasonable time in the ordinary case, and in any cases more than a reasonable time, within which to apply to the inferior court for a stay of mandate, and to duly serve and file the application. One rule laid down as generally applicable is, that as the common-law remedy by certiorari is in the nature of that afforded by writ of error, it will not be issued, or if issued will be ...
Tag this Judgment!Raja Ganga Pratap Singh Vs. the Allahabad Bank Ltd., Lucknow
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-28-1956
Reported in: AIR1956All635
Kidwai, J. 1. The Allahabad Bank instituted a suit against the Deputy Commissioner incharge of the Court of Wards, Mallanpur Estate, for whom Raja Ganga Pratap Singh was later substituted, for the recovery of a considerable sum of money on the foot of a mortgage executed by the Court of Wards on behalf of the father of the applicant in 1939. 2. The defendant raised many pleas and stated a great many facts which indicate that his case was a very hard one and that, in spite of the fact that he and his predecessors had made payments of considerable sums of money to the Bank on the basis of earlier mortgages of which the mortgage in suit was said to be a renewal, a large sum still remains due. Later on, by an application for amendment, he added a plea that he was entitled to the benefit of Sections 3 and 8, U. P. Zamindars' Debt Reduction Act of 1952 since the definition of debt given in the said Act was ultra vires being against the provisions of the Constitution. 3. This plea was incorpo...
Tag this Judgment!The District Board, Banaras Vs. Churhu Rai and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-27-1956
Reported in: AIR1956All680
Brij Mohan Lall, J.1. This and the connected second appeal No. 2127 of 1945 are defendants' appeals against the appellate decree or the learned Civil Judge of Banaras. The latter disposed of by his judgment, three appeals pending before him thereby decreeing the plaintiff-respondent's suit in toto.2. It appears that the U.P. Government has sanctioned a scheme for planting trees by the roadsides in district board areas. Some trees are planted by the district boards themselves while permission is given sometimes to private individuals also to plant trees on the roadsides. The scheme contemplates that persons desirous of planting trees should obtain written consent of the district board, should tend and look after the trees while they are young and protect them against frost and depredation by cattle during their growth. After the trees are grown up a Sanad is issued to the planters recognising their title to the said trees.3. Ghurahu Rai, plaintiff-respondent, obtained a Sanad of the afo...
Tag this Judgment!J.K. Hosiery Factory Vs. Labour Appellate Tribunal of India and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-24-1956
Reported in: AIR1956All498; (1956)IILLJ4All
ORDERDesai, J.1. This is an application by the J.K. Hosiery Factory a firm manufacturing hosiery in Kanpur, for a writ of certiorari to quash an order dated 26-8-1955 of the Labour Appellate Tribunal, Lucknow Bench, and for any other writ order or direction that may be considered proper. During the pendency of some appeals between the applicant and its workmen in the Labour Appellate Tribunal the applicant, which was carrying on the business on a continuous loss since 1949 and had incurred a total loss of more than Rupees Ten lacs upto the middle of 1953 decided to close down the factory and applied to the Appellate Tribunal for permission to do so and discharge the workmen.Previously it had been laying-off its workmen, from time to time. Before the Tribunal could consider the question of granting permission the applicant withdrew the application on being advised that it was its fundamental right to close down its business and no permission of the Tribunal was required. After withdrawi...
Tag this Judgment!Murari Lal Vs. L. Debi Saran and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-24-1956
Reported in: AIR1956All555
Asthana, J. 1. This is a defendant's appeal against the order dated 10-7-1951 of the District Judge of Meerut setting aside the decree of the trial court and remanding the case to it for disposal according to law. 2. The circumstances which gave rise to the case out of which this appeal has arisen may be stated as follows : The plaintiff Lala Debi Saran, along with another person, obtained on lease on a monthly rent of Rs. 25/- a piece of land on 29-12-1937 and thereafter constructed some shops on it. The lease was for a fixed term of 5 years. Before the expiry of the period of the lease defendants 2-4 granted a theka to defendant 1, Lala Murari Lal, on 11-4-1942 in respect of some property including the property which had been given on lease to Debi Saran. After the expiry of the term of the lease in favour of Debi Saran, Lala Murari Lal filed a suit, No. 385 of 1943, against Debi Saran for his ejectment from the land in dispute. This suit was decreed on 13-3-1944. Debi Saran was give...
Tag this Judgment!Darbari Ram Sharma Vs. the State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-24-1956
Reported in: AIR1956All578; 1956CriLJ1147; (1956)IILLJ146All
ORDERMehrotra, J.1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution praying that a writ of a direction be issued quashing the order of the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Northern Range, Bareilly, dated 21st of May, 1953 whereby the petitioner was ordered to be reduced to the rank of a constable and also the order dated 29th August, 1953 passed in appeal confirming the aforesaid order, and a writ of certiorari be issuect quashing the order dated 14th of May, 19S4 dismissing the petitioner and the ordter dated 18th October, 1954 passed in appeal confirming the order of dismissal.2. The petitioner was serving as a Sub-Inspector of Police in the U. P. Police Service since the year 1949. In 1952, he was posted as Second Officer at out post Sarai Qila in the City of Bareilly. He had investigated a case under sections 376/342, I. P. O., and he had, in that connection, challaned one Ram Gopal.The accused in that case had befen committed to the Sessions Court and the hearing o...
Tag this Judgment!Radha Raman Bajpai and ors. Vs. Labour Appellate Tribunal of India and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-22-1956
Reported in: (1957)IILLJ15All
M.C. Desai, J.1. This is an application under Article 226 of the Constitution for writs of certiorari quashing orders of the State industrial tribunal, Uttar Pradesh and the Labour Appellate Tribunal of India, Third Bench, Lucknow, and a writ of mandamus directing the State industrial tribunal to re-hear the reference. The applicants are workmen of the Sun Publishers and, advertisers limited, opposite party 3, which has its registered office at Kanpur. on 10 September 1953, Sri S.P. Mehra, the managing director of opposite party 3, framed charges against some workmen including the applicants to the effect that on 9 September 1953, at 1.30 p.m. they under the leadership of R.K. Tewari, applicant 2, Staged an illegal strike without giving previous notice and at 4 p.m. took forcible possession of the press, and called upon them to submit their explanations on 12 September 1953, by 10.30 a.m. The charges were heard by the managing director of opposite party 3 on 12 September 1953. but none...
Tag this Judgment!Tajammul HusaIn Vs. Mst. Qaisar Jahan Begam and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-21-1956
Reported in: AIR1956All638
Randhir Singh, J. 1. This is an application under Article 133, Constitution of India for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court against the judgment and decree qf this Court, dated 5-5-1954. 2. The application has been opposed on the ground that the value of the subject matter in appeal in this Court as also in the proposed appeal was less than Rs. 20,000/-. The suit which has given rise to the appeal in this Court was a suit for accounting and was decided by the trial court on the 1st March, 1946. The court granted a decree for Rs. 13,888/5/9. The plaintiff then came up in appeal to this Court and the appeal was valued at Rs. 19,431/0/5. This appeal was partly allowed and the sum decreed by the lower court was enhanced by a sum of Rs. 109/9/9. There was also a cross-objection and this was valued at Rs. 6,000/-. The cross-objection was also partly allowed to the extent of Rs. 655/-. The plaintiff now wishes to go in appeal to the Supreme Court as the decree passed by the trial Court was ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »