Allahabad Court April 1956 Judgments
Amir Chand Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-26-1956
Reported in: AIR1956All562; 1956CriLJ1141
ORDERRoy, J. 1. This is an application in revision by Amir Chand who has been convicted under Section 7 of the Essential Supplies (Temporary Powers) Act,. 1946 (No. XXIV of 1946) for contravention of Clause 6(A) of the Cotton Textiles (Control) Order 1948 and Clause 4 of the U. P. Controlled Cotton Cloth and Yarn Dealers'' Licensing Order, 1948 and sentenced to three months' rigorous imprisonment and to a fine of Rs. 2007/- or in default to rigorous imprisonment for further one month. 2. The facts giving rise to this application are these: The applicant held a temporary licence in Form P tenable upto 21st of June, 1951 to carry on business for storing cloth. The license had expired before the 10th of July, 1951 on which date he was found selling a sari to one Sukhan for a sum of Rs. 11/8/-. The prosecution alleged that the sale without a licence was a contravention of Clause 6 (A) of the Cotton Textiles (Control) Order, 1948 and Clause 4 of the U. P. Controlled Cotton Cloth and Yarn De...
Tag this Judgment!Bhusan Saran Vs. Onkar Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-26-1956
Reported in: AIR1956All715
Nasirullah Beg, J. 1. This is a writ petition praying for the issue of a writ of certiorari quashing the judgment and proceedings of an Election Tribunal. The dispute in connection with which the case before the Election Tribunal arose related to the election of members of ward No. 3 of Pilibhit Municipality. This ward is a two member constituency. The election for membership is said to have been held on 26-10-1953. The following four persons were rival candidates for membership of Pilibhit Municipality from the said ward: (1) Sri Bhushan Saran who is the applicant in this writ petition; (2) Sri Rameshwar Dayal Gupta; (3) Sri Shankar Lal; and (4) Sri Hargopal Agarwal. On 29-10-1953 the result of the said election was announced. Sri Shankar Lal was found to have obtained 954 votes while Sri Bhusan Saran, Sri Hargopal Agarwala and Sri Rameshwar Dayal Gupta were found to have secured 700, 697 and 544 votes respectively. As a result, Sri Shankar Lal and Sri Bhushan Saran were declared d...
Tag this Judgment!The Kanpur Journals Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-26-1956
Reported in: [1956]7STC661(All)
1. This is a reference made by the Revising Authority under Section 11 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act.2. The assessees are publishers and printers, and in the course of their business as printers they accept orders from customers for job work such as receipt books, registers, letter heads and handbills which are printed in accordance with the requirements of their customers on paper supplied by the assessees. In the bills submitted by the assessees to their customers the price of the paper and the charges for printing are shown separately. In respect of the assessment year 1948-49 and the first nine months of the year 1949-50 the assessees were assessed to sales tax on the proceeds of sale of such job work. They challenged the validity of such assessments and the question which has been referred by the Revising Authority to this Court is-Whether the turnover of receipt books, registers, forms, letter heads, visiting cards and handbills printed to order when all materials -paper, ink, etc.-a...
Tag this Judgment!Firm Jathmall Sadasukh Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-25-1956
Reported in: AIR1957All110; [1957]32ITR713(All)
V. Bhargava, J. 1. This is an application under Section 21, Excess Profits Tax Act, read with Section 66(2), Income-tax Act, with a prayer that the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal be directed to state the case with reference to the following question of law arising in the case:Q. Whether the main purpose of starting the new firm Jauhari Lal Khemraj was the avoidance or reductions of the liability to excess profits tax of the assessee firm Jetnmal Sadasukh within the meaning of Section 10-A of the Excess Profits Tax Act?'2. The assessee, Firm Jethmal Sadasukh, carried on kirana business with headquarters at Lucknow and a branch at Kanpur in this firm Jauhari Lal had a one-third share. Swamp Chand and Sripal a none-third share and Kailash Chand minor had a one-third share. On 17-12-1942, another firm under the name and style of Jauhari Lal Khemraj was started at Kanpur to carry on the same kirana business and, in this firm, the three partners of the assessee firm each had a four-anna share...
Tag this Judgment!Jogendra Raj Kishore Vs. University of Allahabad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-25-1956
Reported in: AIR1956All503
Mehrotra, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of Constitution.2. The facts giving rise to this petition briefly are that the petitioner had been a student of LL.B. (Previous) of the Allahabad University. On 11-11-1955 he received a letter of the Vice-Chancellor of the said University, signed by the Assistant Registrar of the University, expelling him from the University with immediate effect for gross misconduct. It is alleged by the petitioner that he made several efforts to approch the Vice-Chancellor and the Assistant Registrar to ascertain the nature of the gross misconduct for which he had been expelled but he was not informed of the same.A written representation was then, according to the petitioner, submitted by him to the Vice-Chancellor and several reminders were subsequently made by him but he received no reply to the said representation. The order expelling the petitioner had been communicated to various Universities and the Public Service Commission with the result th...
Tag this Judgment!Shaukat Ali Khan and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-24-1956
Reported in: AIR1956All523; 1956CriLJ1035
Mehrotra, J. 1. This is a petition on behalf of four applicants praying that under the provisions of Chap. 23, Rule 29 of the Rules of Court the applicants be ordered to execute bonds undertaking to lodge a petition before the Supreme Court and the execution of the sentence against them may be stayed.2. The facts which have given rise to this petition briefly are that the applicants were convicted by a Magistrate under Sections 325/34 and 323, I. P. C. Their convictions were maintained on appeal and the appellate court gave a sentence of imprisonment till the rising of the Court and Rs. 50/- as fine each.3. A revision was filed to this Court against the decision of the Additional Sessions Judge in appeal. At the time of the admission of the revision, notice was issued by a learned Single Judge of this Court to show cause why the sentences passed upon the applicants should, not be enhanced. Both the revision application on behalf of the applicants and that relating to enhancement matter...
Tag this Judgment!Great Eastern Electroplaters, Ltd. Vs. Regional Provident Fund Commr., ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-1956
Reported in: AIR1956All495; (1957)IILLJ225All
ORDERMehrotra, J.1. This ia an application under Article 226 of the Constitution praying that a writ of mandamus be issued directing the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, U. P., Kanpur, not to take action under the provisions of the Employees Provident Funds Act of 1952 and the Employees Provident Funds Amendment Act of 1953 against the applicant.2. The petitioner was registered as a public limited company in the year 1948 to work on an electro plating pattern, colour and chrome plating plant in India. The electroplating plant was imported and installed in Allahabad and the factory was started in October, 1950 on a trial basis. The real production, according to the petitioner, started from January, 1951. In the affidavit filed in support of the petition it is alleged that since the date of its establishment, the factory has been experimenting with one kind of thing or the other to find out as to what they could produce profitably and the work continued on an experimental basis.Afte...
Tag this Judgment!Mohammad Raihan Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-1956
Reported in: AIR1956All594
ORDERMehrotra, J.1. The petitioner Mohammad Raihan had applied for a stage carriage permit which was rejected by the Regional Transport Authority, Meerut. An appeal was filed to the State Transport Authority and the decision of the Regional Transport Authority was confirmed by the State Transport Authority. An application under Article 226 of the Constitution was thereafter filed in this Court for a writ of certiorari quashing the order o the Regional Transport Authority refusing the stage carriage permit to the petitioner and also for a mandamus commanding the Regional Transport Authority to grant a permit in favour of the applicant.By my order dated 25-2-1955, the petition was allowed, the order of the Regional Transport Authority was quashed and the Regional Transport Authority was directed to Consider the application of the petitioner for the grant of a permit and it was directed further not to reject it on the ground that there was adequate transport service on the route. The appl...
Tag this Judgment!Kaushal Singh and ors. Vs. Ghanshiam Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-1956
Reported in: AIR1956All639
Kaul, J.1. This is a defendants' appeal in a suit brought under Section 60 of the Transfer of Property Act for redemption of a mortgage dated 14-11-1895.2. It was averred that a mortgage was created by Netra Singh and Mst. Dulari in favour of Hans Ram Singh and Hulam Singh for a consideration of Rs. 500/-. It was a mortgage with possession. Plaintiff Ghanshyam Singh claiming to be an adopted son of Netra Singh brought the suit which has given rise to this appeal on the allegation that the mortgage money had been paid off from the usufruct of the property mortgaged and that he was entitled to redemption without payment of any money.The defendants were the representatives in interest of the original mortgagees. They denied that Ghanshyam Singh was the adopted son of Netra Singh and pleaded that the mortgaged property consisted of ex-proprietary tenancy and occupancy tenancy lands; that a mortgage of such land was void in law; that the defendants were in possession as proprietors and not ...
Tag this Judgment!Registrar, University, Allahabad and ors. Vs. Dr. Ishwari Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-1956
Reported in: AIR1956All603
Kidwai, J.1. I have had the advantage of reading the judgment of my learned brother and I entirely concur. I would, however, like to add a few words as to the meaning to be given to the words 'error apparent on the face of the record'. I conceive that in the English cases from which this expression has been borrowed the emphasis is not upon the word 'error' but upon the words 'apparent on the face of the record', that is to say that error must be such as can be ascertained from the record as it exists or should exist.2. In 'Walsall Overseers v. London and North Western Rly. Co/, 1878-4 AC 30 (A), Lord Cairns, Lord Chancellor, stated, at_ page 39 :'If there was upon the face of the order of the Court of Quarter Sessions anything which shewed that that order was erroneous, the Court of Queen's Bench might be asked to have the order brought into it, and to look at the order, and view it upon the face of it, and if the Court found error upon the face of it, to put an end to its existence b...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »