Allahabad Court April 1956 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.
Bohre Singh and ors. Vs. State Through Dharam Pal Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-1956
Reported in: AIR1956All671; 1956CriLJ1275
Mehrotra, J. 1. Two questions in this revision have been referred to us for decision. 2. It is necessary to give briefly the facts of the case. Pour persons were granted bail by the Additional District Magistrate before whom commitment proceedings for a charge under Section 302, I. P. C. were pending. Before the Additional District Magistrate, an application was made, when the accused were arrested, on behalf of these persons for the grant of bail but by an order dated 13-10-1955, the Additional District Magistrate refused them bail. Thereupon another application was made before him on the ground that the first order was passed ex parte. By a subsequent order dated 20-10-1955, the Additional District Magistrate again refused bail. An application was then made to the Sessions Judge for bail under Section 498 (1), Criminal P. C. which was rejected by him by his order dated 7-11-1955. Three other persons, who were also accused in the case, were granted bail by the Sessions Judge. Subseque...
Firm Shri Krishna Chaudhry Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-20-1956
Reported in: [1956]7STC742(All)
Mootham, C.J.1. These are four references made by the Revising Authority under Section 11 of the U. P. Sales Tax Act. The question common to each reference is 'whether betel leaves fall under the category of green vegetables 2. The assessees are dealers in betel leaves, and Section 3 of the U. P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, provides that, subject to the provisions of that Act, every dealer shall in each assessment year pay sales tax on his turnover of the previous year. Section 4 provides however that no tax shall be payable, inter alia, on such goods which the State Government may by a Notification in the Official Gazette exempt from time to time ; and on the 7th June, 1948, the State Government issued a Notification exempting from the provisions of the Act various classes of goods including as item No. 4 'green vegetables and fresh fruits'. The assessees contend that betel leaves are fresh vegetables within the meaning of this exemption, 3. Now the word vegetable is capable of being used in...
Rameshwar Nath Vs. U.P. Union Bank Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-17-1956
Reported in: AIR1956All586
Agarwala, J.1. This is an appeal against an order of the learned Company Judge in proceedings arising during the course of liquidation of the U. P. Union Bank Ltd. This Bank prior to its liquidation had rented a building belonging to the appellant in the city of Agra at a monthly rent of Rs. 325/- plus Rs. 10/- as house water tax. A portion of the demised premises was let out by the Bank to the proprietor of a hotel called the Man Mohan Hotel and the rest was occupied by the Bank itself and some of its officials also resided in the premises.The rent was not paid regularly and the appellant brought a suit No. 810 of 1949, in the Court of Munsif at Agra on 3-9-1949 for the recovery of rent for the months of July, August and September 1949 and on 5-9-1949 obtained an order of attachment before judgment of the furniture etc. belonging to the Bank and the same was by the consent of parties kept locked in the Banking Hall of the premises under the seal of the Court.On a petition presented on...
Haji Ghulam HusaIn and Sons Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U. P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-17-1956
Reported in: [1957]31ITR231(All)
This is a reference under section 21 of the Excess Profits Tax Act (read with section 66 (2) of the Income-tax Act) relating to the chargeable accounting periods ending on 31st of March, 1944, 31st of March, 1945 and 31st of March, 1946. The assessee had preferred appeals under the Excess Profits Tax Act from assessments made in respect of the three chargeable accounting periods mentioned above, and the 11th September, 1947, was fixed for hearing of these appeals by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Excess Profits Tax at his camp at Bareilly. Arguments were heard and it appears that the Assistant Commissioner passed orders on the same date, for the appellate orders are dated the 11th September, 1947. Copies of these orders were sent to the assessee presumably to communicate to him the orders passed in the appeals and these were received on the 20th September, 1947. The assessee was not satisfied with the decision of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and preferred appeals to th...
Udai Pratap Gir and anr. Vs. Shanta Devi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-16-1956
Reported in: AIR1956All492
Mootham, C.J.1. The question which has to be decided in this appeal is whether a will is, after the death of the testator, an instrument securing property within the meaning of Section 7(IV-A), Court-fees Act, as amended by the U. P. Court-fees (Amendment) Act, 1938. The appellant filed a suit for the recovery of possession over certain immoveable property to which he claimed to be entitled by inheritance.The respondents contested the suit, their contention being that the property in dispute had been bequeathed to them under the will of Mahant Indergir, who was admittedly the former owner of the property. The trial Judge was of opinion that the relief sought by the appellant necessarily involved the cancellation or adjudging void of the will and he held that the court-fee must accordingly be calculated in accordance with the provisions of Section 7(IV-A).The appeal came in the first instance before Kidwai J. who being of -opinion that the question was of a considerable importance and t...
Chhaoni Lal Pragdas Vs. Commr. of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-11-1956
Reported in: AIR1957All65
Upadhya, J. 1. This is an application under Section 66 (2), Income-tax Act against the refusal by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to state a case for the opinion of this Court.2. The assessee-applicant owns a 'sarrafa' business and deals in gold and silver. His account showed the value of opening and closing stocks at a uniform fixed rate by adopting Rs. 50 per hundred tolas of silver and Rs. 70 for each hundred tolas (sic--each tola?) of gold. The income-tax Officer found that this method of valuing the stocks was not proper and accordingly he valued the opening and closing stocks according to the market rates prevailing at the time.The Income-tax Officer added Rs. 2,661 to the profits disclosed by the profit and loss account of the assessee for determining his income from this source. This decision was affirmed in appeal by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and by the Appellate Tribunal. In his application under Section 66(1) the applicant contended that there was no specific fi...
Chhaoni Lal Pragdas Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U. P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-11-1956
Reported in: [1957]31ITR597(All)
ORDERThis is an application under section 66 (2) of the Indian Income-tax Act against the refusal by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal state a case for the opinion of this Court.The assessee-applicant owns a sarrafa business and deals in gold and silver. His account showed the value of opening and closing stocks at a uniform fixed rate by adopting Rs. 50 per hundred tolas of silver and Rs. 70 for each tola of gold. The Income-tax Officer found that this method of valuing the stocks was not proper and accordingly he valued the opening and closing stocks according to the market rates prevailing at the time. The Income-tax Officer added Rs. 2,661 to the profits disclosed by the profit and loss account of the assessee for determining his income from this source. This decision was affirmed in appeal by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and by the Appellate Tribunal. In his application under section 66 (1) the applicant contended that there was no specific finding that the assessees incom...
Mehnga Ram Vs. Labour Appellate Tribunal of India at Lucknow and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-09-1956
Reported in: AIR1956All644; (1957)ILLJ603All
Kidwai, J.1. The relations between the Patiala Cement Works and its employees were not satisfactory. A conciliation Board was appointed but it failed to resolve the disputes. Accordingly, on 5-11-1951, H.H. the Rajpramukh of the State of Pepsu issued a Notification under Section 10(1)(c) Industrial Disputes Act (14 of 1947) referring to the Industrial Tribunal the disputed points.By a subsequent Notification dated 10-1-1952, the number of matters referred to arbitration was increased. Later it seems to have been discovered that these Notifications were defective inasmuch as, although the points referred were common to all the workmen, the parties to the dispute were stated to be the Management: of the Bhupendra Cement Works and 'certain workers'. Accordingly on the 23-8-1952 another Notification was issued superseding the earlier Notifications and referring to the Tribunal an industrial dispute 'between the workmen and the Management of the Bhupendra Cement Works.'2. In the meanwhile, ...
Dr. M.C. Batra Vs. Lakshmi Insurance Co. Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-06-1956
Reported in: AIR1956All709
Mootham, C.J.1. This is an application under Section 115, Civil P. C. for the revision, of a judgment of the learned Civil Judge of Lucknow dated 5-1-1955. The circumstances in which the application is made, as found by the learned Judge, are these :Some years prior to the year 1950 the applicant became the tenant of the first Boor of premises No. 30, Hazratganj, Lueknow for which he paid a monthly rent of Rs. 137/8/-. In August 1950 the applicant, with the permission of the Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Sub-let a portion of this floor to the Reliable Water Supply Services of India Limited (herein called the Supply Company) at a rental of Rs. 75/- a month.In January 1952 the Lakshmi Insurance Company Limited (herein called the Insurance Company) purchased the entire premises No. 30, Hazratganj, from the then owners. Up to that date the rent of the first floor amounting to Rs. 137/8/- had been paid by the applicant to the then owners of the premises, but from February 1952 the appl...
Jaipal Singh and anr. Vs. Board of Revenue U.P. Allahabad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-05-1956
Reported in: AIR1956All698
Mootham, C.J.1. This petition, which has been referred to a Bench by Mr. Justice Chaturvedi raises a question or law of some difficulty. The relevant facts can be stated very shortly.2. The petitioners filed a suit against respondents 2 to 16 under Section 59, U. P. Tenancy Act, 1939. The suit was dismissed by the trial court and the decree of that court was affirmed by the Additional Commissioner, Agra Division, on appeal. The petitioners then filed a second appeal before the first respondent, the Board of Revenue. The Board allowed the appeal, the Judgment of Sri S.S. Hasan, before whom the appeal was argued, being dated 1-8-1952, and a second Judicial Member, Sri R.N. Singh, concurring therein on 4-8-1952.3. The respondents then filed an application before the Board under Section 273, U. P. Tenancy Act, for review. The review application was decided by the two Judicial Members who had earlier decided the appeal and was allowed, the judgment of Sri S.S. Hasan, which was dated 16-10-1...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »