Allahabad Court August 1956 Judgments
Custodian Evacuee Property Vs. Shrimati Bibijan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-31-1956
Reported in: AIR1957All249
Agarwala, J. 1. This is an appeal against an order removing a person from the office of the Mutwalli and calling for applications for the appointment of a fresh mutwalli. 2. A Waqf-alal-aulad was created by one Karamat Ullah by means of a deed of Waqf dated 14th October, 1951, and the order of mutwallis to be appointed for the Waqf properties was laid down in the deed of Waqf. According to the terms contained in the deed of Waqf Akhtar Husain becamemutwalli and managed the property. He, however, migrated to Pakistan and his rights, title and interest in the Waqf properties vested in the Custodian of Evacuee Properties. One Bibi Jan claiming to be the niece of Karamat Ullah applied to the Court of the District Judge, Bareilly, that she may be appointed mutwalli in place of the said Akhtar Husain, The Court below passed an order removing Akhtar Husain from the office of Mutwalli and inviting applications for the vacant office. 3. The Custodian, Evacuee Properties, U.P., has now appealed ...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Hans Raj Gupta and Co.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-30-1956
Reported in: AIR1957All91
Beg, J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 39 of the Arbitration Act. It arises out of an application filed by the defendant-appellant under Section 34, Arbitration Act, for the stay of a suit. The suit in question was filed by M/S Hans Raj Gupta & Co., on 1-2-1950 against two defendants. The first defendant was the Union of India, the appellant in the present appeal, and the second defendant was one Sri Mahesh Chandra Gupta. Defendant No. 2 did not put in appearance, and the suit proceeded ex parte against him. In the suit, the plaintiff claimed a decree for Rs. 2,28,397/14/5 against defendant No. 1 on the ground that there was a contract entered into between defendant No. 1 and defendant No. 2 by virtue of which defendant No. 2 undertook to supply fire-wood to defendant No. 1. The plaintiff claimed to be the, assignee of the interest of defendant No. 2, and hence entitled to the amount claimed. It may be mentioned that in the plaint itself there was a definite and clear reference to ...
Tag this Judgment!Sahu Tota Ram and anr. Vs. Thakur Bhagwant Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-30-1956
Reported in: AIR1957All262
Agarwala, J.1. This is an appeal by certain insolvents, who have been granted a conditional discharge under Section 41(2)(c) of the Provincial Insolvency Act, for the recovery of certain property originally belonging to them but which had been sold by the receiver and which sale was alleged to be void. The facts, briefly stated, are as follows.2. The appellants Tota Ram and Hazari Lal were declared insolvents in the year 1926. An official receiver was appointed who took possession over their properties, the properties vesting in such receiver. Two items of these properties were the properties in dispute. They were revenue paying estates. At the instance of the appellants themselves the property was not sold by the Collector as required by Section 60 of the Provincial Insolvency Act but was sold by the receiver himself in a private manner by means of two sale deeds dated the 34th of October, 1932, to Sarup Singh father of defendant-respondent Th. Bhagwant Singh.The purchaser paid the pr...
Tag this Judgment!Ranjit Singh Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-30-1956
Reported in: AIR1956All194
Oak, J.1. These two connected appeals have been filed by two persons, Ranjit Singh and Pratap Singh, who have been convicted by the learned Special Judge, Hamirpur at Orai under Section 161, I. P. C. and Section 5, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1047. Ranjit Singh has been sentenced to imprisonment for two years and a fine of Rs. 200/- under Section 161, I. P. C. He has been sentenced to imprisonment for two years under Section 5, Prevention of Corruption Act. Pratap Singh has been sentenced to imprisonment for one year and a fine of Rs. 100/- under Section 101, I. P. C. He has been sentenced to imprisonment for one year under Section 5, Prevention of Corruption Act. The sentences passed upon each accused have been ordered to run concurrently.2. According to the prosecution, Ajodhya Prasad Dube had Sir and Kliudkasht land in village Gaor. His Mukhtaram Badri Dayal used to look alter this cultivation, Ranjit Singh was the canal Amin, and Pratap Singh was the canal Patrol in this circle. ...
Tag this Judgment!Bechu Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-29-1956
Reported in: 1957CriLJ113
Mulla, J.1. This order will dispose of Criminal Appeals Nos. 579 and 599 of 1955 and 16 of 1956. These are three Jail appeals sent by Bechu, Bnagirath and Roopey. Bechu and Bhagirath have been convicted under Section 395, I. P. c while Roopey has been convicted under Section 411 I.P.C. Several persons were tried In this case and the learned trial Court convicted the three appellants as well as two other persons, viz., Jag Prasad and Ram Roop Singh, Ram Roop Singh and Jag Prasad have not appealed from jail, but as in my opinion the trial Court has completely misunderstood and misapplied the law in assessing the evidence of identification, I cannot let the order of conviction stand against them either and I am Betting aside their conviction also.2. Briefly stated the prosecution story is that a dacoity was committed on the night between the 7th and 8th of June, 1954, at the house of P. W. 1 Sitlu who is a resident of village Aihar, police station Bhilsar, Sub-division Ramsanehi Ghat, Dis...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Ram Vs. Shripat Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-24-1956
Reported in: AIR1957All106
Agarwala, J. 1. This is an appeal from a decree passed in terms of an award. The facts are as follows :2. The parties entered into an agreement to refer the disputes regarding Krishna Oil Factory to the arbitration of two persons Sri Bankey Lal and Sri Hira Lal, vakils of the civil courts, Aligarh. The agreement is dated 12-3-1948 and is Ex. 1. Thereafter Shri Ram and Shripat Singh, two of the parties, entered into an agreement on 27-8-1948 to refer another dispute between them relating to an amount of Rs. 4,000/- to arbitration. Under this agreement they appointed the very same arbitrator.The arbitrators entered upon the reference towards the end of October 1948. Although the arbitrators entered upon the reference very late so far as the first agreement was concerned, none of the parties objected to the arbitrators doing so. The arbitrators gave a joint award on both of the references. This indeed seems to have been the intention of the parties, as it has been contended before us that...
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Hakim Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-24-1956
Reported in: 1957CriLJ117
Mulla, J.1. Appellant Abdul Hakim, a police constable posted at the Civil Lines Chauki Rae Bareli, has been convicted under Section 5(a)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment by the Sessions Judge, Rae Bareli. In the alternative he was found guilty under Section 384 I. p. Code, but no sentence has been awarded to him under this section.2. The prosecution story is that P.W. 1 Lala tthosi, the complainant in this case, resided to Mohalla Chhota Ghosiana which is about a mile from the city and lies within the police circle Chauki. It is alleged that about 3 or 4 days after the Diwali day in October, 1954, Lala was irrigating his field in his village Malikmau. which is also within Civil Lines Chauki.The appellant along with another constable known as Pandit came to him and asked him to accompany them as the Kotwal wanted him & was present near the railway crossing. The complainant went with the two constables asked Allahdin. also to accomp...
Tag this Judgment!Pitamber Prasad Vs. Sohan Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-23-1956
Reported in: AIR1957All107
Agarwala, J. 1. This is an appeal from an order refusing to set aside an order dismissing a suit for want of prosecution. 1-12-1949 was fixed as the date for final hearing. The plaintiff took adjournment on that date on the ground that he was indisposed. 17-2-1950 was the next date fixed for final hearing. On that date also the plaintiff made an application for adjournment on the ground that he was Indisposed. This application was rejected by the court and thereafter the counsel for the plaintiff stated that he had no further instructions to proceed with the case. The Court passed the following order: 'The suit is dismissed for want of prosecution with costs to the defendants.' 2. The plaintiff then made an application within time for restoration of the suit to its original number. The court rejected this application on the ground that the order was appealable as it was an order on merits under Order 17 Rule 3 Civil P. C. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant had urged that the order in...
Tag this Judgment!Prem Shankar Misra Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-23-1956
Reported in: (1957)IILLJ177All
Oak, J.1. This is an appeal by Prem Shankar Misra, who has been convicted by the learned Special Judge (Anti-Corruption) for Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow, under Section 468, I.P.C., and under Section 5 of Act II of 1947. For each offence he has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for three years. The two sentences have been ordered to run concurrently. According to the prosecution, the appellant was a clerk in the accounts section in the office of the District Executive Engineer It izatnagar in district Bareilly in the employ payment orders, the accused presented these documents for payment at railway station, Bareilly. The accused on each occasion succeeded in obtaining payment of a sum of Rs. 107 upon each payment order. The fraud was detected by an officer of the Special Police Establishment, Luoknow. The payment orders in question were sent to the Government Examiner of Questioned Documents. It was found that the documents in question had been forged. The accused was, therefore, pros...
Tag this Judgment!Prem Shanker Misra Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-23-1956
Reported in: 1957CriLJ108
Oak, J.1. This is an appeal by Prem Shankar Misra, who has been convicted by the learned Special Judge (Anti Corruption) for U. P., Lucknow under Section 468, I. P. C. and under Section 5 of the Act II of 1947. For each offence he has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for three years. The two sentences have been ordered to run concurrently. According to the prosecution, the appellant was a clerk in the accounts section in the office of the District Executive Engineer at Izatnagar in district Bareilly in the employment of O. T. Railway in the year 1950.The accused forged three payment orders (Exs. P-3, P-4 and P-5) during the period from April to June 1950. The forged payment orders were in favour of a fictitious person Sarju Mal. Soon after preparing the forged payment orders, the accused presented these documents for payment at Railway Station, Bareilly. The accused on each occasion succeeded in obtaining payment of a sum of Rs. 107/- upon each payment order.The fraud was detect...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »