Allahabad Court January 1957 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.
Manmohan Das and ors. Vs. BahauddIn and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-11-1957
Reported in: AIR1957All575
Brij Mohan Lall, J. 1. This and the connected First Appeal No. 435 of 1943 are defendants' appeals arising out of the same judgment and decree of the learned Civil Judge of Allahabad. This appeal was preferred by nine appellants some of whom have died during its pendency and have since been substituted by their legal representatives. Mr. Gopinath Kunzru who preferred the appeal on behalf of all the 9 appellants informs us that he has instructions to argue this appeal on behalf of two appellants only, viz. Abdul Kadir appellant No. 4 and Manmohan Das who was appellant No. 1 and who after his death is now represented by his legal representatives. So far as other appellants are concerned the appeal shall have to be dismissed for default. If may be pointed out at this stage that every appellant has a separate interest and that separate and distinct reliefs have been sought by the respondents against everyone of them.2. Connected Appeal No. 435 of 1943 has been preferred by Rakhal Das Bose ...
Aidal Singh and ors. Vs. Karan Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-10-1957
Reported in: AIR1957All414
Kidwai, J.1. These four appeals are in the nature of test cases fixed before this Full Bench in order to determine the question whether, under the rulesof this Court, a special appeal lies to a division Bench from the decision, of a Single Judge on a petition for the issue of a writ under Article 226 of the Constitution. The point was fully argued before us by the learned counsel for the appellants in each of the appeals and we are obliged to Mr. Jagdish Swarup for the assistance which he gave us, as amicus curiae by putting the other side of the case before us.2. The necessary facts relating to all the four appeals are stated in the order of my learned brother, Beg J., and it ig unnecessary for me to repeat them.3. The question raised before us depends upon the interpretation on Rule 5 of Chapter VIII of the rules of the Court. That rule reads as follows:--'An appeal shall lie to the Court from the judgment (Not being a judgment passed in the exercise of appellate jurisdiction in resp...
Ram Das Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-10-1957
Reported in: AIR1958All703; 1958CriLJ1257
Raghubar Dayal, J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 476-B of the Criminal Procedure Code against the filing of a complaint under a 195 (c), Criminal Procedure Code by the Registrar on behalf of this Court in compliance of the order of the Chief Justice dated the 6th of April, 1953 on a complaint filed on behalf of Parduman Das on the 28th of September, 1951 complaining that Ram Das appellant had committed forgery in connection with two entries in the Kachchi Rokar Bahi of Parduman Das for the year Sambat 2005.2. A criminal case under Sections 408 and 477-A, I. P. C. was instituted against Ram Das by Ram Shanker Lal, manager and mukhtar-i-am of Parduman Das, in February, 1949. That case had nothing to do with the aforesaid forged entries. Ram Das was convicted by the trial court of those offences but was acquitted by the Sessions Judge on appeal on the 17th of April, 1951. On the 18th of May, 1951 Ram Shanker Lal filed a criminal revision No. 747 of 1951 in this Court against the acqu...
Nasir HusaIn Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-09-1957
Reported in: AIR1957All366
ORDERMehrotra, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution praying that a writ of mandamus be issued to the opposite parties who are the State of Uttar Pradesh, the District Magistrate of Faizabad and the members of the Town Area Committee Bhadarsa, District Faizabad, not to interfere in any manner with the applicant's function as Chairman of the Town Area Committee Bhadarsa, District Faizabad, on the basis of the resolution said to have been passed in the meeting of 27th of August 1956.2. The facts briefly which are set out in the affidavit filed in support of the petition are that the petitioner was elected Chairman of the Town Area Committee Bhadarsa in the District of Faizabad in January 1954 in a bye-election by the general electorate of the town. The Town Area Committee Bhadarsa consists of nine members and the Chairman. By a notification dated 2nd of May 1956 the State of Uttar Pradesh had applied the provisions of Sections 47-A and 87-A of the U. P. Municipali...
Ram Kishore Vs. Sm. Bimla Devi and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-09-1957
Reported in: AIR1957All658; 1957CriLJ1052
ORDERMulla, J. 1. Shrimati Bimla Devi, wife of the applicant Bam Kishore, claimed maintenance from him. The Magistrate awarded maintenance to her as well as her child, although the applicant had contested her claim. The applicant went up in revision, but his revision application was also dismissed. Bimla Devi then filed an application for the recovery of the arrears of maintenance which had been awarded to her and her son. Notice was issued to the applicant and he contested this application again on the grounds that Bimla Devi was refusing to live with him without sufficient reason and was living in adultery. He therefore, prayed that Bimla Devi's prayer should be rejected and no distress warrant should be issued against him. 2. The learned Magistrate came to the conclusion that the objection filed by the applicant was mala fide & was lodged only to delay the execution of the order passed against him. It may be mentioned here that the applicant had not taken the plea of his wife's adul...
Dudhnath Prasad Vs. Mulchand and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-08-1957
Reported in: AIR1958All7
ORDERDesai, J.1. This is a petition for a writ of certiorari to quash the decision of opposite party No. 1 Sri Mulchand, additional Sub-Divisional Officer, Rasra and any other writ or direction that may be deemed necessary in the interest of justice.2. The petitioner contested election for the office of Pradhan of village Chaukia; he was elected by an overwhelming majority on 12-3-1956. The defeated candidate, Babu Bam filed an election petition which was dismissed on 11-8-1956 by opposite party No. 1. Another election petition was filed by Sukh Raj Ram and others, opposite parties 2 to 16, and it was allowed by opposite party No. 1 on the same date on the ground that the petitioner was less than thirty years of age and was, therefore, disqualified for the office of Pradhan.3. The petitioner claims that he was more than thirty years of age when he contested the Election, that according to the family register prepared for the purpose of the elections he was 31 years of age and that an o...
Sippattar Singh and ors. Vs. Krishna
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-08-1957
Reported in: AIR1957All405; 1957CriLJ702
ORDERAsthana, J.1. This is a reference by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bareilly, recommending that the conviction of the accused under Section 427 I. P. C. was not correct and may be set aside.2. It appears that the accused cut the sugar cane crop of one Smt. Krishan on the 29th January, 1954, and when she came to know about it she and her nephew protested about it and thereupon were beaten by the accused. The Sugar cane crop which had been cut by the accused was taken away by them. Smt. Krishan filed a complaint under Sections 447, 323, and 395 I. P. C. The learned Magistrate framed charges under Sections 323 and 427 I. P. C. The trial court found, on a consideration of the evidence produced before him, that the accused had cut the crop of' the complainant and had beaten her and her nephew. It accordingly convicted them under Sections 427 and 323, I. P. C. and sentenced each of them to a fine of Rs. 25/- under Section 427, I. P. C. and in default to three months' rigorous im...
Munwa Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-08-1957
Reported in: AIR1957All466; 1957CriLJ808
Roy, J.1. This is an appeal by Shiam Kishore alias Munwa aged 18 years, son of Chhunnu Pande alias Yagdutt, a resident of Maksudabad, within police circle Ka-lianpur, District Kanpur, who has been convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Kanpur, for an offence under Section 302, I. P. C., for having committed the murder of one Chhotelal, on the 18th November 1955, at about 11 a.m. near Gumti No. 10 on Grant Trunk Road, by inflicting injuries on him with a knife as a result of which Chhotelal died on the same day at 11-45 p.m. The learned Sessions Judge gave the appellant a sentence of death. Along with the appeal there is the usual reference for the confirmation of the death sentence.2. Chhotelal lived at Maksudabad along with his father Dharmu. He had 3 other brothers, Putti-lal, Sanehilal, and Sundar. The prosecution contended that village Maksudabad was torn into two factions, one headed by the father of the appellant who was once a big Zamindar and is even now an influential man...
Godhu Mal Vs. Sm. Ganga Hasso Mal Idnani
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-07-1957
Reported in: AIR1958All26
M.L. Chaturvedi, J.1. This is an appeal against an order of the learned First Civil Judge of Kanpur referring a dispute to arbitration.2. On the 20th April, 1947, the parties entered into a partnership and a deed was drawn up whereby the respondent, Smt. Ganga Hasso Mal Indnani, agreed to finance the venture and the appellant was to be the working partner of the concern. The partnership business was to be carried on at Matli, District Hyderabad (Sind), The respondent was to get Rs. 100/- per month for a period of eight months or six annas in a rupee in the profits, whichever was the larger sum, though she was not to be liable for any losses incurred in the business. It appears that the deed of partnership also contained an arbitration clause. The respondent advanced a sum of Rs. 5000/- to the appellant.After a few months, communal trouble started in Pakistan and the respondent shifted first to Kanpur in India, and the appellant followed her sometime later. In 1950 she filed an applicat...
Baldeo Pershad Vs. Dwarika Pd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-06-1957
Reported in: AIR1957All334
Mootham, C.J.1. The question referred to this Bench is 'Whether in computing the period of limitation prescribed for an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court the applicant is entitled to exclude the time taken in obtaining a copy of the judgment appealed from.'The reference has been made because of a difference of opinion between the former Allahabad High Court and the Oudh Chief Court.2. The relevant provisions of the Indian Limitation Act are Sub-sections (2) and (3) of Section 12 which read as follows :'(2) In computing the period of limitation prescribed for an appeal, an application for leave, to appeal and an application for a review of judgment the day on which the judgment complained of was pronounced and the time requisite for obtaining the copy of the decree, sentence or order appealed from or sought to be reviewed shall be excluded. (3) Where a decree is appealed from or sought to be reviewed, the time requisite for obtaining a copy of the judgment on which it...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »