Allahabad Court March 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.
Khairul Bashar Vs. Thannu Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-19-1957
Reported in: AIR1957All553
Beg, J.1. This is a first appeal by defendant No. 1 in the suit. The trial Court has passed a decree for Rs. 20,764/14/- with proportionate costs in favour of a Committee consisting of plaintiff No. 10 Babu Prahlad Das, plaintiff No. 11 Babu Girdhar Das and defendant No. 2 Abut Latif against defendant No. 1 Kharul Bashar Proprietor of the firm Haji Abdullah Daniyal. It would appear that in Qasba Mau Nath Bhanjan, Pergana Mau, District Azamgarh, there is a firm named Sheo Ram Baleshwar Prasad. The proprietor of this firm was one Sheo Ram. Sheo Ram is defendant No. 5 in the suit. His firm used to do business in yarn. In 1942, Sheo Ram became heavily indebted. According to the plaintiff's case, in August 1942 there was a rumour that Sheo Ram had become insolvent.On the 17th of August, 1942, he had closed his shop. This resulted in a rush of creditors who went to Sheo Ram, and insisted on payment of the debts due to them. Sheo Ram expressed his inability to pay the debts in cash. He, howev...
Phoosa Lal Mansinghka Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-19-1957
Reported in: AIR1957All823; [1957]32ITR96(All)
V. Bhargava, J. 1. The assessee during the year of assessment and the corresponding previous year was a resident of Bhilwara outside British India, so that proceedings for his assessment could be taken on the basis that he was a non-resident in British India. He held 8,390 shares in Bijay Cotton Mills, Ltd. situate at Bijaynagar in British India. The Income-Tax Officer of Ajmer Merwara issued a notice under Section 22(2) of the Income-Tax Act, on 6-3-1943 calling upon the assesses to file a return in respect of the assessment year 1942-43. The notice was served on the assessee but no return was filed. Thereafter, a notice under Section 22(4) dated 26-3-1043 was issued for production of books of account by the assessee at Ajmer on 12-4-1943.On 10-4-1943 the assesses Sent a letter to the Income-Tax Officer. The Income-Tax Officer in his reply to the letter required the appellant to file a return and to show his income in British India as 'Nil' if he had no such income. It is said that an...
Lala Pannalal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-19-1957
Reported in: [1958]33ITR145(All)
BHARGAVA, J. - The assessee, Pannalal, is an individual who was also the karta of a Hindu undivided family known as Kashi Ram Kanhaiyalal. The family was earning income from various sources including commission from Messrs. J.K. Distributors, Kanpur. The whole income of the family including this commission was assessed as the income of the Hindu undivided family up to the assessment year 1941-42. When the assessment for the year 1942-43 came up, it was claimed by the Hindu undivided family that the agency for the jute mills which was held by the family had been terminated and instead Pannalal in his individual capacity had become the commission agent of Messrs. J.K. Distributors, Kanpur, so that the commission earned was the individual income of Pannalal and not the income of the Hindu undivided family. This plea was accepted and the commission received from Messrs. J.K. Distributors, Kanpur, was not included in the assessment of the income of the Hindu undivided family. Pannalal also ...
Balbhadra Chand Munna Lal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-18-1957
Reported in: AIR1958All20
V. Bhargava, J.1. The assessee is a firm in which there were three partners Munna Lal (since dead) who was the financing partner holding a -/13/- share and Debi Dayal and Dwarka Nath working partners holding -/2/- and -/1/- respectively in the assessment year in question 1944-45 the relevant accounting year being July, 194a to July, 1943. In this relevant accounting year, there were found in the books of account of the firm two credits of the sums of Rs. 10,000/- and 15,000/- on 31-12-1942 and 11-3-1943 in the names of Smt. Shakuntala wife of Munna Lal and Behari Lal father-in-law of Munna Lal respectively. The Income-tax authorities called upon the assessee to explain the source of these deposits.The Income-tax authorities, not being satis-fied with the explanation given by the assessee, treated these two deposits as taxable income of the assessee for the year in question and the appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner failed. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal accepted the ...
Sohan Lal Gupta Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-18-1957
Reported in: AIR1958All21; [1958]33ITR786(All)
V. Bhargava, J.1. The assessee, Sohan Lal Gupta, is assessed in the capacity of an individual. This reference relates to the assessment year 1944-45, the previous relevant year of account being the financial year 1943-44. The facts given in the statement of the case show that sometime in the year 1935 Lala Jaswant Rai, father of the assessee, purchased a sugar mill at Meerut and, subsequently, in the year 1936 he purchased 2,892 shares of the value of Rs. 100/- each of the Straw Board Mills Ltd. at Shahdra. The shares of the Straw Board Mills Ltd. at Shahdra were purchased by Lala Jaswant Rai in his own name as well as in the names of his four sons and other relatives including one of his cousins, Chiranji Lal.The assessee was then a minor and in his name were purchased 120 shares. Thereafter, the Straw Board Mills were shifted from Shahdra to Meerut and located in the same premises which came to be known as the Jaswant Sugar Mills after the purchase of the mill by Lala Jaswant Rai. Th...
Hakim Mohammad Illayas Khan Vs. Sahab Collector Bahadur (Aligarh)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-14-1957
Reported in: AIR1958All24
Srivastava, J.1. This case was filed as a First Appeal from order, but as the Bench before which it was put up for admission was of the view that it could be entertained only as an application in revision it has been converted into a Civil Revision.2. One Zafar Husain was the owner of the Properties in dispute. On 9th June 1926 he made a simple mortgage in respect of the properties in favour of Nawab Muzammiluallah Khan for a consideration of Rs. 26,000. On 20th April, 1928 he made a second simple mortgage of the properties in favour of one Kishan Lal. Zafar Husain died after making these mortgages and was succeeded by his mother Smt. Meharun-nissa his widow Srimati Faruqi Begam and a sister Smt. Batul Fatma. The applicant before us is the husband of Smt. Batul Fatma. On llth January, 1932 the applicant purchased the mortgage rights in respect of the second simple mortgage of Zafar Husain from the mortgagee Kishan Lal.A suit (Suit No. 136 of 1932) was then filed on behalf of the first ...
Sita Ram Sahu and ors. Vs. Kedarnath Sahu
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-14-1957
Reported in: AIR1957All825
Mukerji, J. 1. This is an application in revision against an order of the learned .Civil Judge granting time to the plaintiff to make good the deficiency in court-fees after the plaint had been rejected under Order 7, Rule 11 (c) of the Code of Civil Procedureon the ground that the plaint had been insufficiently stamped. 2. It is necessary to state a few dates in order to appreciate the point that arises for our consideration in this application in revision. On 13-2-1950 a suit was filed on the foot of a mortgage deed. There was report by the Stamp Reporter in respect of some deficiency in regard to court-fees. Time in the first instance was granted by the Court to make good the deficiency upto 16-2-1950. The deficiency was not made good, but an application for further time was made on behalf of the plaintiff. Time was granted. It is not necessary to mention in detail the various occasions on Which time was granted to the plaintiff to make good the deficiency, for we think it sufficien...
Lachmi NaraIn Vs. Rent Control and Eviction Officer and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-11-1957
Reported in: AIR1957All490
ORDERMootham, C.J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution in which the petitioner seeks to have set aside an order of allotment made in favour of the second respondent. The facts are these;2. Premises known as No. 7, Cantonment Road, Lucknow, belonged to one Jagan Nath Prasad since deceased. Part of the premises consisting of a shop with attached residential accommodation was in possession of the third respondent as a tenant of Jagan Nath Prasad. Cm Jagan Nath Prasad's death the petitioner and his four brothers became the owner of the premises, and in September 1955, the five brothers obtained a decree for the ejectment of the third respondent from that portion of the premises which he occupied. On the 12th January 1956, the second respondent applied to the Rent Control and Eviction Officer for the allotment to him of that portion of the premises (herein referred to as the premises in dispute) which were then, notwithstanding the decree which had been obtained by th...
Benchey Lal Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-11-1957
Reported in: AIR1959All614; (1957)IILLJ231All
ORDERMehrotra, J. 1. The petitioner was employed as a clerk in the Collectorate of Shahjahanpur. He was recruited in the year 1921, and since 1927 he has been working as a permanent employee. The ministerial officials of the Collectorate have organised themselves into an association since 1929. One Radhey Lal Gupta was the Reader of the sub-divisional Magistrate, Jalalabad. He made a complaint that on or about Sunday, 5-2-1956 he was mal-treated by the Sub-divisional Magistrate and he filed a complaint in the Court of the Addl. District Magistrate, (Judicial) Shahjahanpur the next day against the Sub-divisional Magistrate. The complaint was rejected on the ground that previous sanction of the Government was necessary. Thereupon it is contended by the petitioner that a meeting of the association was convened by the President of the association for the 7th February at 4-45 p.m. The matter was discussed before the meeting. The meeting is said to have decided to re-sort to a pen-down strik...
Lalit Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-11-1957
Reported in: AIR1957All636; 1957CriLJ1041
ORDERChowdhry, J.1. The applicant Lalit, who was a porter and a, railway servant within the meaning of that term under Section 3(7) of the Indian Railways Act, 1890, at the railway station of Gorakhpur, was convicted by a learned first class Magistrate of that place under Section 120 (a) of that Act for having been upon a part of the railway, i.e. on the railway platform, in a state of intoxication and sentenced to a fine of Rs. 25/-, or 10 days simple imprisonment in default of payment of fine. The sentence not being applicable, he went up in revision to the learned Sessions Judge of Gorakhpur, but the revision was rejected. He has now come up in revision to this Court.2. His defence was that he had taken brandy on its being prescribed by a doctor for colic pain, and that he was not on duty at that time but had been called from leave of absence on account of that ailment. The learned Magistrate did not deal with the latter portion of his defence at all, and he did not accept the evide...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »