Allahabad Court August 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.
Bikrama and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-26-1957
Reported in: AIR1958All348; 1958CriLJ588
J.K. Tandon, J. 1. Six persons Bikarma, Parshottam, Patiram and Debi sons of Sarup and Surat and Baleshar sons of Mahadeo, all residents of village Kaneri, have been convicted by the learned Sessions Judge, Azamgarh on charges under Sections 147, I. P. C., 24, Cattle Trespass Act read with Section 149, I, P. C., 323 read with Section 149, I. P. C., 302 read with Section 149, I. P. O. Bikarma, Debi and Baleshar have further been convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34, I. F. O., and Baleshar under Section 302, I. P. C. Under Section 302 read with Section 149, I, P. C., all have been awarded life imprisonment. The sentence under Section 147 is to one year's rigorous imprisonment and under Section 24 read with Section 149, I.P.C., to three months' rigorous imprisonment, The sentence under Section 323 read with Section 149, I. P. C., is again to one year's rigorous imprisonment. 2. The facts leading to their conviction were as follows: On 3-10-1955, a pahar before sunset Sripat, t...
Vibhuti NaraIn Singh Vs. Municipal Board, Allahabad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-23-1957
Reported in: AIR1958All41
V. Bhargava, J. 1. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Junior Standing Counsel and have gone through the report of the Inspector of Stamps and the opinion sent by the Taxing Officer. It appears that in this case, the Taxing Officer paid more attention to only the first part of the declaration sought as relief (a) in the plaint and did not take into account the significance of the last part of the declaration sought.2. The declaration, that is sought as relief (a), really consists of three different declarations.3. The first was that the declaration dated 4th June, 1940, under Section 221 of the U. P. Municipalities Act, 1916, was null and void. The second declaration sought was that the plaintiff was as usual, entitled to allow the stall holders and hawkers on the Jamuna Road and its patri in village Usmanpur Maiku alias Katghar, Allahabad.4. The third and the last declaration sought was that the plaintiff was, as usual, entitled to realise the tahbazari dues fr...
Shri Krishan Lal Mehra Vs. the District Magistrate, Kanpur and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-23-1957
Reported in: AIR1958All393
ORDERGopalji Mehrotra, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution praying that a writ of mandamust be issued quashing the order dated 28th of October, 1955, passed by the District Magistrate, Kanpur, opposite party No. 1, and directing him not to modify or cancel the allotment order passed in favour of the petitioner. The other relief prayed for is a relief for any direction which may be deemed just and proper in the circumstances of the case.2. The facts briefly are that house No. 37/ 52, Gillis Bazar, Kanpur, is owned by one Sri Jagdish Prasad Kesarwani. The house was constructed in the year 1939, and one Sri Gauri Shan-ker Bhargava entered into a lease with the landlord in respect of the entire house and thus became a tenant of the house. Sri Bhargava, subsequently sublet portions of the house to various persons. In 1946, Bhargava Brothers, Booksellers, one Sri B. C. Bhargava in 1947 and Sri N. C. Agarwala, opposite party No. 3, all became subtenants of different ...
Ghani and ors. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-22-1957
Reported in: AIR1958All316; 1958CriLJ583
ORDERV.G. Oak, J. 1. The learned Sessions Judge has found that the accused were the aggressors and that the defence story cannot be accepted for a moment. On this view, there is no scope for applying the rule laid down by the Full Bench of Allahabad High Court in Parbhoo v. Emperor, AIR 1941 All 403 (PB) (A). 2. The main contention of Mr. M. H. Beg appearing for the applicants was that, the accused did not get a fair trial in this case. This contention is based on the following circumstances. Evidence was recorded by one Magistrate, Sri Ram Kumar. He was transferred from Muzaffarnagar, and was succeeded by Sri V. N. Tripathi. Sri Tripathi heard arguments, and pronounced judgment convicting the applicants. It has been urged that the trial was improper, inasmuch as Sri Tripathi decided the case without watching the demeanour of witnesses. 3. It was conceded that the procedure adopted by Sri Tripathi is permissible under Section 350 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, as that provision sta...
Pratap Chandra Vs. Bharat Bank Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-21-1957
Reported in: AIR1958All114
Desai, J.1. In a suit Instituted by the appellant for recovery of a certain sum of money, the arguments on his behalf were heard on 28-8-1947. He had engaged three counsel, Sri Murli Manohar, Sri Gur Charan Das and Sri Rajeshwari Dayal and before the commencement of the arguments they filed certificates in respect of fees alleged to have been received by them from him. The fee was paid in each case through a cheque dated 28-3-1947, and the total amount of the three cheques was Rs. 700/-.The certificate of each counsel mentioned the fact that the payment was made through cheque, and also contained the prescribed recitals that the fee was actually paid before the commencement of the arguments and that no portion of it has been remitted or appropriated to the use by any other person. The cheques were cashed by Sri Rajeshwari Dayal on 30-8-1947, Sri Gur Charan Das on 1-9-1947 and Sri Murli Manohar on 4-9-1947.The suit was decreed with costs on 10-9-1947 and a decree was prepared. Originall...
R.S. Diwakar Vakil and anr. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-21-1957
Reported in: AIR1958All325; 1958CriLJ585
ORDERV.G. Oak, J.1. This revision application is directed against an order of the learned Sessions Judge of Rampur interfering with an order of commitment. The matter has arisen under the following circumstances.2. R. S. Diwakar and Smt. Prem Kumari Diwakar are being prosecuted under the Indian Official Secrets Act. The case was before a Magistrate. An application for the transfer of the case was moved before the High Court. I dismissed the application for transfer, but remarked that the accused might insist on a trial by the Sessions Court as provided under Section 13 of the Official Secrets Act.3. When the case went back to the Magistrate after the dismissal of the transfer application, the accused exercised the option given by Sub-section (2) of Section 13 of the Indian Official Secrets Act. The Court was informed that the accused would prefer to have the case tried by the Court of Session. On receiving this application the learned Magistrate passed an order on 20-12-1956, committin...
Chiranji Lal Vs. Behari
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-21-1957
Reported in: AIR1958All326
R.N. Gurtu, J. 1. This is a second appeal by the plaintiff in the suit and arises in the following circumstances :--2. The plaintiff had brought a suit No. 361 of 1946 in the Court of II Munsif, Bulandshahr on the allegation that he was a Khudkasht-holder of six plots, four of which had been taken possession of by the defendant and in regard to two of which there was an apprehension that the defendant would interfere with the plaintiff's possession. The suit was for possession and for an injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with the plaintiff's possession qua the two plots.3. After filing the above suit, the plaintiff obtained an interim injunction directing the defendant to refrain from interfering with the said two plots.4. Subsequent to the issue of the interim injunction, the plaintiff moved the learned Munsif that there had been a disobedience of the interim injunction order.5. The learned Munsif accepted the allegation of the plaintiff and, acting under Order XXX...
Hamid and anr. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-21-1957
Reported in: 1958CriLJ115
ORDEROak, J.1. These seven connected revisions have been filed by ten persons, who were convicted by the learned Special Magistrate, first class, Baraut, district Meerut, under Seciton 299, U. P. Municipalities Act. Amin Nagar Sarai is a Town Area in district Meerut. The ten applicants are residents of Amin Nagar Sarai, and are butchers.2. According to the prosecution, the Town Area Committee, Amin Nagar Sarai passed on 23-3-1948 a resolution prohibiting the slaughter of cows, buffaloes and other animals, and forbidding the sale of meat of these animals within the limits of the Town Area. The bye-law was duly confirmed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Baghpat, On 16-10-1952 the ten applicants slaughtered a buffalo within the limits of the Town Area, and they sold the meat of the slaughtered animal. The ten applicants were therefore, prosecuted under Section 299 of the U. P. Municipalities Act for a breach of the bye-law.3. The trial of the ten accused was split up In seven separate ...
Raja Ram Jaiswal Vs. Ganesh Prasad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-19-1957
Reported in: AIR1959All29
A.P. Srivastava, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal. The Jawahar Palace Cinema including its building, furniture and machine belonged to defendant No. 1, a limited Company known as Allahabad Theatres Ltd. The appellant Sri Raja Ram Jaiswal, Sri Radhey Shyam Jaiswal and Sri Nand Kishore Chaudhari were the directors of the Allahabad Theatres Ltd, The plaintiff is a broker. According to him, the abovomention-cd three directors of the Allahabad Theatres Ltd. deputed him to find a purchaser for the property and Sri Raja Ram Taiswal wrote a letter to him on 22-12-1941 in which he said that'Ap Jawahar Palace Cinema building Rs. 54,000/-mai furniture machine ke ko bechainge to ap ko Rs. 2,000/- commission dilavien gay. Kharcha kul ap ka rahega magar Jawab jald ana chahiye.' Armed with this letter the plaintiff started making efforts to Ret a purchaser for the property and succeeded in persuading one Sri K. S. Gandhi to agree to purchase it for Rs. 55,000/- Sri Gandhi wrote a cheque for Rs. 1,00...
Abdul Gafoor Vs. Hakim Ali and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-19-1957
Reported in: AIR1959All78
R. Dayal, Actg. C.J.1. This is a special appeal against the order of a learned single Judge and arises out of a suit for partition of a grove.2. The plaintiff claimed one-fourth share in this grove. He impleaded 31 defendants. Out of these defendants three contested the suit on the grounds that the plaintiff's share was less than one-fourth and that the grove in suit was waqf property, it being dedicated for the purpose of a family graveyard. Two other defendants just wanted their share also to be partitioned. The remaining defendants did not put in appearance.3. The trial court decreed the suit for partition and also decreed the claim for partition bydefendant No. 1. 23 of the other defendants appealed against this order. On appeal, the learned Civil Judge dismissed the appeal and confirmed the judgment and decree of the trial court. The same 23 defendants filed a second appeal in this Court. It was also dismissed by the learned single judge and it is against that order that the prese...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »