Allahabad Court January 1958 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.
Prabhu Dayal and ors. Vs. the Sub-divisional Officer, Karvi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-13-1958
Reported in: AIR1958All673
ORDERJagdish Sahai, J. 1. The respondents Nos. 2 and 3 i.e. Mahadeo and Sheo Sampati had filed a suit in the court of the Munsif of Banda being suit No, 241 of 1953 against the petitioners for partition of Bhumidhari holding measuring 50 bighas 13 biswas situated in village Hesta, pargana Karvi in the district of Banda. The learned Munsif passed a preliminary decree on 29-10-54 by which he held respondents Nos. 2 and 3 entitled to a half share in the said holding and to partition thereof. On 26-4-1953 the respondents Nos. 2 and 3 made an application, a copy of which has been filed along with this petition and marked as annexuxe 'A', in the court of the Judicial Magistrate, Karvi, Revenue Department (Sigha Mal Mauza Hasta Pargana Karvi). In this application the petitioners were impleaded as opposite parties. It was said in the application that a suit had been filed between the parties in the Civil Court in respect of partition o the bhumidhari plot in which the Civil court had declared ...
Babu Ram Upadhya Vs. Uttar Pradesh Government
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-09-1958
Reported in: AIR1958All584; 1958CriLJ994
Randhir Singh, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the quashing of an order of dismissal passed by opposite-party No. 2 and subsequently confirmed by opposite parties Nos. 3 and 1.2. It appears that the applicant was a Sub-Inspector of Police appointed in December, 1948. In June, 1953, he happened to be posted at Sitapur. On 6-9-1953 the applicant was returning from a village known as Madhwapur where he had gone in connection with the investigation of a theft case when he saw a person who was subsequently found to be Tika Ram coming from, the side of a canal and going hurriedly towards a field. The movements of Tika Ram roused some suspicion in the mind of the applicant. One Lalji, an ex-patwari also happened to be with the Sub-Inspector at that time.Tika Ram was called and it was found that he was carrying something in the folds of his Dhoti which he was trying to hide with his hand. The applicant asked him to produce the Potli which Tika Ram had...
Anwar HussaIn and ors. Vs. S.L. FranklIn and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-07-1958
Reported in: AIR1958All562
D.N. Roy, J.1. This is an application in revision against an order of remand dated the 22nd of December, 1952, made by the Civil Judge of Farrukhabad.2. The matter came up before a learned single Judge of this Court and in view of certain important questions of law which arose in the case he has referred it to a Bench for decision.3. The facts may be briefly stated. A suit was filed for an injunction and for recovery of Rs. 500/- as damages. The trial Court gave the plaintiff a decree for injunction and for damages to the extent of Rs. 200/- only. One of the defendants preferred an appeal. The plaintiffs filed a cross-objection in respect of that part of the damages which had been disallowed by the trial Court. The lower appellate Court went into the questions that were raised by the parties and came to the conclusion that the trial of the case by the Munsif had been unsatisfactorily conducted and that there had been no clarification of pleadings of the parties; nor had proper issues i...
Prakash Chandra Vishnu Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-06-1958
Reported in: AIR1959All373
ORDERJ.K. Tandon, J.1. These are two separate petitions Nos. 3089 of 1957 and 3090 of 1957, the former by Messrs Prakash Chandra Vishnu Kumar and the latter by Messrs Puran Mal Prabhat Ranjan, both doing business in food grains and other articles at Kothdwara in district Garhwal. Similar questions have been raised in both the petitions. They have therefore been heard together.2. The facts in petition No. 3089 of 1957 are that a permanent private carrier permit No. 40 was granted to the concerned petitioner for a transport vehicle No. U. P. Y. 574 on 7-9-1955. It is valid upto 6-9-1958. In the permit that was granted to this petitioner under the Motor Vehicles Act two conditions amongst others were provided, firstly, with regard to the nature of the goods to be carried by him in the vehicle and, secondly, with regard to the maintaining of log book showing the journey etc. performed by the vehicle. The condition about the carrying of goods read as follows:'for carriage of food grains, fl...
Mukhram Kampar and anr. Vs. Basant Rai and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-06-1958
Reported in: AIR1958All500
1. This is a plaintiff's appeal in a suit for possession of certain fixed rate tenancy plots and for recovery of Rs. 270/- as mesne profits.2. The plaintiffs claimed to recover as the next reversioners of the last male-holder and filed the suit upon the allegations that the plots in question were alienated by Smt. Mabtula Kuar, who held the plots at the time of their transfer by her as a Hindu widow without any legal necessity or for the benefit of the estate. The deed by which the transfer was effected was dated 18-5-1917 and was in favour of one Saidan Kumar. The defendants are his successors-in-interest. The case of the plaintiffs was that the widow Mabtula Kuar, had died on 12-6-1937 and that the defendants thereafter had no right to remain in possession and that they had refused to deliver up the said plots; hence the suit for possession and mesne profits in the sum of Rs. 270/-.3. Several defences were raised. The ones with which I am concerned in the present appeal relate to jur...
L.R. Brothers Vs. the Agricultural Income-tax Board, U.P., Lucknow and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-06-1958
Reported in: AIR1958All528; [1960]39ITR687(All)
A.P. Srivastava, J.1. This special appeal has been preferred against an order of Mr. Justice Chaturvedi by which he rejected a petition filed by the appellant under Article 226 of the Constitution. Four other petitions had been filed by the appellant with similar prayers. All the five petitions were disposed of by a common judgment, as the questions of law which they sought to raise were identical.2. The appellant is a firm which carries on business of supplying seeds and plants at Saharanpur. The appellant was assessed to agricultural income-tax under the U. P. Agricultural Income-tax Act, 1949. It was not found assessable for the year 1947-48 but was assessed for the years 1948-49, 1949-50, 1950-51, 1951-52 and 1952-53 on 25-10-1949, 26-9-1950, 25-9-1951, 12-9-1952 and 6-4-1954 respectively.The appellant acquiesced to the assessments in respect of the other years but filed an appeal before the Commissioner, Agricultural Income-tax in respect of the assessment for the year 1951-52. In...
Madan Lal Vs. Zargham Haider and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-03-1958
Reported in: AIR1958All596
V. Bhargava, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 116A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, as amended upto date. An election was held for the U. P. Legislative Assembly from the Bahraich North 269 Constituency. There were three candidates for election to the seat who are the three respondents in this appeal. Respondent No. 1 Syed Zargam Haidar alias Hijjan Mian was declared as the successful candidate. The actual polling took place on 25-2-1957 and the result of the election was declared on 2-3-1957. The appellant Madan Lal, who was a voter but had not stood as a candidate, filed his election petition before the election Commission on 16-4-1957, which was the last date of limitation prescribed for presentation of election petitions under the Act. The Election Commission entrusted this petition for trial to the Election Tribunal at Gonda and fixed 12-6-1957, as the date for appearance of parties before the Tribunal.2. The election of respondent No. 1 was challenged by the app...
Raja Jagdish Pratap Pd. Sahai Vs. the State.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-02-1958
Reported in: [1958]34ITR426(All)
MOOTHAM, C.J. - Two questions of law have been referred to this court by the Agricultural Income-tax Board. The questions arose in the course of two applications in revision before the Board and the reference has been made under section 24(1) of the U.P. Agricultural Income-tax Act. The circumstances in which the reference has been made can be stated very shortly.The assessee was the Taluqdar of the Deara Estate in the district of Sultanpur, and in anticipation of the coming into force of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, he sold in the assessment years 1356 and 1358 Fasli a number of groves and stray fruit bearing trees for sums amounting to Rs. 16,248-3-7 and Rs. 12,928-9-3 respectively. A dispute then arose between the assessee and the Agricultural Income-tax authorities as to whether agricultural income-tax was payable by the assessee on these two sums, and the Agricultural Income-tax Board has referred two questions to this court, namely :'(1) Whether the pr...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›