Allahabad Court December 1959 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.
Ahmad HusaIn Vs. Rama Shankar Misra and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-08-1959
Reported in: AIR1960All435
R. Dayal, J. 1. This is a special appeal against an order of Mr. Justice Mathur allowing a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.2. M/s. Rama Shankar Misra and Bros, (hereinafter called the respondent firm) filed a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution praying for the quashing of resolution No. 11 (e) dated 1-11-1956, of the Regional Transport Authority, Kanpur, cancelling permanent permit No. 374 for the Mahoba Rajnagar route held by the respondent firm and for the issue of writ of mandamus directing the Regional Transport Authority, Kanpur, and the State Transport Authority, Lucknow, not to interfere with its right of running the stage carriage on that route under that permit. Ahmad Husain, the appellant, on his application was made a party in the writ petition.3. The facts leading to the writ petition are as follows: The respondent firm held stage carriage permit No. 374 for running their stage carriage on the Mahoba-Rajnagar route. The permit was valid up to the 4...
Paras Ram and ors. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-08-1959
Reported in: AIR1960All479; 1960CriLJ1054
S.K. Verma, J.1. There are three appellants in this case -- Paras Ram, Sukkhi and Bashir. They, along with two other persons:, namely Gokul and Ghani, stood their trial before the learned Additional Sessions .Judge of Moradabad for offences, punishable under Sections 143, 363 and 368 I. P. C. One other accused, Man Singh, was absconding, The learned trial Judge acquitted Gokul and Ghani but he convicted the three appellants under Section 366 of the Code. He sentenced Paras Ram appellant to four years' Rule I. and Sukkhi and Bashir to three years, R. I. each.2. Paras Ram is a resident of village Guretha, Police station Moghalpnra, district Moradabad. He had a son, Nanak. Srimati Mohandei, aged between seventeen and eighteen years, is the daughter of Ram Sarup deceased and Reotidei, residents of village Majhola, Police Station Kotwali, Morada-bad. Mohandei was married to Nanak. Both Nanak, the husband of Mohandei, and Ram Sarup, her father are dead.3. The prosecution case was that Nanak ...
Central Govt. Vs. P.L. Jaitly and Co.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-03-1959
Reported in: AIR1960All708
Dwivedi, J.1. These arc two appeals against an award made under Section 19(1) of the Defence of India Act, 1939. Since they are against the same award, they are being disposed of by a common judgment.2. First Appeal No. 86 of 1945 was filed by the Central Government, whereas First Appeal No. 291 of 1945 was filed by M. G. Qadir. Messrs. P.L. Jaitly and Company through Pandit Purushottam Lal Jaitly, Manager and Karta, was originally the respondent in both the appeals. During the pendency of the appeals Pandit Purushottam Lal Jaitly died and then the names of Pandit Amar Nath Jaitly, Arvind Nath Jaitly, Triloki Nath Jaitly and Smt. Savitri Devi, who were also the heirs of Pandit Purshottam Lal Jaitly, were brought on record as the legal representatives of the deceased.3. The dispute relates to the requisitioning of premises No. 17 Canning Road, Allahabad. The aforesaid premises consisted at the relevant dates of a bungalow having a verandah and 20 rooms as well as an open yard at its bac...
Sia Ram Vs. District Agriculture Officer, Sultanpur and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-02-1959
Reported in: AIR1961All92
ORDERJagdish Sahai, J.1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on the allegation that he had been selling fertilisers (including ammonium sulphate and urea) in Sultanpur for ten years next preceding the date of filing of the petition. On 29th of March 1957 the Government of India declared fertilisers, both inorganic as well as organic as also mixed, as essential commodities under the Essential Commodities Act. On 23-4-1957 the Government of India issued the Fertilizers (Control) Order of 1957 (hereinafter called the Order) under Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955.On 30th of December 1958 the U. P. Government ordered that from 1st of February 1959 no person shall carry on the business of selling fertilizers except under a licence and in accordance with its terms and conditions. The District Agriculture Officer was appointed the licensing authority. In pursuance of the aforesaid order of the State Government the petitione...
Ram Das Vs. Kalu Ram Girdhar Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-01-1959
Reported in: AIR1960All557
S.S. Dhavan, J.1. This is a plaintiffs appeal against an order of the learned Additional Civil Judge of Jhansi directing the return of the plaint on the ground that a part of the cause of action had arisen within the local limits of the jurisdiction of the court and the suit was not cognizable by the Civil court at Jhansi. The plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 3,450/- as damages for breach of contract and for refund of Rs. 3000/- paid as earnest money for the purhcase of 1500 maunds of mahua through the defendants, who are commission agents.The admitted facts are that the contract was made at Khariar Road (Orissa) and Rs. 1000/- was deposited with the defendants. The balance of Rs. 3,000/- was to be paid through the bank against the Railway Receipt, but the defendant drew a Hundi of Rs. 2000/- on the plaintiff, which was accepted by the latter at Lalitpur. It is also admitted that, in pursuance of this acceptance, a sum of Rs. 2000/- was remitted to the defendants. Subsequentl...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›