Skip to content

Allahabad Court March 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.

Mar 19 1959

Municipal Board of Bareilly Vs. Kundan Lal

Court: Allahabad

Decided on: Mar-19-1959

Reported in: AIR1959All562

Mootham, C.J. 1. This is a reference under Section 113 of the Code of Civil Procedure made by the Judge of the Court of Small Causes, Bareilly.2. Sri Kundan Lal, who resides in the Civil Lines, Bareilly, was assessed to tax in the sum of Rs. 300 by the Municipal Board of Bareilly on two houses owned by him and situated in Ward No. 2, Bareilly. Demand was made for payment of this amount but Sri Kundan Lal refused to pay and a suit was filed against him in the Court of the Judge of Small Causes by the Municipal Board for the recovery of the tax.3. The tax had been imposed a number of years earlier by the Municipal Board in exercise of its powers under Section 128(1) of the U. P. Municipalities Act, 1916, which provides that '128(1) Subject to any general rules or special orders of the State Government in this behalf, the taxes which a board may impose in the whole or any part of a municipality are- (i) a tax on the annual value of buildings or lands or of both; (ii) a tax on trades and c...


Mar 18 1959

Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Mool NaraIn and ors.

Court: Allahabad

Decided on: Mar-18-1959

Reported in: AIR1959All780

N.U. Beg, J. 1. This is an application under Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure praying that certain additional evidence specified in the schedule attached to the plaint be admitted at this stage. The application has been given in connection with First Civil Appeal No. 59 of 1945. This is an appeal filed by the plaintiff whose suit for possession has been dismissed by the trial court. In the suit the plaintiff claimed possession of certain land the exact area, the boundaries and the numbers of plots over which the plaintiff claimed possession, were not specified in the plaint. The defendant accordingly, took an objection on this ground. The trial court found that the land claimed by the plaintiff was not clearly delineated by the plaintiff in the plaint nor was sufficient evidence adduced before the Court to enable it to identify the area claimed. The suit was, accordingly, dismissed. Dissatisfied with the said judgment the plaintiff has filed this appeal in this Court.2. ...


Mar 18 1959

Hari Krishna and anr. Vs. State

Court: Allahabad

Decided on: Mar-18-1959

Reported in: AIR1959All794; 1959CriLJ1396; [1960(1)FLR562]; (1960)ILLJ42All

ORDERM.C. Desai, J.1. The two applicants, who are partners of a firm owning premises in which the manufacturing process of converting paddy into rice by mechanical power is being carried on, have been convicted under Section 92 of the Factories Act. The first question is whether the premises are a factory or not. It is admitted by the applicants that they have employed seven workmen in the manufacturing process. When the premises were inspected by the Factory Inspector he found twenty workmen in the premises. Seven were admittedly the workers employed by the applicants for the manufacturing process and ten have been found by the courts below not to have been so employed.The remaining three persons were, according to the applicants, employed temporarily to repair the compressor which had gone out of order, but the manufacturing process was going on. Since the three men were employed in repairs of the compressor, which are incidental or connected with the manufacturing process, they have...


Mar 17 1959

Pt. Hazari Lal, Hatia Kanpur Vs. Income-tax Officer, Dist. Ii (ii)

Court: Allahabad

Decided on: Mar-17-1959

Reported in: AIR1960All97; [1960]39ITR265(All)

ORDER1. The petitioner, Hazari Lal, has invoked the power of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution for issue of a writ of certiorari to quash a notice issued under Section 34 of the Income Tax Act by the opposite-party to him on 4-1-1956, and for issue of a writ of prohibition directing the opposite party to refrain from taking proceedings for re-assessment of the petitioner for the assessment year 1946-47. The petitioner was a partner in Firm Hazari Lal Babu Lal at Kanpur which was registered under Section 26-A of the Income-tax Act. He was an assessee in his personal capacity and for the year 1946-47 an assessment order under Section 23(3) of the Income Tax Act was passed in his case on 31-8-1946. For the following assessment year 1947-48 the order of assessment under Section 23(3) of the Act was passed on 30-9-1947.On 15-1-1946, the wife of the petitioner purchased a house by means of a registered sale deed for a total price of Rs. 19,500/-, out of which Rs. 500/- had bee...


Mar 17 1959

Adarsh Bhandar, Aligarh Vs. Sales Tax Officer, Aligarh

Court: Allahabad

Decided on: Mar-17-1959

Reported in: AIR1959All557; [1959]10STC364(All)

ORDER1. This is an application made under Section 4 of the U. P. Sales Tax (Validation) Act, 1958, (U. P. Act No, XV of 1958) for the review of an order of this Court dated 5-5-1957. The respondents- contend that Section 4 is ultra vires of the State Legislature and that the application is accordingly not maintainable.2. The relevant facts are these. On the 31st March, 1956, the Governor of Uttar Pradesh in purported exercise of his powers under Section 3A of the U. P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, issued a Notification, No. ST-905/X. By this Notification the Governor was pleased to declare, inter alia, that the turnover in respect of certain specified classes of goods imported from outside Uttar Pradesh would, with effect from 1-4-1956, be taxed at the rate of one anna per rupee. The classes of goods subject to sales tax at this rate included vegetable ghee, cloth and sugar. The respondent firm carried on business in Aligarh, and on the 14th September, 1956, it was provisionally assessed to sa...


Mar 16 1959

Kundan Sugar Mills, Amroha Vs. Indian Sugar Syndicate Ltd. and ors.

Court: Allahabad

Decided on: Mar-16-1959

Reported in: AIR1959All540

O.H. Mootham, C.J. 1. I have had the advantage of reading the order prepared by Srivastava J. I agree with the conclusion at which he has arrived for the reasons stated by him. R. Dayal, J. 2. This is an application under Order 44, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure for filing a cross-objection in forma pauperis in First Appeal No. 333 of 1957. The applicant is the Indian Sugar Syndicate Limited (in voluntary liquidation) through its Liquidators four in number. Notice or the application was issued to the appellant, Kundan Sugar Mills, Amroha. A preliminary objection has been taken on behalf of the appellant to the effect that the provisions of Order 33 of the Civil Procedure Code do not apply to a limited company. 3. Order 33 of the Civil Procedure Code deals with suits by paupers. Its Rules 1 is: '1. Suits may be instituted in forma pauperis subject to the following provisions, any suit may be instituted by a pauper. Explanation:--A person is a 'pauper' when he is not possessed of ...


Mar 16 1959

Kailash Chand Vs. Union of India (Uoi), Rly. Dept. New-delhi

Court: Allahabad

Decided on: Mar-16-1959

Reported in: AIR1959All685

N.U. Beg, J.1. This is an application made by one Kailash Chandra under Article 132(1) and Article 133(1)(c) of the Constitution of India. The applicant subsequently applied for an amendment to the effect that this application might also be treated as an application under Article 133(1)(b) of the Constitution. This application was allowed and the applicant has made the necessary amendments in this regard. The applicant was employed as a ministerial railway servant in the E. I. Railway. He was working as a sub-head in the Divisional Accounts Office of the East Indian Railway at Lucknow. He was compulsorily retired from service on 30-6-1948 on attaining the age of 55 years.Thereafter the applicant brought a suit out of which the present proceedings have arisen. In the suit lie prayed for a declaration that the plaintiff's compulsory retirement on 30-6-1948 on attaining the age of 55 years was illegal and ultra vires as under the railway rules he had the right to continue in service till ...


Mar 16 1959

J.K. Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mills Co. Private Ltd., Kanpur Vs. K. ...

Court: Allahabad

Decided on: Mar-16-1959

Reported in: AIR1959All724

ORDERJ.K. Tandon, J.1. The petitioner company is carrying on the business of manufacture and sale of cotton textiles in the town of Kanpur. Sri Ram Swarup Khare, respondent No. 3, is an employee of the said company. He was working at the post of Employees' State Insurance Clerk in the office of the company until 24th September, 1957 when he was transferred from that post to the post of Size-Mixing Clerk. The two posts were on the same scale of pay and Sri Khare was to continue to draw the same wages on this new post.At the time when his transfer was so ordered, an industrial dispute, being adjudication case No. 12 of 1957, was already pending before the Industrial Tribunal in respect of allowance for additional work claimed by workmen, including Sri Khare, for the post of Employees' State Insurance Clerk. The workmen's claim was that by reason of adding of the third shift, which the mill started sometime earlier, their work load had increased and they were entitled to an allowance.2. O...


Mar 13 1959

Lakshmiji Sugar Mills Co. Ltd., Maholi Vs. Banwari Lal Tandon

Court: Allahabad

Decided on: Mar-13-1959

Reported in: AIR1959All546

B.N. Nigam, J. 1. Banwari Lal Tandon filed regular suit No. 51 of 1951 against Messrs. The Lakshmiji Sugar Mills Co. Limited, Maholi, district Sitapur, claiming the following reliefs : (a) A decree for full and true account of commission due to the plaintiff. (b) Decree for Rs. 5,250 : 00 nP. or such other further amount as may be found due to the plaintiff on rendition of details on which additional court-fee will be paid. (c) Interest at six per cent. per annum until payment. (d) Costs of the suit. 2. The plaintiff alleged that about the middle of January 1948 the defendant company's Managing Director, Kishori Lal, had a talk with the plaintiff at plaintiff's residence to induce him to work as defendant's representative to secure Government contracts for the supply of Sugar to various Government departments, and the plaintiff acted as the defendant company's agent and broker from the middle of January 1948 up to end of January 1949. The plaintiff was promised a commission of rupee...


Mar 13 1959

Radha Kant Bhargava Vs. State of U.P., Lucknow and ors.

Court: Allahabad

Decided on: Mar-13-1959

Reported in: AIR1959All737

ORDERS.S. Dhavan, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution impugning the legality of an order of the Government of the State of Uttar Pradesh passed under Section 7(F) of the U. P. Temporary Control of Rent and Eviction Act by which it reversed the respective decisions of the Additional District Magistrate, Allahabad and the Additional Commissioner, Allahabad refusing permission to the petitioner's landlord to file a suit for the ejectment of the petitioner and granted this permission itself. Very briefly the facts, as stated in the affidavit supporting the petition, are these. The petitioner is the tenant of the respondent Kali Prasad in a portion of the shop known as 78 A. K. P. Kakkar Road, in the city of Allahabad. He has been carrying on the business of selling sanitary fittings and building materials. According to the petitioner the value of the stock in trade stored in this shop and godown at another place is about Rs. 50,000/-. The number of persons employe...


  • Last »

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial