Allahabad Court April 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.
Bhagelu and ors. Vs. Civil Surgeon, Jaunpur and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-14-1959
Reported in: AIR1960All353
ORDER1. There are three petitioners, who are Bhagelu, Rattu Mali and Ram Khelawan Mali the first named was a chaukidar and the last a gardener in women's hospital Jaunpur. The second was also a gardener but in the District hospital Jaunpur. Both the hospitals are Government institutions under the charge of the Civil Surgeon, Jaunpur.2. All the three applicants were permanent employees under the subordinate services of the Government of this State. Besides the petitioners there were a number of other class IV servants attached to these institutions. These employees formed an association consisting of them with Ram Khelawan as President, Rattu as Secretary and Bhagelu as Treasurer and also applied for its registration under the Trade Unions Act. No. XVI ot 1926. The registration was granted on 25-5-1955. The petitioners' allegation is that the above action on the part of, the class IV employees of the two hospitals was disapproved by the medical officers Incharge of those institutions; c...
Mohammad HusaIn Ansari Vs. the Benaras State Carpet Weavers' Co-operat ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-14-1959
Reported in: AIR1959All733
ORDERS.S. Dhavan, J. 1. This is a deplorable case in which the petitioner has suffered wrongful arrest in the process of realisation of dues as arrears of land revenue, and illustrates the dangers of vesting the Executive authorities with powers uncontrolled by any guiding principles or checks to arrest any citizen for dues which according to their erroneous interpretation of the law, are considered to be recoverable as arrears of land revenue. The petitioner was arrested under an order of the local Tehsildar and remained in custody for one day. On his furnishing security the Tehsildar directed his release and he was given one week's time for payment of the alleged dues. Almost immediately after his release he filed this petition impugning the legality of the entire proceedings which led to his arrest. The facts of this case, as proved or admitted by the parties, very briefly are these :2. The petitioner was a share-holder of a Co-operative Society registered under the Co-operative Soc...
Sripat NaraIn Rai Vs. Board of Revenue, U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-13-1959
Reported in: AIR1960All93
Chaturvedi, J.1. This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution praying that a writ of certiorari be issued quashing an order of the Board of Revenue dated 19-5-58.2. The necessary facts of the case are in a short compass. Respondents Nos. 2 and 3 filed an applica-tion under Section 20 of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act for being reinstated la the plots in suit on the ground that they were adhi-vasis. The petitioner contested the application and denied that the respondents had acquired adhivasi rights. The trial court decided the case on 27-2-54 holding that the respondents had acquired the rights of adhivasi. The petitioners then went up in appeal to the Commissioner and the Additional Commissioner allowed the appeal by his order dated 4-6-54. He held that the respondents had not acquired adhivasi rights. On 17-1-55 the respondents filed a revision petition before the Board of Revenue.This petition appears to have been placed in Chambers of a Member o...
In Re: Excess Profits Tax Assessment of Chaturbhuj and Co., Kanpur
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-07-1959
Reported in: AIR1960All413
V. Bhargava, J.1. The two questions referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal for the opinion of this Court are :'1. Whether in the circumstances of the case as stated above the penalty of Rs. 6,200/- maintained by the Tribunal was in accordance with the provisions of Section 16 (1), E. P. T. Act or the basis for it should have been only the E. P. T. which was avoided in respect of the chargeable accounting period in question, namely, Rs. 2,947-5-0.2. Whether in face of the fact that the whole E. P. T. was refunded in the following chargeable accounting period before the order of imposition of the penalty was passed by the Excess Profits Tax Officer there was any avoidance of the E. P. T. and any penalty could legally be imposed under Section 16, E.P.T. Act in respect of the chargeable accounting period in question?'In deciding this reference, we have had considerable difficulty because in the statement of the case full facts were not given by the Income-ax Appellate Tribunal. In f...
Om Dutt Sharma, Convict Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-07-1959
Reported in: AIR1960All470; 1960CriLJ1050
S.K. Verma, J.1. These are two connected matters. Criminal Appeal No. 1901 of 1957 has been filed by Om Dutt Sharma against his conviction under Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 5(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (Act II of 1947). The appellant has been sentenced by the learned Special Judge of Rampur under Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code to pay a fine of Rs. 150/- and in default of payment of fine to rigorous imprisonment for six months, and under Section 5(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- and in default of payment of fine to rigorous imprisonment for three months. On a perusal of the Sessions statement, our brother, S. N. Sahai, J., issued notice to Om Dutt Sharma to show cause why the sentences imposed upon him should not be enhanced. This has given rise to the connected Criminal Revision No. 1295 of 1958. It will be convenient to dispose of both the criminal appeal and the criminal revision by one judgment.2. The facts, ab...
Chaturbhuj and Co. Vs. Re.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-07-1959
Reported in: [1960]39ITR337(All)
BHARGAVA, J. - The two questions referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal for the opinion of this court are :'1. Whether in the circumstances of the case as stated above the penalty of Rs. 6,200 maintained by the Tribunal was in accordance with the provisions of section 16(1) of the Excess Profits Tax Act or the basis for it should have been only the excess profits tax which was avoided in respect of the chargeable accounting period in question namely Rs. 2,947-5-0 ?2. Whether in face of the fact that the whole excess profits tax was refunded in the following chargeable accounting period before the order of imposition of the penalty was passed by the Excess Profits Tax Officer there was any avoidance of the excess profits tax and any penalty could legally be imposed under section 16 of the Excess Profits Tax Act in respect of the chargeable accounting period in question ?'In deciding this reference, we have had considerable difficulty because in the statement of the case full fact...
Laxmi NaraIn Pande Vs. Dist. Magistrate and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-02-1959
Reported in: AIR1960All55
ORDERS.S. Dhavan, J. 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the District Magistrate and Collector, Ballia and the Sub-Divisional Officer, Ballia not to proceed with a departmental enquiry into the conduct of the petitioner and not to enforce an order of suspension passed against the petitioner by the Collector of Ballia. The petitioner has made the following allegations in his affidavit supporting the petition. 2. He entered the service of the State of Uttar Pradesh in the year 1952 and worked as permanent Supervisor Qanungo for several years. In May 1958 lie was appointed Naib Tahsildar Taxation, He alleges that, on or about 26th July, 1958, a conspiracy was hatched to 'frame' the petitioner and involve him in serious trouble. According to him the author of this conspiracy was a man called Chaturbhuj Sahai who was an officiating Sadar Qanungo and living as almost next door neighbour to the petitioner. 'This man...
Municipal Board, Lucknow Vs. Ram Autar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-02-1959
Reported in: AIR1960All119
A.N. Mulla, J. 1. This is an appeal filed under Section 417(3) Cr. P. C. against an order of acquittal passed by Sri A. C. Bansal, Additional Sessions Judge Lucknow, acquitting the opposite party who was convicted under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (Act 37 of 1954), by a Magistrate.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are as follows: Ram Autar, opposite party, was prosecuted by the Municipal Board, Lucknow, through its Medical Officer of Health for selling adulterated Alsi oil on 10-10-1955, to the Food Inspector Sri O. P.Mehrotra. The trial court found the charge proved against the opposite party and convicted him under Section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act of 1954 and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs. 600/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months. The opposite party went up in appeal and the learned Additional Sessions judge came to the conclusion that there was no proper prosecution within the meaning of Se...
Municipal Board Vs. Ram Autar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-02-1959
Reported in: 1960CriLJ199
ORDERA.N. Mulla, J.1. This is an appeal filed Under Section 417(3) Cr. P.C. against an order of acquittal passed by Sri A. C. Bansal, Additional Sessions Judge Lucknow, acquitting the opposite party who was convicted Under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (Act 37 of 1954), by a Magistrate.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are as follows: Ram Autar, opposite party, was prosecuted by the Municipal Board, Lucknow, through its Medical Officer of Health for selling adulterated Alsi oil . A. on 10-10-1955, to the Food Inspector Sri O. P, Mehrotra . The trial court found the charge proved against the opposite party and convicted him Under Section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act of 1954 and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs. 600/- in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months. The opposite party went up in appeal and the learned Additional Sessions Judge came to the conclusion that there was no proper prosecution within the mea...
Jamuna Prasad Vs. Mst. Panna and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-02-1959
Reported in: AIR1960All285
V.D. Bhargava, J. 1. The facts of the case will be clear from the following pedigree : SARJU RAI __________________|______________ | | Babban Rai = Pyari Dulari = Jamuna Prasad. | ____________|_____________ Avad Behari= Pana | | | Shambhu Saran Bhairon Kumari Radhika alias Jai Shankar Prasad Prasad2. Sarju Rai's son Babban Rai had not been known for more than past 11 years and will be presumed to be dead, and his grandson Avad Behari had pre-deceased him. In 1953, in Sarju Rai's family, besides Sarju Rai there were only Smt. Pyari widow of Babban Rai, Smt. Pana widow of Avad Behari and Kumari Radhika great grand-daughter of Sarju Rai. Smt. Dulari the daughter of Sarju Rai was married to Jamuna Prasad whose sons are Shambhu Saran and Bhairon Prasad.3. On 13-3-1953 Sarju Rai executed a deed of gift regarding Barnai property in favour of Shri mati Piari, Shrimati Pana, Kumari Radhika and one Ram Asre. This Ram Asre is the son of Janta Rai, and was supposed to be the would be husband of Ku...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »