Allahabad Court October 1960 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.
Maharani Devi Vs. Ram Adhar Pandey and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-31-1960
Reported in: AIR1962All20
S.S. Dhavan, J. 1. This is a decree-holder's appeal against the decision of the learned Civil Judge, Gorakhpur allowing the judgment debtor's objection and dismissing the application for execution. The facts of the case as revealed by the judgments of the courts below appear to be these. The appellant Smt. Maharani Devi filed a suit against the two defendants respondents Rama AdharPandey and Kedar Nath Pandey for a declaration that she was entitled, as the widow of their deceaed brother, to the rights of a Bhumidhar to the extent of one third in certain plots of land which were jointly held by her late husband and the defendants.2. The suit was compromised in the following terms : 'The plaintiff surrendered her rights in the plots in dispute in consideration of which the defendants agreed to pay her a sum of Rs. 30/-per month, subject to the condition that the sum would be reduced by Rs. 10/- per month on the marriage of each of her two daughters'. The compromise also provided that in ...
Town Area Vs. Chhedilal Marwari
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-31-1960
Reported in: AIR1962All124
S.S. Dhavan, J.1. This is a second appeal by the Town Area Committee, Captainganj, district Deoria against an appellate order of the learned Civil Judge Deoria dismissing the Committee's objection under Section 47 C. P. C. The execution court had allowed the objection and held that the execution had abated in view of a change in the law but the learned Judge took a different view in appeal.2. The facts are these : The plaintiff respondent Chhedilal filed a suit in 1949 for the recovery of Rs. 850 being the amount which had been recovered from him by the Town Area Committee Captainganj as tax. The suit was decreed by the trial court and the decree was upheld both by the appellate court and this Court in second appeal. The decree holder then applied for execution of his decree on Feb. 2, 1956. The Town Area Committee filed an objection on the ground that the law relating to the recovery of the impugned tax had been amended with retrospective effect and the decree holder was, therefore, n...
Faulad and anr. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-31-1960
Reported in: AIR1961All326; 1961CriLJ797
ORDERB. Dayal, J.1. This is an application trade on behalf of Faulad and Kalloo on the 6th of October, 1960 stating that Criminal Appeal No. 233 of 1960 has been compromised between the parties and there-lore permission to compound the offence be granted.2. The facts, which have given rise to this application may be shortly stated. The applicants Faulad and Kalloo were convicted by the iearnp.d Addl. Sessions Judge of Allahabad on the 30th of January, 1960 under Sections 308 and 397, I. P. C., and sentenced to different terms of imprisonment which it is not necessary to mention for the purpose of this application. Both the applicants appealed to this Court against their conviction which was heard by me on the 23rd September, 1960. I, after hearing the appeal, dictated judgment in open Court on that very date.As a result, I allowed the appeal of Kalloo and set him at liberty while I converted conviction of Faulad into one under Section 325, I. P. C. and under that section sentenced him ...
Harihar Prasad Tripathi Vs. District Magistrate, Mirzapur and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-27-1960
Reported in: AIR1961All365
S.N. Dwivedi, J.1. The petitioner, Harihar Prasad Tripathi, is a Bakshi in the Town Area, Kachhwa, constituted under the U.P. Town Areas Act (hereinafter called the Act). There was a Town Area Committee, which looked after the affairs of the Town Area. By a notification dated, August 3, 1960, and published in the U. P. Gazette, dated August 13, 1960, the State Government, in exercise of its powers under Section 36 (1) of the Act, made an order superseding the Town Area Committee for a period of two years, or till the next general election whichever was earlier.A copy of the notification superseding the Committee is annexure D to the affidavit accompanying the writ petition. On October 6, 1960 the petitioner received an order, dated October 1, 1960, from the District Magistrate, Mirzapur, suspending him pending conclusion of an enquiry against him. A charge sheet signed by the District Magistrate was also served upon him. The petitioned was asked by the District Magistrate to submit his...
Shri Ram and ors. Vs. Gauri Shanker
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-26-1960
Reported in: AIR1961All320
B. Mukerji, J.1. This matter was filed as a revision under Section 115 C. P. C. Office made a report to the effect that a revision did not lie but that a second appeal lay.2. Learned counsel contested this Office report and he argued that the office was wrong in its view that a second appeal lay, for, according to learned counsel, the amendment made by Parliament on which the Office relied had no application. It is necessary in Order to decide the controversy to state the facts in some detail.3. A suit was filed in the Court of the Munsif of Kanauj sometime in 1958 for the recovery of Rs. 1,600/-. The suit was decreed on the 29th August, 1959 by the learned Munsif. An Appeal was filed against the decision of the Munsif and the appeal was valued at Rs. 1,600/-. The appeal was dismissed on the 2nd of June, 1960.4. Section 102, Civil P. C., as it stood originally, namely before the two amendments, one by the State in 1954 and the other by Parliament in 1956, was in these words:'No second ...
Shafiullah Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-26-1960
Reported in: AIR1961All485
ORDERJ.K. Tandon, J.1. The above petition has contained more than one relief and also a number of facts but in view of the fact that the relief asked is now confined to the prayer that the respondents be debarred from proceeding to realise the sum of Rs. 1,500/- from the petitioner as arrears of land revenue, I shall state such of them only as bear on the question.2. The petitioner is a forest contractor. The respondents are the State of Uttar Pradesh, the Chief Conservator of Forests, U.P., the Conser-vator of Forests, U.P., Eastern Circle and the Divisional Forest Officer, Bahraich Division. The Divisional Forest Officer sold by auction the right to remove timber from lot No. 2 in compartment No. 21 (c) in Motipur Block in the Bahraich Division on the 21st August, 1958. The petitioner having offered the highest bid of Rs. 15,000/- the same was knocked down in his favour.In accordance with the conditions governing the sale the petitioner also deposited a- sum ot Rs. 1,500/-, being 10 ...
Babu Ram Kulshreshta Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-25-1960
Reported in: 1961CriLJ55
S.K. Verma, J.1. Babu Ram Kulshreshta has been convicted by the learned Civil and Sessions Judge of Etah under Sections 467, 471, 477 and 201 I.P.C. He has been sentenced to three years' R. I, and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- with six months' rigorous imprisonment in default of payment of fine under Section 467 of the Code, to three years' R. I. under Section 471 of the Code and to three years' R. I, under Section 477 of the Code, but no separate sentence has been awarded to him under Section 201 of the Code. The sentences under Sections 467, 471 and 477 of the Code have been ordered by the learned trial Judge to run concurrently.2. The charge against the appellant was that he forged a will dated the 15th of May 1957, purporting to have been executed by a widow,Kalawati, in favour of his grand-daughter, Kumari Basanti.3. The following facts are not in dispute, Kalawati was the widow of one Din Dayal who died in 11908 without leaving any issue. Kalawati inherited her husband's property, ...
ishwar Dayal Vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-24-1960
Reported in: AIR1961All374
ORDERJ.K. Tandon, J.1. The petitioner possesses a Stage Carriage Permit No. 809-1622 for his transport vehicle on the Bulandshahr, Anupshahr, Debai, Naraura and Debai-Ramghat route in the Meerut Region. This route earlier was classified as a B Class route and also approved as such by the State Transport Authority. It is said that originally it was partly metalled and partly Kankar, while the extension from Debai to Ramghat was sandy. In 1957-58 this route was extended up to Ramghat and again classified by the Regional Transport Authority as a 'B' class route. When, however, the classification made by the Regional Transport Authority came up before the State Transport Authority, the latter by its resolution, dated the 29th/30th September, 1958, declared it to be an 'A' class route.2. One of the consequences of classifying the route as an 'A' class route has been an increase in the rate of taxes payable by the permit holder and also a decrease in the fate chargeable from persons travelli...
Ram Abhilakh and anr. Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-24-1960
Reported in: AIR1961All544; 1961CriLJ597
Nigam, J.1. A dacoity was committed on the night between the 14th and 15th of October, 1953, in village Hariharpur, police station Mawai, district Barabanki at the house of one Jagpal. In connection with the dacoity Ram Naresh, Sheo Prasad, Ram Abhilakh, Inder Singh, Palli Singh, Mahadeo, Raj Karan and Ram Pratap were charged with an offence under Section 396 Indian Penal Code. Ram Abhilakh, Ma-hadeo, Raj Karan and Ram Pratap were further charged with an offence under Section 412, Indian Penal Code in respect of several articles alleged to have been recovered from their possession. The eight items of property alleged to have been recovered from the two applicants Ram Pratap and Ram Abhilakh are detailed in paragraph 5 of this miscellaneous application.The learned Temporary Sessions Judge, Barabanki delivered judgment in the two connected trials on 3-11-1955. Then he acquitted Ram Naresh, Palli Singh, Inder Singh, Sheo Prasad, Raj Karan, Ram Abhilakh and Ram Pratap of all the charges le...
Saghir Ahmad Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-18-1960
Reported in: AIR1961All507; 1961CriLJ441
ORDERW. Broome, J.1. Saghir Ahmad, the applicant in this criminal revision, has been convicted by a first class Magistrate of Gorakhpur for an offence under Section 14 of the Foreigners Act read with Section 7 of the Foreigners Order and has been sentenced to six months' simple imprisonment. His conviction and sentence were confirmed in appeal by the Temporary Civil and Session Judge of Gorakhpur.2. The facts of the case are as follows. Saghir Ahmad was born in Gorakhpur district in January 1937, but at the time of the communal riots that followed partition in 1947 he was attending school in Delhi and was sent to a refugee camp and from there to Pakistan, without his parents,who remained behind in India, being consulted in the matter. Eventually he got in touch with his parents and came back to India on 15-2-1955 on the basis of a passport issued on 3-11-1954 and a visa in category B valid for two months. He remained on in this country after the period noted in his visa had expired and...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »