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.
Ghulam MohiuddIn Vs. Munsiff of Etah and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-10-1960
Reported in: AIR1961All200
Mootham, C.J.1. I have had the advantage of reading the judgment prepared by Dwivedi, J., and I agree that this petition fails substantially for the reasons which he has stated. Mr. Justice Tandon had referred this petition to a larger Bench as he doubted whether the case of Abdul Aziz v. State of Uttar Pradesh : AIR1958All109 , had been rightly decided. Out of deference to the learned Judge, I think it proper to state shortly the reasons which lead me to take a different view. The learned Judge was of opinion that the provisions of Sections 47-A and 87-A of the U. P. Municipalities Act, 1916, could not be extended to town areas substantially on two grounds: first, that only such provisions of the Municipalities Act can be extended to town areas as relate to the carrying out. of functions which a Municipal Board can discharge and, secondly, that the modifications made by the State Government when extending those sections radically altered the policy underlying the Municipalities Act an...
Savitri Devi Vs. Rajul Devi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-10-1960
Reported in: AIR1961All245
Mootham, C.J. 1. The applicant filed a suit against the respondents for the recovery of Rs. 1,39,000 due on a promissory note. The trial court ordered to be recorded a compromise which the applicant contended had been arrived at between the parties during the pendency of the suit,, and it passed a decree in the terms of the compromise save with regard to one provision thereof. Two of the defendants appealed to this Court under Order XLIII, Rule 1 (m) C. P. C. against the order recording the compromise, and this Court by an order dated the 28th September, 1959, allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the trial court. The plaintiff then filed an application for a certificate under Article 133(1)(a) of the Constitution and the Bench hearing the application has referred to this Court the following question. 'whether the order of this Court reversing the order of the trial court recording a compromise amounts to a judgment or final order within the meaning of these terms in Article 13...
J.K. Investment Trust Ltd. and ors. Vs. Muir Mills Co. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-10-1960
Reported in: AIR1961All413; [1962]32CompCas893(All)
Srivastava, J. 1. An application was filed under Sections 397 and 898 of the Indian Companies Act of 1956 against the company itself, its managing agents and certain of its directors. There were eight respondents to the petition, One of them, viz. respondent No. 5, was Sri Hari Shankar Bagla. The reliefs prayed in the application were as follows :(a) That the existing Managing Agency agreement between the respondent company and the Indian Textile Syndicate (Private) Limited be terminated and the said Indian Textile Syndicate (Private) Limited be removed from their office as Managing Agents of the respondent company.(b) That the existing sole selling agency agreement between the respondent company and the Kanpur Agencies (Private) Limited be terminated and that the said Kanpur Agencies (Private) Limited be removed from their office of the sole selling agents of the respondent company.(c) That respondents Nos. 2, 3, 4, 5 and 9 be removed from their office as Directors of the respondent c...
Dhandu and ors. Vs. Girdhari Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-10-1960
Reported in: AIR1961All518
A.P. Srivastava, J.1. This first appeal from order arises out of a suit to recover rent. The plaintiff claimed that his father had lent Rs. 417/- to two persons Lohery and Chotey Lal and had obtained from them as security for the debt a usufructuary mortgage in respect of some birt khakrobi rights which the two persons Posessed. On the same date the two persons had taken a lease of the birt kha-krobi rights by executing a qabuliyat in favour of the plaintiff's father. By the qabuliyat the executants purported to take the property on lease for a fixed period of three years.After the death of his father the plaintiff succeeded to the mortgagee rights and became the landlord in respect of the lease. Lohery, one of the mortgagors and executant of the qabuliyat, having died was succeeded by the defendants Nos. 1 and 2. The Plaintiff further alleged that the rent had been paid by the defendants up to the 7th February, 1934, and that they had not paid any rent thereafter. He, therefore, sued ...
Anwarul Hasan Khan and ors. Vs. Ali Mohammad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-10-1960
Reported in: AIR1961All558
V. Bhargava, J. 1. We have heard learned counsel for the appellants in this special appeal and we find that there is no prima facie reason for differing from the view taken by the learned Single Judge, so that this appeal has no force. 2. The appeal before the learned Single Judge came up under Section 39 of the Arbitration Act against an order passed by the trial court on an application under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act dismissing that application. The respondents had applied to the court for an order directing the present appellants to file an arbitration agreement. The appellants denied the existence of that agreement. The trial court, without going into the question whether an agreement of the nature alleged by the respondents was or was not executed and without recording any finding as to its existence, dismissed the application on the view that since the existence of the agreement was denied by the present appellants, no order under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act could b...
Suraj Lal Bal Krishna Das Vs. Padrauna Raj Krishna Sugar Works Ltd. an ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-05-1960
Reported in: AIR1961All371
ORDERB. Mukherji, J.1. These five connected applications in revision arose out of a single controversy in which the five applicants were equally /interested: the applications having arisen out of the same order of the Court below, namely, an order dated the 17th October 1958, The applications in revision were connected in this Court and have been listed together, and I propose deciding them by this Judgment.2. A few facts need be stated in order to appreciate the points in controversy between the parties. The Padrauna Raj Krishna Sugar Works Limited, Padrauna, appears to have fallen on evil days, and, thus got into financial difficulties, with the result that several decrees came to be made against this Sugar Mills. As was natural, each decree-holder attempted to get his decree satisfied, and to that end he took the steps he thought would further his end in getting satisfaction of his decree.The Padrauna Raj Krishna Sugar Works Limited, however, had their own difficulties to face and t...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Mathulal Baldeo Prasad.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-05-1960
Reported in: [1961]42ITR517(All)
GURTU, J. - This is a reference under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, read with section 21 of the Excess Profits Tax Act, 1940, made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal at the instance of the assessee Messrs. Mathulal Baldeo Prasad, Kanpur.The facts stated by the Appellate Tribunal in the statement of the case drawn up and referred to this court are as follows :'The assessee is a registered firm. The assessment year is 1946-47 and the accounting year is from July 7, 1944, to July 14, 1945. It carried on speculative transactions in cotton. Three such transactions were entered into with a firm Chaturbhuj Piramal and in these three transactions the date of settlement in the first one was January, 1944, the second in March, 1944, and the third in May, 1944. In other words these dates of settlement were all in the accounting year ending on July 6, 1944, relevant to the assessment year 1945-46. The first one resulted in a profit of Rs. 297-8-0, the second in a loss of Rs. ...
Bankhandi Lal Vs. Asst. Supdt. of Police and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-04-1960
Reported in: AIR1962All114
Srivastava, J. 1. This is an appeal against a judgment of Mr. Justice Oak dated the 26th November, 1957, by which he dismissed a petition filed by the appellant under Article 226 of the Constitution. 2. The appellant Bankhandi Lal was formerly employed as a police head constable in the district of Mathura. Certain allegations having been made against him he was charge-sheeted under section 7 of the Police Act. The enquiry into the charges framed was held by Mr, B. M. Mathur, Assistant Superintendent of Police, Mathura. He recorded his findings against the appellant and forwarded the same to the Superintendent of Police, Mathura, Agreeing with the findings the latter served a notice on the appellant requiring him to show cause why he should not be dismissed from the Police Force. The appellant submitted his explanation. The explanation was not found to be satisfactory and by his order dated the 10th October, 1954, the Superintendent of Police dismissed the appellant from service. He pre...
Gorakh Ram and ors. Vs. Dhannu Ram and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-04-1960
Reported in: AIR1961All415
Desai, J. 1. On 12-8-1960 this Court granted a certificate-under Article 133(1)(a) of the Constitution to the appellants and under Order 45, Rule 7, C.P.C., they were bound to furnish security and to deposit the amount to defray the expenses of translating, transcribing etc. and transmitting to the Supreme Court a correct copy of the whole record within a certain time. They failed to make the initial deposit and to apply for preparation of the paper book as required by Rules of Court within the prescribed time. Hence the office listed the case before us for orders. Sri H. N. Seth orally asked for time to make the initial deposit and to apply for preparation of the paper book. He contended that cancellation of the certificate is not mandatory and that we have jurisdiction to extend the time. After having heard him at length I am convinced that we have no jurisdiction to extend the time at all.2. The procedure relating to appeals to the Supreme Court is contained in Order 45, C.P.C., and...
Mool Chand and anr. Vs. Kamta Prasad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-04-1960
Reported in: AIR1961All595
D.S. Mathur, J.1. The points for consideration are :(1) Should the finding of the civil or revenue court form part of the judgment of the trial court and copy thereof furnished along with the trial court's judgment?(2) Should the memorandum of Second Appeal be accompanied by a copy of the finding of the civil or revenue court, as the case may be?(3) Is it necessary for the appellant to move an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, accompanied by an affidavit, if copies of the trial court's judgment and revenue or civil court's finding are not filed within the prescribed period of limitation? and(4) Can the Registrar grant time for filing copies of the trial court's judgment and of the finding of the civil or revenue court On oral request, without an application accompanied by an affidavit?2. There may be two kinds of references to the revenue court for recording a finding on issues remitted to it for decision) one under the provisions of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and L...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›