Allahabad Court February 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.
State Vs. Brij Lal Gulati and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-15-1960
Reported in: AIR1961All79; 1961CriLJ199; (1960)IILLJ379All; (1960)IILLJ379All
Jagdish Sahai, J.1. The respondents were prosecuted under Section 27 of the U. P. Shops and Commercial Establishments Act 1947, for breach of Rules 13 and 15 of the Rules on the allegation that the respondent Brij Lal Gulati was the proprietor and the respondent Ved Prakash was the manager of the Railway Booking Agency Shaheedganj, Saharanpur. They had neither maintained nor produced for inspection on demand by Sri O.N. Avasthi, Inspector of Shops and Commercial Establishments, Saharanpur, the prescribed registers of attendance and wages in Form E, the register of leave in Form F, the register of fine and deduction in Forms D and C and the Inspection Book and they also did not display the close day and weekly holiday notices in Forms A and B and the abstract of the Act and the Rules in the premises on 14th of March 1958. The learned magistrate who tried the respondents acquitted them by his order dated 30-8-1958.It is against that order of acquittal that the present appeal has been fil...
Bal Govind Kaya Vs. 3rd Addl. Civil Judge and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-15-1960
Reported in: AIR1961All306
ORDERV.D. Bhargava, J. 1. This is a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution filed by one Bal Govind Kaya against whom a case is pending before the 3rd Addl. Civil Judge, Kanpur, who is respondent No. 1. The suit has been filed by Brij Behari Lal, respondent No. 2. 2. According to the petition, the suit is contested, inter alia, on the ground that the defendant never borrowed any money and he had no need to borrow the money. Written statements were filed by the petitioner and on 28-10-58 he alleges to have filed six original papers which, according to the petitioner, would have disproved and falsified the plaintiffs claim. On that day an application further is said to have been made to the effect that he was filing certain papers, and prayed for time for filing certain other papers. According to the affidavit filed by the petitioner, no sooner the papers were filed by the defendant than they had been removed along with the entire English order-sheet as these papers were entered t...
Karam Chand Vs. Gur Dayal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-15-1960
Reported in: AIR1960All512
S.S. Dhavan, J. 1. This is a decree-holder's second appeal against an order of the learned Civil Judge, Agra, upholding the judgment-debtor's objection to the execution of his decree. It raises an interesting question of law relating to the effect of the recent amendment of Section 42 C. P. C. The facts of the case are these:2. The decree-holder Karam Chand obtained a decree for Rs. 58.0/- with costs against GUR Dayal from the Judge Small Cause Court, Agra. He wanted to execute it by attachment of some immovable property of the judgment-debtor. As the Small Cause Court is debarred by Order 21 Rule 82 and Order 50 Rule 1 C. P. C., from proceeding against immovable property in execution of decrees, the appellant Karam Chand obtained a transfer of his decree to the Court o the Munsiff, Agra, and secured from that Court an order of attachment against some immovable property belonging to the judgment-debtor. The latter, however, objected that, in view of the amendment of Section 42 C. P. C....
Abdul Razzaq Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-15-1960
Reported in: AIR1960All567; 1960CriLJ1179
S.K. Verma, J.1. Abdul Razzak has filed this appeal against the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge of Allahabad, convicting him under Sections 323 and 325, 'each read with Section 34 I. P. C. and sentencing him to one year's rigorous imprisonment for the former offence and to two years' R. I. for the latter offence. The sentences were ordered by the learned trial Judge to run concurrently.2. The following facts are not in dispute, Abdul Razzak and his son Naziruddin are residents of village Kasari Masari, police station Dhumanganj, district Allahabad. Reayat Hussain P. W. 1 is also a resident of that very village. On 22-4-1958, at 6 a.m. an incident, involving the use of violence, took place near a well situate at a short distance from Reayat Husain's house. In this incident Reayat Husain, Abdul Majid and Ramizan Ali received injuries on the side of Reayat Husain and Abdul Raz-zaq and bis son received injuries on the other side. Reayat Husain bad two traumatic swellings on his band...
Rama Kant Vs. Cantonment Board, Allahabad Through Executive Officer
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-11-1960
Reported in: AIR1960All719
A.P. Srivastava, J.1. This is a petitioner's special appeal directed against an order of Mr. Justice Mehrotra dismissing a petition filed by him under Article 226 of the Constitution.2. The appellant is the proprietor of a brickkiln situate in village Tar Bagh, Mazra UmarpurNeema, tahsil Chail, district Allahabad. The brickkiln is situate just outside the limits of the Cantonment of Allahabad. Near its north east corner startsa road of the Cantonment of Allahabad known asMeagharganj Road or Ravidas Road. That roadis under the control and management of the Cantonment Board. In the exercise of the powers conferred upon it by Clause (4) of Section 282 after obtaining the approval of the Central Government under Section 283of the Cantonments Act 1924 (Act No. II of 1924)the Cantonment Board has framed certain bye-lawsfor the regulation and prohibition of traffic withinits area.One of the bye-laws authorises the Board to prohibit either absolutely or during such hours as may be notified by ...
Satya NaraIn Chaube Vs. Lal Chand Ojha and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-10-1960
Reported in: AIR1960All561; 1960CriLJ1178
Srivastava, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 o the Consti-tution. In connection with the election to the office of the Pradhan of Gram Sabha Ganeshraipur, pargana Bhadohi, district Varanasi, an election petition No. 10 of 1955 was filed and was being heard by opposite-party No. 1 as an election tribunal. In that election petition the petitioner appeared as a witness and made statement on oath. After the election petition had been decided the opposite-party No. 2 made an application to the election tribunal under Section 479 Cr. P. C. He alleged that the petitioner had committed the offence under Section 193 I. P. C. by making a false statement, on oath and prayed that after an enquiry a complaint be filed against him for that offence. The application was opposed on behalf of the petitioner. He denied that he had made a false statement. He, also contended that the opposite-party No. 1 had no right to proceed under Section 470 Cr. P. C. and file a complaint against him. By his o...
J.K. Cotton Manufacturers Ltd., Kanpur Vs. U.P. Government and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-10-1960
Reported in: AIR1960All734; [1960(1)FLR564]
ORDERV.D. Bhargava, J. 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution filed by Messrs J. K. Cotton . 2. The petitioner is a joint stock company registered under the Companies Act, having its head office at Kanpur and running the business of manufacture and sale of yarn and cloth. The petitioner employs a strength of about 1700 workmen for this purpose. They are divided into different categories. The opposite parties to this petition are the U. P. Government; the Additional Regional Conciliation Officer; the Workmen of the J. K. Cotton ., the Kanpur Mechanical and Technical Workers Union, Kanpur, and Sri Rama Shankar Gupta, one o the workers, who had been employed on a temporary basis by the petitioner. He is opposite party No. 5. He was employed on 1-1-53 as a temporary clerk. The engagement was for a specific period on the expiry of which, under the terms of the contract, he was automatically to leave the petitioner's company. With an interval of short periods this tempor...
Shambhu Datt Vs. Jagdish Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-08-1960
Reported in: AIR1961All89
S.S. Dhavan, J. 1. This is an appeal against anorder dated 22-3-1952 passed by Additional District Magistrate, Meerut functioning as Commissioner under the Indian Workmen's Compensation Act, rejecting the appellant's prayer for compensation. The appellant Shambhu Datt filed an application fox compensation against the respondent Jag-dish Prasad for compensation in respect of an injury to his finger. The employer pleaded in defence that the injury was caused because Shambhu Datt was under the influence of drink at the time and, in that state, he disobeyed the express orders of the employer, and, instead of stopping the machine, started repairing it while the engine was still runing. As a direct result of his own conduct, his finger was cut off.2. The parties led evidence. The Commissioner believed the testimony of Dr. R.S. Goel that Shambhu Datt was very much under the influence of drink when he examined him. Consequently, he dismissed the claim under Section 3(1)(b)(i) which provides th...
Shri Mustaq HusaIn Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-04-1960
Reported in: AIR1960All559; 1960CriLJ1176
Dwivedi, J.1. By this writ petition Mushtaq Husain prays for a mandamus commanding the State of Uttar Pradesh to forbear from interfering with his right to settle and reside in any part of India.2. The petition is accompanied by an affidavit of his father, Iqbal Husain, The allegations, material to the case as argued, are : The petitioner was born in 1940 in India, and in 1,951 he was reading in Dr. Ghosh Modern College. Allahabad. In the Dasehra holidays of that year he went to Delhi and thence he crossed over to Pakistan. When it wasdiscovered in 1954 that he was in Pakistan, his father asked his friends in that country to arrange for his send-back to Allahabad. A passport was then obtained for him and he came back in 1954.The father consulted some persons as to his permanent stay in India, but no decision could be taken before the expiry of the prescribed period of his stay, and he had to leave for Pakistan. He came to India several times thereafter, and in 1956 his visa was extende...
Ch. Mansa Ram and Sons Vs. the Secretary, Industries and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-01-1960
Reported in: AIR1960All570
ORDERV.D. Bhargava, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution by a firm named and styled Ch. Mansa Ram and Sons. It has been filed against the Secretary, Industries (B) Department, Government of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow; The Secretary Forests Department, Government of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow, Collector, Dehra Dun; Sri C. P. Sharma, Dehra Dun and Hindustan Sugar Mills, Ltd. (Cement Division) Branch Office, Dehra Dun.2. According to the petition, the petitioner is a partnership firm consisting of three persons, Dr. Satya Prakash, Sri Vigyan, Prakash and Sri Dharam Prakash. They are all sons of Ch. Mansa Ram The managing partner is Vigyan Prakash through whom this writ petition has been filed by the firm. The firm holds' a certificate of approval granted to them by the State Government under Rule 5 of the Mineral Concession Rules, 1949. On 29-2-1952 the petitioner filed an application under Rule 6 of the Mineral Concession Rules to the Government, Uttar Pradesh through th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›