Allahabad Court March 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.
Peru Paltu Ghosi and anr. Vs. Assistant Custodian, Mathura
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-11-1960
Reported in: AIR1961All299
ORDERV.D. Bhargava, J. 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution filed on behalf of two persons, Peru and Abdul Waheed, who claim to be the members of the Sunni Waqf Board, Lucknow, and are acquainted with the facts mentioned in the petition. They say that there was a certain graveyard which has now been acquired by the Custodian of Evacuee Property treating it as an evacuee property. According to their contention it is a graveyard and, therefore, could not be acquired. They have further contended that the property is a takia attached to the graveyard and it can never be declared as an evacuee property.Therefore, it has been prayed that the order of the Assistant Custodian dated the 22nd of September, 1950, declaring it to be an evacuee property may be quashed and the subsequent proceedings that had taken place may also be quashed. There are several preliminary objections to this writ petition. The first is that the order sought to be quashed is dated the 22nd of Sept...
Shri Ram Shanker Lal Vs. Collector of Mirzapur and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-11-1960
Reported in: AIR1960All732
ORDERV.D. Bhargava, J. 1. These are five connected writ petitions filed by five different petitioners who had been assessed to sales tax by the State of Bihar. The State of Bihar had sent an order of collection to the Collector of Mirzapur, who was making collections on behalf of the State of Bihar. These writ petitions have been filed on the ground that the order passed by the State of Bihar under the Sales Tax Laws Validation Act VII of 1956 was not a valid one and, therefore, the Collector of Mirzapur has no jurisdiction to realise the illegal tax on behalf of the sales tax authorities at Bihar. 2. The real order, which is being challenged, is the order of the Assistant Superintendent, Sales Tax, Central Circle, Bihar, Patna. Unless the order of that authority is set aside no mandamus can be issued to the Collector of Mirzapur directing him not to realise tax. So long as that order stands it will be deemed to be a valid order and if it is a valid order then no objection can be taken...
Kailash Chandra and ors. Vs. the Dist. Registrar, Registration Departm ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-10-1960
Reported in: AIR1961All61
ORDERV.D. Bhargava, J.1. This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution filed on behalf of four persons, Kailash Chandra, Ansar Husain, Alauddin Khan and Ram Narain, all of whom claimed to be deedwriters. They were practising in the registration office at Firozabad district Agra under licences granted to them. The licence of all of them hits been cancelled and, therefore, this writ petition has been filed.2. The right of each petitioner is separate and distinct and is not one. Therefore, a joint petition by four of them is not maintainable, as has been held in Uma Shankar Rai v. Divisional Superintendent, Northern Railway, Lucknow, 1959 All LJ 864 : (AIR 1960 All 366). Learned counsel for the petitioners elects to press this petition on behalf of Ansar Husain and he prays that the names of Kailash Chandra, Alauddin Khan and Ram Narain be deleted from this petition. These persons may be making separate petitions if so advised.3. The petitioner practised as deed-writer for...
State Vs. Tula Ram and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-09-1960
Reported in: AIR1960All585; 1960CriLJ1276
ORDER1. This is an application by the State of U. P. under Article 134(1)(c) of the Constitution of India for a certificate of fitness for appeal to the Supreme Court. It arises out of Criminal Appeal No. 2069 of 1959 of this Court connected with which was Referred No. 133 of 1959, decided by us on 8-1-1960. The appeal was by the opposite-parties against their conviction and sentence for rioting under Section 147 I. P. C. and for the murder of one Babu Deepchand a practising Mukhtar of Sodabad in the district of Mathura under Section 302 with the aid of Section 149/34, I. P. C. The reference was made by the Sessions Judge for the confirmation of the death sentence of Tula Ram and Bhag wan.2. The circumstances relating to the murder, and the evidence bearing upon the alleged crime of the accused, were dealt with by us in our judgment of 8-1-1960 and need no re-statement for the disposal of this application. That Babu Deepchand had been murdered admitted of no doubt. The question was whe...
Mukand Madhav Singh Vs. Agra University and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-08-1960
Reported in: AIR1961All301
V.D. Bhargava, J. 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution filed by one Mukand Madhav Singh, who after having passed his B. A. examination from the Agra University got admission to the LL. B. (Previous) of the Agra College in 1955. In 1956 he appeared in that examination but failed. In 1956 he got admission to M. A. (Previous) in Political Science of the Agra College. He appeared at the M. A. (Previous) examination in 1957 as a regular student and at the LL. B. examination as an ex-student.He succeeded in M. A. (Previous) but failed in Law again. He joined M. A. (Final) of the Agra University in 1957 and appeared in 1958 at the M, A. (Final) Examination and also as an ex-student in LL. B. (Pr,).. He succeeded in both. The petitioner alleges that he obtained a third division in M. A. (Final); a true copy of the mark-sheet has been given by him in Annexure Y. The petitioner got his degree having passed his M. A. examination in the third division. He got himself admitte...
Secretary, Board of High School and Intermediate Education, Uttar Prad ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-08-1960
Reported in: AIR1960All535
Gurtu, J. 1. This is a special appeal from an order of a learned single Judge of this Court, dated 24-12-3.959. The respondent was the petitioner before the learned single Judge. He was a student of class X at the Government Intermediate College, Etawah, during the session 1958-59. He was found using unfair means at the High School Examination held in that year in the month of March/April. The Examinations' Committee of the Board of High School and Intermediate Education, after necessary enquiries, held him guilty of the charge of using unfair means and made an order cancelling his examination for the session 1958-59 and debarring him from appearing in the examination to be held in 1959-60.2. Originally the respondent, petitioner, before the learned single Judge, attacked the legality of the proceedings held against him by the Examinations' Committee and impugned the entire order made by it, including the portion whereby his examination of 1959-60 was cancelled, but he later confined h...
State of Uttar Pradesh and ors. Vs. Salig Ram Sharma
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-08-1960
Reported in: AIR1960All543
Dhavan, J.1. This is an appeal against an order of Mr. Justice S. K. Verma allowing a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution and quashing the order of the Inspector General of Prisons, Uttar Pradesh dismissing the respondent Salig Ram Sharma from service. The respondent was employed as an Assistant Jailor in the Central Prison, Fatehgarh when the incident leading to his dismissal occurred. On 8-3-1952 he received an indent from the Jailor in charge for a certain quantity of iron sheet's. He entered the amount of one maund and seventeen seers in his issue register. Subsequently this entry was altered by the respondent to four maunds and seventeen seers.Action was taken against him and he was charge-sheeted. It was stated in the charge that he had made the alteration 'with ulterior motives'. Salig Ram Sharma admitted that be had made the change in the entry but explained that he had done this because the indent issued by the jailor was for four maunds and seventeen seers and he e...
Vishwanath Pandey Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-08-1960
Reported in: AIR1960All721
ORDERM.C. Desai, J.1. The main question that is raised in this reference by the applicant Vishwanath Pande, who is an assistant station master, is whether the word 'person' used in the beginning of Section 120 of the Railways Act includes a railway servant. The Magistrate answered the question in the affirmative and convicted the applicant under Section 120, but the Additional Sessions Judge considering that it should have been answered in the negative has referred the case to this Court for quashing the applicant's conviction.2. Section 120 reads as follows : 120. If a person in any railway carriage or upon any part of a railway -(a) is in a state of intoxication, or (b) commits any nuisance or act of indecency, or uses obscene or abusive language, or (c) wilfully and without lawful excuse interferes with the comfort of any passenger or extinguishes any lamp, he shall be punished with fine which may extend to fifty rupees, in addition to the forfeiture of any fare which he may have ...
Mahadeo Misir and anr. Vs. Palakdhari Misir and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-07-1960
Reported in: AIR1960All743
Nasirullah Beg, J.1. This is a plaintiffs' appeal. It arises out of a suit for demolition of constructions made by the defendants and for permanent injunction. The plaintiffs brought a suit for demolition and removal of the disputed constructions and for the issue of a permanent injunction against the defendants restraining them from interfering with the right of plaintiffs' peaceful enjoyment of subplot No. 95. The plaintiffs' case was that sub-plot No. 95 was settled with plaintiff No. 1 and father of plaintiff No. 2 by the Zamindar in the year 1926 under a deed which is paper No. 70-A and is dated 20-11-1926. Under the said deed the plaintiff No. 1 was accorded permission by the Zamindar to fix cattle troughs or to prepare cow dung cakes or to construct cattle sheds or to instal chappars or to sink wells or to plant trees or to build a house on the said plot.He was also given a right to cultivate the same, but, if he did so, he was to pay Rs. 14/4/- per year as rent. He alleged that...
Abdul Mannan Khan Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through the Ministry of For ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-04-1960
Reported in: AIR1960All565
ORDERV.D. Bhargava, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, filed by one Abdul Mannan Khan who claims to be a citizen of India. He was born in Umarkhel, police station Sharan in the district of Ghazni in the State of Afghanistan. The petitioner's father had migrated to Banaras some 30 years ago and lived in house No. 66/3, Bania Bagh from where he carried on business in various parts of India and made the said house his permanent home. The petitioner was brought up by his father at Banaras and he too settled down there. The petitioner, in fact, had made Banaras his home and permanent residence with no intention of leaving the place. During the 30 years' stay in India he has hardly visited Afghanistan six times, and during the last 22 years he probably visited only twice or thrice. After the coming of the Constitution, the petitioner considered himself to be a domicile of India and its citizen.When the Citizenship Act of 1955 came into Force, the petitioner though...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »