Allahabad Court September 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.
Doctors X-ray and Pathology Institute Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income- ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-21-1960
Reported in: [1961]42ITR185(All)
GURTU, J. - These are two references under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, made at the instance of the assessee Doctors X-Ray & Pathology Institute Ltd., Kanpur. The question propounded for our answer is as follows :'Whether the income-tax authorities were justified in levying additional income-tax at five annas in the rupee on the sums of Rs. 2,295 and Rs. 4,276 under clause (ii) of the the proviso to section B of part 1 of Schedule 1 of the Indian Finance Act, 1951, in determining the income-tax payable by the company for the assessment years 1951-52 and 1952-53 ?'The facts may be briefly stated. For the assessment year 1951-52 (the previous year being the calendar year 1950), the assessee company was found to incur a loss of Rs. 2,715 and was thus adjudged to be not liable to income-tax. In that year, the assessee company had made a profit of Rs. 5,584 but the depreciation allowance under the Indian Income-tax Act came to Rs. 8,299. This converted the profit into l...
Ram Prasad Seth Vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-20-1960
Reported in: AIR1961All334; (1961)IILLJ247All
Srivastava, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred against a judgment of Mr. Justice Mehrotra by which he dismissed a petition of the appellant filed under Article 223 of the Constitution.2. The appellant is an Engineer employed under the State of Uttar Pradesh in the Public Works Department He claims to be a Hindu by religion. He was married to respondent No. 3 in 1934. A daughter was bom of the marriage. Thereafter the respondent No. 3 began to miscarry. No son was ever born to her and it has been found that on medical grounds the respondent No. 3 was incapable of bearing a son.Both the appellant and his father believe that according to Hindu Dharm Shastras salvation was not possible without a son and in the absence of a male child in the family a number of religious obligations would remain unfulfilled. The appellant, therefore, decided to marry a second wife in the hope that he will be able to get a son by her. The respondent No. 3 at first consented to the proposal but then changed ...
Dr. S.N. Shukla Vs. Chancellor, Lucknow University and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-16-1960
Reported in: AIR1961All401
ORDERTandon, J.1. The petitioner, who is Dr. S. N. Shukla, is a Professor of Chemistry in the Lucknow University. The third respondent, Dr. A. B. Sen is also a Professor in the same Department. The other two respondents are the Chancellor of the University and the Lucknow University as such.2. Dr. A. C. Chatterji who was the then Professor of Chemistry retired on the 30th April, 1956, and it became necessary to make an appointment in the vacancy thus created. Earlier in January, 1958, the University Grants Commission had in pursuance of their scheme for the development of the higher scientific education during the Second Five Year Plan sanctioned various grants one of which made provision for the entertainment of one further Professor of Chemistry in this University on condition that the State Government also placed a matching grant of similar amount to meet the cost of the post. Appointment of two Professors thus became necessary. An advertisement inviting applications from candidates...
Arjun Singh and ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-16-1960
Reported in: AIR1961All520
ORDERS.N. Dwivedi, J.1. There is some land, situate in village Baraubagh, in the district of Nainital. It comprised a part of the Khamestate, in Tarai and Bhabar area, belonging to the State Government. The State Government let it out by written leaser deeds to certain persons who, in turn, sublet it by registered sub-leases in favour of the Petitioners. Leaving out unnecessary details it appears that the State Government, by a notification, dated June 3, 1959, under Sub-section (1) of Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, published in the U.P. Gazette dated June 6, 1959, declared that it was proposed to acquire the land for rehabilitating displaced Persons from East Pakistan.It was also stated in the notification that the Governor, being of opinion that the Provisions of Sub-section (1) of Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter called the Act) were applicable tothe land, has directed under Sub-section (4) of Section 17 that the provisions of Section 5A of the Act would n...
Ram Sarup and ors. Vs. Shikhar Chand and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-13-1960
Reported in: AIR1961All221
Mootham, C.J.1. I had the advantage of reading the judgment prepared by Beg, J. but regret that I am unable to agree with the conclusion at which he has arrived,2. The essential facts are not in dispute. The District Magistrate refused to grant permission to the appellants to file a suit for the ejectment or the respondents from the premises occupied by them as tenants of the appellants. This order was made under Sub-section (1) of Section 3 of the U. P. (Temporary) Control of Rent and Eviction Act as it stood prior to its amendment by U. P. Act No. XVII of 1954. The appellants then applied to the Commissioner under Sub-section (2) of that section to revise the order. The Commissioner by an order dated the 28th December, 1953, allowed the application, set aside the order of the District' Magistrate and granted the requisite permission. The validity of the Commissioner's order is questioned on the ground that as the Commissioner did not find that the District Magistrate had acted illega...
Bhagwat Swarup Vs. Ram Gopal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-13-1960
Reported in: AIR1961All379
D.S. Mathur, J.1. Section 5 of the Limitation Act permits the admission of an appeal presented after the expiry of the prescribed period of limitation if the appellant satisfied the Court that he had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal within the period of limitation. One of the questions on which, I may add, the High Courts have not expressed the same opinion is, whether the appellant should merely explain the delay subsequent to the last date of the period of limitation or should also indicate that during the preceding period he had not been guilty of gross negligence, inaction or lack of bona fides.One view is that a party who had been grossly negligent or was guilty of inaction till about the end of the period of limitation, or did not originally have the intention to prefer an appeal but thought of appealing against the decree at the end of the period of limitation, is as much entitled to the benefit of Section 5, i.e., to the condonation of delay in the presentation of...
The State of U.P. Vs. Lakshmi Insurance Co. Ltd., New Delhi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-13-1960
Reported in: AIR1961All528
V.D. Bhargava, J.1. This is an application on behalf of the State filed in execution proceedings. There appears to have been a decree on the basis of the mortgage. Some property was sold. There was an order under Section 15 of the Payment of Wages Act against Ravi Hosiery Factory, who were the mortgagors of some properties of Lakshmi Insurance Co., Ltd., New Delhi opposite party No. 1. The Chief Inspector of Factories representing the State objected to the sale of the property on the ground that since there was a decree under Section 15 of the payment of Wages Act, that amount would get a preference over any other debt. It was, however, contended that it was not open to the Civil Courts to investigate into the claim under Section 15 of the Payment of Wages Act.2. It appears that there was an order of realisation of Rs. 5,000/- and odd under Section 15 of the Payment of Wages Act as against Ravi Hosiery Factory, whose proprietors are Sri Bhimesh Mehra and Yudhishter Mehra opposite parti...
Raja Bhagwati Baksh Singh and anr. Vs. the Civil Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-13-1960
Reported in: AIR1961All559
ORDERJ.K. Tandon, J. 1. The above petition which has been framed under Article 227 of the Constitution has asked an order dated 26th September, 1957, passed by the learned Civil Judge, Kheri, in a suit No. 11 of 1952 pending before him to be set aside. It will be necessary to state at the very outset certain facts to enable the dispute to be appreciated. 2. There used to be in Oudh what was called Mahewa Estate belonging to a Taluqdar known by the said title. He made a will in 1907 and executed later a codicil in 1912. By these documents he granted to bis wife after his death a certain amount as maintenance and further set aside a number of villages for her use and benefit. The Taluqdar who was Rajendra Bahadur Singh died on 1st October, 1912. The case of the parties, other than the petitioners, so far as the bequest to the widow thus made was concerned is that she had been granted a life interest with the consequence that after her death which Occurred on 6th May, 1951, whatever prope...
The State of U.P. Vs. Lakshmi Insurance Co. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-13-1960
Reported in: 1961CriLJ585
V.D. Bhargava, J.1. This is an application on behalf of the State filed in execution proceedings. There appears to have been a decree on the basis of the mortgage. Some property was sold. There was an order under Section 15 of the Payment of Wages Act against Ravi Hosiery Factory, who were the mortgagors of some properties of Lakshmi Insurance Co., Ltd., New Delhi opposite party No. 1. The Chief Inspector of Factories representing the State objected to the pale of the property on the ground that since there was a decree under Section 15 of the Payment of Wages Act, that amount would get a preference over any other debt. It. was, however, contended that it as not open to the Civil Courts to investigate into the claim under Section 15 of the Payment of Wages Act.2. It appears that there was an order of realisation of Rs. 5,000/- and odd under Section 15 of the Payment of Wages Act as against Ravi Hosiery Factory, whose proprietors are Sri Bhimesh Mehra andYudhishwer Mehra opposite partie...
Ram Kishan Das Munnu Lal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U. P. and V. ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-13-1960
Reported in: [1961]41ITR452(All)
UPADHYA, J. - The questions referred for the opinion of this court are :'1. Whether there was any evidence to prove that the cash deposits of Rs. 3,200, Rs. 3,500 and Rs. 1,000 totalling Rs. 7,700 entered in the account books of the firm Bachhoolal Chotey Lal in the name of Kailash Chand, Mst. Ram Piari and Bachhoolals mother respectively were the revenue receipts of the assessee ?2. Whether there was any evidence to prove that this amount could be treated as revenue receipts for the relevant accounting year ?' The assessee is a Hindu undivided family carrying on business in gold and silver. The pedigree of the family, as set out in the statement of the case, is as follows :Ram Kishan Das Mst. Ram Piari (dead) (his wife) ___________________________________________________________ ___ | | | Munnoolal Radhey Shiam Lakshmi Narain | | Bachhoolal Triloki Nath | Kailash ChandBachhoolal, a member of the family as shown above, is a partner of the firm carrying on business in the name and style...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »