Allahabad Court January 1961 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.
Baboo Khan Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-31-1961
Reported in: AIR1961All639; 1961CriLJ759
ORDERW. Broome, J.1. Babu Khan, the applicant in this criminal revision, has been, convicted by a first class Magistrate of Budaun for an offence under Section 419, I. P. C. and has been sentenced to nine months' R. I. and a fine of Rs. 100/-. His conviction and sentence were confirmed in appeal by the Second Temporary Civil and Sessions Judge of Budaun.2. The prosecution allegations were that on 9-6-1959 the accused-applicant came to the village of Shekhupur, pretending to be Dr. Mohan Lal, the famous eye specialist of Aligarh, and induced the complainant Zalim to allow him to perform an operation on the right eye of Zalim's 12-year old son Rajpal. The boy had previously been shown to a certain Dr. Gupta, who had declared his eye to be incurable but the accused assured Zalim that he could restore sight to the eye by performing the operation. The accused made an incision in the boy's eye-lid and extracted some whitish matter and then bandaged up the eye and told Zalim to bring Rs. 32/-...
Bala Prasad Vs. Jagannath Prasad Sharma Vakil and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-30-1961
Reported in: AIR1962All75
V.G. Oak, J.1. These two connected appeals under the Court Fees Act have arisen out of a proceeding under the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940.2. On 1-10-1959 Sri Jagannath Prasad Sharma filed an application in the Court of the Civil Judge, Agra under Section 14 of the Indian Arbitration Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). According to this application, there were certain differences among the three opposite parties. The matter was referred to Sri Jagannath Prasad Sharma as arbitrator. He gave his award on 20-6-1959. Opposite Party No. 1 (The Central Finance anid! Housing Company Limited) requested the arbitrator to file his award. The arbitrator filed the award accordingly for necessary action by the Court. The case was registered; and notices were issued as laid down in Section 14 of the Act.3. Opposite Party No. 1 supported the application by the arbitrator, and requested the Court to pass a decree in terms of the award. Nand Kumar Misra and Bala Prasad, opposite parties Nos. 2 an...
State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Asha Nand Kurmi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-27-1961
Reported in: 1962CriLJ623
B.N. Nigam, J.1. Asha Nand was tried on a charge under Section 3 of the Paddy (Restriction on Movement Order, 1938 read With Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 for attempting to move three bags of paddy weighing 6 maunds and 15 seen from Rae Bareli district to Sultanpur district without any permit or authority on 11th April, 1959, at 3.30 a.m.2. It appears that P.W. 3 Muhammad Idris, Head Constable Mela Dalmau was posted at police out-post Jains. He was told by an informer that about 2 a.m. while patrolling at night that some carts were going with paddy to Sultanpur district. Muhammad Idris thereupon went to the border, along with some witnesses and he saw nine bullock carts near the border. Ho stopped them. One of these carts belonged to the respondent Asha Nand. On search three bags of paddy were recovered from Inside the bhoosa. The recovery memo Ext. Ka-3 was prepared and was signed by witnesses. Site-plan Ext. Ka-3 was also prepared The accused and paddy were sent to...
Madho Prasad Vs. the Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-20-1961
Reported in: AIR1961All433
ORDERJ.D. Sharma, J. 1. The short question arising in this revision is whether a combined notice under Section 77, Railways Act and Section 80, C. P. C., is valid. 2. The applicant brought the suit for damages on account of short delivery. The suit was contested on the ground inter alia that a combined notice under Section 77, Railways Act, and Section 80, C. P. C., was invalid. The contention was upheld by the court below and the suit was dismissed without going into the merits. 3. The object of a notice under Section 77, Railways Act, is to inform the railway administration of the nature of loss etc. claimed by a person. This notice must be given within six months from the date of delivery. The object of a notice under Section 80, C. P. C., is almost the same but in addition to informing the railway administration about the nature of the claim a person giving such a notice has also to notify his intention of filing a suit. But in essence and substance the subject-matter of the two no...
Bhagwati Saran and anr. Vs. the State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-20-1961
Reported in: 1961CriLJ24
N. Rajagopala Ayyangar, J.1. Having heard the learned Counsel for the appellants in full we did not consider it necessary to call on the respondent since, we were clearly of the opinion that the contentions raised in the appeal possessed no merit.2. The legality of a prosecution for contravention of the notification fixing the maximum prices at which certain categories of iron and steel could be sold is the subject-matter of this appeal. The appellants are two in number, related to each other as husband and wife. The second appellant--Sushila Devi -is ' a Registered Stockholder' and is stated to be the proprietor of the firm ' Balwanta Devi Sushila Devi ' situated in Sultanpur in Uttar Pradesh and the first appellant-Bhagwati Saran her husband, the manager of the said firm.3. There has been some previous history before the present prosecution was initiated but it is sufficient for the purposes of this appeal to start with the report to the Judicial Magistrate Amathi by the officer in-c...
Hukam Chand and anr. Vs. State Transport Authority Tribunal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-17-1961
Reported in: AIR1961All571
Mootham, C. J. 1. This is an appeal from an order of Mr. Justice James dated the 5th December, 1958, dismissing a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.2. The relevant facts are these: On the 8th June, 1957, the Regional Transport Authority, Kanpur Region, invited applications for the grant of a single permit on the Jhansi-Garotha route. In response to this invitation a number of applications were received including a joint application from the appellants who are two in number. The applications were thereafter published in the Government gazette and certain objections were received. The matter came before the Regional Transport Authority on the 16th/17th January, 1958, and by a resolution passed at that meeting the Regional Transport Authority sanctioned the grant of a stage carriage permit for a term of three years to the appellants who were, in their opinion, 'the best claimants', and thereafter a permit was issued accordingly.3. Against this order of the Regional Transport ...
L.C. Agarwal Vs. Municipal Board, Hapur and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-17-1961
Reported in: AIR1961All580
Mootham, C.J.1. This is an appeal against an order of a learned Judge dated the 16th October, 1959, dismissing a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.2. The facts necessary for the purposes of this appeal can be stated very shortly. The appellant was appointed the executive officer of the respondent Municipal Board in the year 1931. In 1958 the President of the Board held an enquiry into charges which he had framed against the appellant under Section 69-A of the U. P. Municipalities Act, 1916, on the 23rd September, 1958. On the 27th November, the President pursuant to Sub-section (4) of that section submitted the record of the enquiry with his recommendations to the State Government. On the 23rd May, 1959, the State Government made the following order:-''On a perusal of the enquiry report, submitted by the Ex-President, Municipal Board, Hapur, under Sub-section (4) of Section 69-A of the U. P. Municipalities Act, 1916, the charges framed by him against you, are, prima facie,...
Budh Sagar Ram Udit Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-10-1961
Reported in: AIR1961All368; 1961CriLJ51
Nigam, J.1. Budh Sagar aged 27, resident of village Jamunahi, police station Itiathok, district Gonda has been found guilty of an offence under Section 5 (1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (Central Act II of 1947) read with Section 5(2) of the same Act and has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for two years and has been directed to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- with four months* further rigorous imprisonment in default. Against his conviction, sentence and fine, he has preferred this appeal. The appeal came up for hearing before one of us and a reference was made to a Bench in view of certain observations made by a learned Single Judge in the case of Ram Pukar Singh v. State. AIR 1954 All 223. Today we have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the State.2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that Budh Sagar was an Amin in the Irrigation Department attached to Kohargaddi reservoir, police station Pachhperwa, district Gonda in October, 1958. Vil...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›