Allahabad Court October 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.
Mst. Lakshmi Devi Vs. Roongta and Co. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-05-1961
Reported in: AIR1962All381
Srivastava, J.1. This is a defendants' appeal. The suit was for the recovery of Rs. 26,738/-. There were several defendants. The present appellants were defendants Nos. 3 and 4. We are not concerned at present with the other defendants. The appellants were duly served with summonses. They had filed their written statements. Issues had been framed on the basis of their written statements and the ease came up for hearing on the 25th of August, 1949. On that date the appellants were absent and their counsel stated that he had no instructions. The case was, therefore directed to proceed ex parte againt the appellants. The plaintiff examined one witness in support of his case against these appellants. The suit was decreed ex parte against them. Subsequently the appellants applied for the setting aside of the ex parte decree against them. As they showed sufficient cause for absence on the 25th of August 1949 the date on which the ex parte decree had been passed, their request was accepted, t...
Jyoti Prasad Kishan Lal Vs. the Punjab National Bank Ltd. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-05-1961
Reported in: AIR1963All374
ORDERMithan Lal, J.1. This civil revision filed by the defendant arises out of an order of restoration passed by the Second Additional Civil Judge, Dehra Dun, under the following circumstances : The suit was dismissed for the plaintiff's default in the forenoon of 22-6-1959. Immediately after the order was signed [he counsel for the plaintiff entered the courtroom and within a few minutes made an application for restoration of the suit under Order 9, Rule 9, C. P. C. The Court passed an order 'Let a copy of the application be given to the defendants' counsel and the case be put up for orders after lunch.' On the copy of the application served on the defendants' counsel they noted that they had no instructions. The learned Second Additional Civil Judge finding the grounds sufficient set aside the order of dismissal on that very day and restored the suit. It is against this order that the present revision has been filed.2. The only point which has been contended in this case by Sri S. N....
Raghunath Sahai Vs. Sarup Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-05-1961
Reported in: AIR1962All620; [1961(3)FLR445]; (1962)ILLJ19All
J.D. Sharma, J.1. This is an appeal under section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against an order dated the 31st October, 1956, of the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Meerut, awarding to the respondent Rs. 505/- as compensation.2. The motor vehicle No. USL 5011 stood registered in the name of Sm. Kampa Devi residing at Ghaziabad. The appellant, her uncle-in-law, was looking after the business. The respondent was engaged as a driver by him. While on the 9th September, 1955, the respondent was taking air in a wheel of the vehicle its ring flew out and struck the respondent who sustained grievous and simple injuries incapacitating him as a driver. He remained under medical treatment for some time. The respondent made an application claiming compensation from the appellant.3. The Commissioner found that the respondent had sustained injuries in the course of his employment and was entitled to Rs. 505/- as compensation for which the appellant w...
Lalji Koeri Vs. Gajadhar Koeri
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-03-1961
Reported in: AIR1962All431
Mukerji, J. 1. This is a special appeal brought up on a permission granted by the learned Single Judge who dismissed the second appeal made to this Court.2. The appeal arises out of execution proceedings and is by the judgment-debtor.3. On the 18h of February, 1928 a compromise was effected between the plaintiff and the defendant. A decree on that compromise followed. The terms of the decree were that whenever the plaintiff paid a sum of Rs. 140/-to the defendant, the plaintiff would be put in possession of the property for which he had sued and that till such payment by the plaintiff of the sum of Rs. 140/- the defendant was to remain in possession of the property.4. The plaintiff let matters lie, inasmuch as, he did not trouble to make the payment of Rs. 140/- to the defendant with the result that the defendant continued to be in possession as he was entitled to under the compromise decree. More than twelve years after the compromise decree the plaintiff paid Rs. 140/- into Court to ...
Asha Ram Vs. G.C. Saxena
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-03-1961
Reported in: AIR1962All507; (1962)ILLJ700All
ORDERW. Broome, J. 1. In this reference the Civil and Sessions Judge of Rampur recommends the quashing of proceedings pending against the applicant, Sub-Inspector Asa Ram, in the court of the City Magistrate of Rampur under Section 29 of the Police Act.2. The allegations against the applicant are that while posted as Station Officer of Tanda Police Station he refused to record a report that a certain Rahim Bux wished to lodge about a burglary committed in his shop in the month of December 1955, and similarly while posted as Station Officer of Suar Police Station he refused to record a report of one Gokul Haldia regarding a burglary committed in his house during the month of September 1957. On complaints being made by Rahim Bux and Gokul departmental proceedings were started against the applicant under Section 7 of the Police Act, and on the conclusion of that inquiry he was called upon to show cause why he should not be punished. But instead of submitting a proper reply to this notice ...
Mohd. Atiq Vs. Income-tax Officer, District Ii (V), Kanpur.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-03-1961
Reported in: [1962]46ITR452(All)
This is a writ petition under article 226 of the Constitution.The prayer contained in the petition is that a writ of certiorari may be issued quashing the order dated January 15, 1959, whereby a penalty of Rs. 5,000 was imposed upon the petitioner.The material facts were, that the petitioner was a partner in the firm, Eastern Trading Company, carrying on business at Kanpur. There were two other partners also along with him in this firm, namely, Rahmatulla Khan and Rahim Baksh. It appears that an ex parte assessment was made against the firm for the assessment year 1944-45. This was by order dated January 27, 1945. On January 29, 1945, i.e., two days after the making of the assessment order, a notice under section 28(1)(b) was issued to the firm proposing to impose a penalty and requiring the firm to sow cause. It appears that in response to this notice one of the partners of the firm appeared before the Income-tax Officer and produced before him a certificate of posting. It was stated ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›