Allahabad Court February 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.
Gaja Vs. Mohd. Farukh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-06-1961
Reported in: AIR1961All561
ORDERJ.D. Sharma, J. 1. This is an application in revision against an order dated the 24th November, 1956 of the learned Civil Judge, Kheri, dismissing the appeal on the ground that it was not maintainable. 2. The suit was decreed ex parte on the 6th April 1956. The defendant applicant made an application on the 6th April 1956 under Order 9, Rule 13 Civil Procedure Code for setting aside the ex parte decree. That application was dismissed in default on the 4th August 1956. The applicant made an application on the 3rd September 1956 for setting aside the order dated the 4th August 1956 by which his application for setting aside the ex parte decree was dismissed. The learned Munsif dismissed that application on the 17th September 1956. Against that order an appeal was preferred to the District Judge, which was disposed of by the Civil Judge, Kheri, on the 24th November, 1956. 3. The learned Civil Judge, following the decisions of the Allahabad High Court, came to the conclusion that an a...
Ram Swarup Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-03-1961
Reported in: AIR1962All58
Uniyal, J.1. This reference raises an important question with regard to the true scope and effect of Section 116 (d) Cr. P. C. (Amendment) Act XXVI of 1955, hereinafter referred to as the Amending Act.2. The facts are briefly stated as follows. The appellant was prosecuted under Sections 409 and 477-A I. P. C. The trial of the accused commenced on 17-10-55 in the court of Sri Onkar Singh, Sessions Judge of Pilibhit, with the aid of assessors. After a substantial part of the prosecutionevidence had been recorded the accused came up in Revision to the High Court and obtained the stay of further proceedings in the case. The Revision was dismissed sometime in July 1959 and the case was then sent back to the Sessions Judge for trial. During the pendency of the said Revision, however, two events had. occurred; one was the coming into force on. 2-1-50 of the Cr. P. C. (Amendment) Act XXVI of 1955, and the other was the posting of Sri Visheshwari Pd. Mathur as Sessions Judge in place of Sri On...
Amrita Devi and ors. Vs. Sripat Rai and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-03-1961
Reported in: AIR1962All111
J.D. Sharma, J.1. This is a plaintiffs' appeal from the judgment and decree of the learned District Judge, Allahabad. 2. The plaintiffs, the proprietors of the Bhargava Pustakalaya, Gaighat, Varanasi, brought the suit on the allegations that a novel called Nirmala was written by the famous Hindi Writer, Sri Prem Chand; R. Sehgal (who was impleaded as defendant No. 4 but died during the pendency of the suit) had paid the writing charges of Nirmala inclusive of copyright to Sri Prem Chand, and as the owner of the copyright, R. Sehgal printed and published the said work in 1947. Raja Ram Kumar Bhargava brought to sale in execution of his decreeNo. 28 of 1929 of Civil Judge's Court, Lucknow, against Rule Sehgal his copyrights in Nirmala and 131 other books. The plaintiff No. 2 purchased the copyrights in a public auction held by the court of Munsif, West, on the 1st December, 1944. A sale certificate, as provided by Order 21, Rule 81, C. P. C. was granted by the Munsif West, Allahabad, whe...
Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Babu Ram
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-01-1961
Reported in: AIR1962All52; (1961)IILLJ708All
ORDERS.C. Dhavan, J.1. This is an application under Section 118 C. P. G. filed by the Union of India against the decision of the Additional District Judge, Moradar bad dismissing their appeal against an order of the Additional District Magistrate, Moradabad functioning as Commissioner under the Payment of Wages Act by which he directed the Union of India to pay certain sum claimed as wages by a workman Babu Ram. It raises a question of general importance regarding the scope of the powers of the Commissioners in an inquiry under Section 15(1) of the Act and also the meaning and purpose of the rule requiring a strict interpretation of statutes ousting the jurisdiction of the Civil Courts. 2. The facts are these : Babu Ram was in the employ of the Northern Railway which is run by the Union of India. On 18th April 1946 he was served with an order removing him from service. He preferred appeals to the competent authorities which were rejected. Finally, on 20th August 1951 he filed a suit fo...
Mangal Singh Vs. Nawab Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-01-1961
Reported in: AIR1962All219
ORDERD.P. Uniyal, J.1, This is a revision against an order of the Civil Judge, Kanpur, dated 25-8-55 setting aside the order of the Munsif dated 23-10-53 by which he passed a decree in terms of the award.2. The facts of the case are these. The parties to the dispute are alleged to have entered into an arbitration agreement to refer their disputes to certain named arbitrators. The arbitrators gave an award which was signed by both the parties. Thereafter; an application under Section 14 of the Arbitration Act was filed in the court of the Munsif by one of the arbitrators with a prayer that the award be made the rule of the court. Notices were issued to the parties concerned and the opposite parties thereupon tiled objections to the award. One of the objections raised was that the arbitration agreement had been obtained by fraud and further that the same was bad on account of vagueness.3. The learned Munsif found that the opposite parties had signed the arbitration agreement and the alle...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›