Allahabad Court July 1963 Judgments
Ghurey Lal and ors. Vs. State Through Ram NaraIn Pathak
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-30-1963
Reported in: AIR1965All206
ORDERGyanendra Kumar, J.1. This revision application is directed against an interlocutory order passed by the magistrate on 18-7-1962 on the application of the accused,2. The facts of the case briefly are that the complainant-opposite party Ham Narain Pathak, filed a complaint at Bareilly against the applicants under Section 63 of the Copyright Act on the allegations that; the complainant was the Manager, Printer and Publisher of Sri Kadhey Shyam Printing Press, Bareilly and had the copyright of printing, publishing and selling the booit known as 'Hadhey Shyam Kal Ramayana' written by Pandit Hadhey Shyam Kathawachak of Bareilly; that the accused were the owners of Deepak Jyoti Karyaiaya Krishna Printing Press, Hathras, that the accused infringed the copyright of the said book by printing the same at their press at Hathras and also by publishing and selling its copies at Bareilly and thus committed the offence at Bareilly as well.3. When the accused appeared before the magistrate, they ...
Tag this Judgment!Raja Mohammad Amir Ahmad Khan Vs. Uttar Pradesh Government
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-29-1963
Reported in: AIR1964All201
R. N. Sharma, J.1. This is a First Civil Appeal against the judgment and decree passed by the District Judges Bitapur in a reference made to him under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. A piece of land-measuring 8.10 acres situate in Mauza Naurangabad, Pargana and District Kheri consisting of three plots and having a building and boundary wall standing thereon was acquired by the Collector from the appellant. It has been conceded before us that this land is situate within the area of Kheri town known as the Civil Lines. The Collector awarded a compensation of Rs. 4036/- for the building and boundary wall and Rs. 283/12/- for the land treating the appellant as an occupancy tenant of this land.The appellant was not satisfied with the compensation awarded and asked for a reference to the Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. His contention was that he was not an occupancy tenant but a perpetual tenant, and that he should be allowed compensation according to the potentia...
Tag this Judgment!Shiva Dayal Vs. S.D.O. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-29-1963
Reported in: AIR1964All456
M.C. Desai, C.J.1. This is an appeal from a judgment o out brother Dwivedi rejecting the appellant's petition for certiorari to quash an order passed by a Sub-Divisional Magistrate setting aside the appellant's election as a Pradhan of a Gaon Sabba under Section 12-C of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act. There were only two candidates nominated for the election, the appellant and respondent No. 2 Bheji Ram. Before the poll Bheji Ram withdrew and consequently the appellant was declared elected unopposed. Subsequently respondent No. 5 Jamuna Prasad, an elector, filed a petition challenging the appellant's election on the ground mentioned in Section 12-C (b) (i) that the result of the election had been materially affected by the improper acceptance of his nomination. Under Section 5-6 of the Act a member of a Gaon Sabha is not qualified to be chosen as a Pradhan unless he is not less than 30 years of age and the contention of Bheji Ram in the election petition was that the appellant was of less ...
Tag this Judgment!K.N. Agarwala Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-26-1963
Reported in: AIR1965All175
Oak, J.1. In these two connected petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioners have raised the question of validity of the Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960 (U. P. Act No. T of 1981--hereafter referred to as the Act).2. On 1-3-1933 the Secretary of State for India-in-Council executed in favour of Prag Narain Agarwal a lease for land covering an area of 5,198 acres situate in 12 villages in Pargana Rudrapur,Tahsil Kichha, district Nainital. Prag Narain Agarwal died in 1938. K. N. Agarwal, who is the petitioner in Writ No. 2147 of 1961, and S. N.Agarwal, who is petitioner No. 1 in Writ No. 2633 of 1962 are two sons of Prag Narain Agarwal. Under a family arrangement, rights under the lease now vest in K. N. Agarwal, S. N. Agarwal and other members of the family. The land covered by the lease was undeveloped. It was covered with forest. The petitioners cleared the jungle, reclaimed the land, and brought it under cultivation. A good deal of mon...
Tag this Judgment!Sheo NaraIn Lal Vs. A.N. Rastogi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-23-1963
Reported in: AIR1964All16; 1964CriLJ24
ORDERN.U. Beg, J.1. The applicant was convicted by the Nyaya Panchayat, Lachhannagar, police station Laharpur, district Sitapur, for having committed offences under Sections 290 and 174 of the Indian Penal Code. He was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 10/- on each count. On a revision having been filed by him, Sri Rule N. Rastogi Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Sitapur, set aside the order of conviction in respect of Section 174 of the Indian Penal Code but maintained the said order in so far as Section 290 of the Indian Penal Code is concerned. Section 290 lays down that whoever commits a public nuisance in any case not otherwise punishable by this Code, shall be punished with fine which may extend to two hundred rupees. The allegation against the petitioner was that he had not paid Panchayat taxes for 1355 and 1356 Fasli, and further that he was unable to offer any explanation as to why he did not do it. Public nuisance has been defined in Section 268 as follows :'A person is guilty of a pu...
Tag this Judgment!Kidwai HusaIn Kamil Vs. Yadav Ram Sewak and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-23-1963
Reported in: AIR1964All86
Jagdish Sahai, J.1. This is an appeal directed against the order passed by the Election Tribunal, Lucknow, on the 2nd of March, 1963, dismissing the election petition filed by the appellant, Kidwai Husain KamiI (Husain Kamil Kidwai). The Bara Banki Parliamentary Constituency No. 30 (hereinafter referred to as the Constituency) consists of the following five U.P. Legislative Assembly Constituencies:--1.148Nawabganj.2.149Kursi.3.150Bhitauti,4.170Sariu.5.171Tarabganj.In the last general election the appellant Kidwai was acandidate from the constituency on Congress ticket. Opposedto him were Yadav Ram Sewak (Ram Sewak Yadav) on theSocialist Party ticket, Sri Kishna Das on the Jan Sanghticket, Krishna Behari on the Swatantra Party ticket, andAutar on the Communist Party ticket.2. The counting of the votes took place between the 26th of February and 28th of February, 1962. Yadav Ram Sewak was declared elected. The number of votes secures by each of the candidates is as follows:(1)Kidai Husai...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Singh Vs. Board of Revenue and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-22-1963
Reported in: AIR1964All310
ORDERV.G. Oak, J.1. This writ petition arises out of a suit for partition under Section 176 of Act No, 1 of 1951.2. The parties to the suit were related to one another as shown in the pedigree given in the affidavit. Bachchan Singh had five sons Including Ram Baran Singh,Deo Singh and Samoo. Ram Baran Singh's wife was Smt.Rukmina. Deo Singh's daughter was Smt.Lachi. Her sons are Dashrath and others. Samoo'ssons are Sharda, Rama and Markandey. Dashrath andothers filed the suit for partition against Sharda andothers claiming 2/5th Share in the holding. Accordingto the plaintiffs, Smt. Rukmina died before Deo Singh.The plaintiffs' claim was resisted by the defendants. Inthe first place, it was denied that Smt. Rukmina is dead.In the alternative, it was suggested that she might havedied after Deo Singh's death. The trial Court held thatSmt. Rukmina is dead, and that she died during DeoSingh's lifetime. The plaintiffs' claim was, therefore,decreed. Successive appeal's by the defendants were...
Tag this Judgment!Sonpal Girraj Kishore Vs. Sales Tax Officer and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-19-1963
Reported in: [1964]15STC50(All)
S.C. Manchanda, J.1. This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution directed against the Order of the Sales Tax Officer, Hathras, dated the 18th January, 1960, whereby he held that the application filed by the petitioner under Section 30 of the U. P. Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for setting aside an exparte assessment made under Section 7, Sub-clause (iii), of the Act could not be, entertained as the condition precedent for hearing of such an application was that 'tax admitted to be due' was first to be paid and the plea of the peti tioner that no tax was due was fantastic. The application on merits was also disposed of without giving the petitioner an opportunity of being heard or showing cause that he was prevented by sufficient cause from appearing on the date fixed.2. An ex parte assessment order was passed on the 27th November, 1962, and the petitioner was assessed to a tax of Rs. 4,500 for the assessment year 1960-61. The petitioner had not fi...
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Samad Vs. the State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-17-1963
Reported in: AIR1965All158; 1965CriLJ410
Gyanendra Kumar, J. 1. This reference has been mode by the learned Sessions Judge of Kanpur. The notice of the case was personally served on Abdul Samad applicant on 9-2-1963 but nobody has put in appearance on his behalf 2. The facts of the case briefly are that in the first instance the applicant Abdul Samad had entered India with a passport and visa bat had overstayed here. Accordingly he was deported to Pakistan in 1956. Thereafter he is alleged to have entered India without any valid passport or visa and was found residing in the city of Kanpur. Accordingly he was challaned under Rule 6 of the Passport Rules for contravention of Rule 3 of the Rules. The applicant raised a preliminary objection to his trial being held within the jurisdiction of Kanpur court on the ground that the words used in Rule 3 have to be strictly construed Rule 3 runs as follows: 'Save as provided in Rule 4, no person proceeding from any place outside India shall enter, or attempt to enter, India by water, l...
Tag this Judgment!Mohammad Ali Khan Vs. Mumtaz Jahan Begam
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-12-1963
Reported in: AIR1964All344
R.S. Pathak, J.1. This is a judgment-debtor's appeal arising out of execution proceedings.2. Smt. Mumtaz Jahan Begam obtained a decree for her dower debt against Mohd. Ali Khan on March 2, 1950. The decree! was sought to be executed by the arrest and detention of the judgment-debtor.3. It appears that proceedings were initiated under Order 21, Rule 40, C. P. C., and after the Court had recorded the evidence of the decree-holder in support of his application for execution, it called upon the judgment-debtor to produce evidence in rebuttal. The judgment-debtor prayed that another date be fixed for this purpose and the executing Court treating this as an application for adjournment, adjourned the case on condition of payment of costs by the judgment-debtor. The judgment-debtor, however, did not pay the costs, and instead contended that he was entitled as of right to another date and could not be precluded from leading evidence on the adjourned date without payment of costs.4. The only poi...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »