Allahabad Court January 1964 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.
Batti Kunwar and ors. Vs. Chunni Lal Shukla and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-06-1964
Reported in: AIR1959All256
ORDERV.G. Oak, J. 1. This is an application under Section 56 of Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 (Act No. XLIII of 1958 hereafter referred to as the Act). 2. Parties are related to one another. Smt. Batti Kunwar, applicant No. 1 is the widow of one Lakshmi Narain. Munna Lal and Kamal Krishna, applicants Nos. 2 and 3 are two sons of Lakshmi Narain deceased. Chunni Lal, opposite party No. 1 is another eon of Lakshmi Narain deceased. Rajendra Prasad and Surendra Kumar, opposite parties Nos. 2 and S are sons of Chunni Lal opposite party No. 1. 3. The applicants' case is that in the year 1912 Lakshmi Narain established a business of manufacturing and selling Pan-ka-Masala in the name and style of 'Badshah Pasand Pan Ka Masala' The business was carried on at Kanpur, in 1950 Lakshmi Narain got the device of Lord Ganesh with other representation registered under the Trade Marks Act, 1940. That Trade mark was later renewed in the year 1957. In 1051 Lakshmi Narain got the words 'Badshah Pas...
Major Dal Chand Singh Pratap Vs. Swarn Pratap
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-03-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All46
Jagdish Sahai, J.1. In this First Appeal From Order, which originally came up for hearing before our brother Bishambhar Dayal, a question with regard to the competence of the appeal in this Court was raised. How the question arises would be apparent from the following facts:2. Mrs. Swarn Pratap, the respondent, filed a petition under Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for judicial separation from her husband Major Dal Chand Singh Pratap, the appellant. In these proceedings two applications, one under Section 24 and the other under Section 25 of the Act were made by Mrs. Swarn Pratap. By means of the first she claimed some amounts towards the expenses of the proceedings under Section 10 of the Act and by the second she claimed some amount of money towards the maintenance charges of the children of the parties who were living with her. The learned Civil Judge, who was seized of the matter, disposed of the applications mentioned above by means of a s...
ishaq Abdul Karim and anr. Vs. Madan Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-02-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All34
M.H. Beg, J.1. This second appeal arises out of a suit for recovery of Rs. 955/- as damages for breach of contract after deducting a sum of Rs. 5,100/- already paid by the defendant-appellant to the plaintiff-respondent. 2. The plaintiff-respondent carries on the business of wholesale dealers in potatoes at Fatehgarh, to Uttar Pradesh, and the defendants-appellants carry on the business of selling potatoes at Khandwa in Madhya Pradesh. The defendant-appellant No. 2 sent the defendant-appellant No. 1 to the plaintiff at Fatehgarh with a letter of introduction. After this letter had been handed over to the plaintiff-respondent by the defendant-appellant No. 1 at Fatehgarh, the defendant-appellant No. 1 placed an order on the 13th December, 1948. for despatch of a wagon of potatoes and deposited Rs. 500/- with the plaintiff. On the 1st of January 1949, the plaintiff-respondent despatched a wagon of potatoes to defendant No. 1 and forwarded the Invoice and railway receipt to him through th...
Baij Nath Singh Vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh Through the Secretary, ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-02-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All151
D.D. Seth, J. 1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The opposite party No 2 in the petition was the Administrator, Municipal Board. By an order passed on an application made by the petitioner the name of the Administrator was removed from the array of opposite parties and in his place Nagar Mahapalika, Allahabad through the Mukhya Nagar Adhikari Allahabad was substituted. 2. The facts, in brief, according to the petition, are that on 2nd May 1956 an advertisement was published in the local papers of Allahabad inviting applications from trained M. As. or M. Ses. for the post of Superintendent of Education in the then Municipal Board of Allahabad. In response to the advertisement ninety applications were received and 38 persons were called for interview who were all post graduates and either held the degree of L. T. or B. T. or held Acting Teachers Certificate. Out of the 38 persons called for interview only 21 persons appeared before the Interview Board and one of...
Pratap Chand Purshottam Das Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-02-1964
Reported in: AIR1964All284
ORDERN.U. Beg, J.1. The short question that arises in this writ petition is as to how far the definition of 'sale' in Section 2(h) of the U. P. Sales-tax Act, 1948 (U. P. Act No. XV of 1948), hereinafter called the Act, was ultra vires the Provincial Legislature. The petitioner in the writ petition is Sri Pratap Chand, a partner of the firm Messrs. Purshottam Das and Sons, Aminabad, LucKnow. He has been assessed to a turnover of Rs. 25,000/- for the year 1958-59 for the purpose of payment of sales tax under the Act by an order of Sri L.S. Kotwall, Sales-tax Officer III, Lucknow, dated the 25th September, 1961. The petitioner has prayed for a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated the 25th September, 1961, as well as for a writ of mandamus directing the Sales-tax Officer not to assess the petitioner in respect of the transactions which form the basis of the turnover.The modus operandi followed by the petitioner in respect of the transactions which have been made the subject-matter ...
Sadhan Lal Suraj Prasad Vs. Deputy Director, Consolidation and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-02-1964
Reported in: AIR1964All424
ORDERN.U. Beg, J.1. The sole point urged before me in this writ petition is that the opposite parties Nos. 4 and 5 did not make an application for mutation after the death of Srimati Sheo Devi to be recorded in the revenue papers as heirs of Shambhu Dayal. They are therefore, debarred from making any application in Consolidation Courts in respect of their claimbecause of Section 34 (5) of the U. P. Land Revenue Act. Section 34 (5) of the U. P. Land Revenue Act states :'No Revenue Court shall entertain a suit or application by the person so succeeding or otherwise obtaining possession until such person has made the report required by this section.'It is conceded before me that this point was not urged as a ground of attack in the consolidation courts. Under the circumstances I am not inclined to entertain it for the first time in writ proceedings.2. On merits also I am of opinion that the argument has not much force. In the present case the parties agitated their claims before the Conso...
Medical Officer of Health, Municipal Corporation Vs. Gulzari
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-01-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All170; 1965CriLJ418
H.C.P. Tripathi, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 417(3) Cr. P. C. against an order of acquittal dated 12-2-1962, recorded by a Magistrate 1st Class, Agra, in a case under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act.2. The Medical Officer of Health, Agra Municipality, filed a complaint against the opposite party on the allegations mat on 19-6-59 he was found carrying goat's milk in his can for sale; that Sri R. Kumar, Food Inspector, (P. W. 1) purchased three-fourth seer of milk from the opposite-party for sample, that the sample was sent to the Public Analyst for his report; that the report of the Public Analyst dated 30-7-1959 shows that the sample contained about 27% of water and as such was adulterated, and that the opposite party thereby had committed an offence punishable under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act.3. In support of the allegations in the complaint. Sri R. Kumar, Food Inspector, Agra Municipal 'Board was examined as P. W. 1. He st...
Pearey and anr. Vs. Pachchoo
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-01-1964
Reported in: AIR1964All249
Chandra, J.1. This case has come up before this Bench as a result of the following order of reference by Mithan Lal, J. in asecond appeal.'I, therefore, direct that this case be laid before the Hon'ble the Chief Justice for constituting a larger bench to decide this appeal which involves only one question and no other, i.e. whether the right of Brit Khakrobi is enforceable in a Court of law, when its origin is not given.' The second appeal arose out of a suit for possession and injunction in respect of alleged Brit Khakrobi and recovery of a sum of Rs. 84/- as mesne profits for a period or six months. The parties are sweepers. The case of the plaintiff-respondent No. 1, hereinafter called the respondent No. 1, was that he and his ancestors were owners ofBrit Khakrobi, i.e. the right to earn money by scavengingthe houses in a certain part of Chandausi town, and thatthe defendants started interference with the plaintiff's possession about six months before the institution of the suit. Th...
Municipal Board Vs. Kanhaiya Lal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-01-1964
Reported in: AIR1964All455; 1964CriLJ375
ORDER1. This is an appeal under Section 417 (3), Cri. P. C. filed by the Municipal Board of Moradabad against an order of acquittal dated 31-7-1962 recorded by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Moradabad in a case under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteartion Act.2. Respondent No. 2 Girdhar Gopal was found selling aerated water at his shop on 1-1-5-1961 at about 10.15 A.M. This aerated water was manufactured by the R. K. Soda Water Factory, Guria Bazar, Moradabad, of which respondent No. 1 Kanhaiya Lal was the manager. Sample of the aerated water was taken by the Food. Inspector and sent to the Public Analyst whose report indicated that on laboratory test it was found to have been sweetened with sugar admixed with an added substance, viz., Saccharin. This was considered to be prohibited under the provisions of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, and hence both the respondents were tried on a complaint filed by the Food Inspector under the provisions of Section 7/16 of the...
Durga Prasad and Another Vs. Income-tax Officer, A-ward, Muzaffarnagar ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-01-1964
Reported in: [1965]57ITR583(All)
S. C. MANCHANDA J. - This is a writ petition under article 226 of the Constitution directed against the notice issued under section 34(1)(a) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, (hereinafter referred to as the Act), for the assessment year 1949-50 on the 27the of September, 1958.The facts are not in dispute. Briefly stated they are that the petitioner No. 1 is one of the ex-partners of firm, Messrs. Mayaram Durga Prasad, which was a registered firm carrying on business of commission agency, speculation business and business in gur in his own account. The firm filed a return showing a loss of Rs. 6,099 for the assessment year the Income-tax Officer noticed certain cash credits in the books of the firm in various names totalling Rs. 45,500. The firm failed to prove the genuineness of the cash credits and the Income-tax officer, therefore, added a sum of Rs. 45,500 as income for the assessment year 1950-51 as from an undisclosed source. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner confirmed this f...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›