Allahabad Court November 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.
Beni and ors. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-24-1964
Reported in: AIR1966All11; 1966CriLJ1
ORDERH.C.P. Tripathi, J. 1. This revision is directed against in order of the learned Sessions Judge, Varanasi, upholding the applicants conviction and sentence of Rs. 20 each as fine under Section 70, Clauses (1) and (2) of the Northern India Canal and Drainage Act (Act VIII) of 1873, as recorded by a Magistrate, First Class on 31-12-1962.2. A complaint was filed by one Bashistha Tewari on the allegations that on 21-7-1962, at 2 P.M. the applicants demolished the water course which was supplied with canal water from outlet No. 1 of Ben Canal and included the land in their plot No. 768 and when the complainant remonstrated they were prepared to beat him. When sumnoned, the applicants pleaded not guilty and stated that the allegation made in the complaint were false and that it had been filed on account of enmity. In support of his case the complainant examined himself and two eye-witnesses Ramjeet Singh and Sita Ram. Ram Baksha Prasad, Canal Amin also also testified that there was it w...
Ram Kumar Vs. Baldeo Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-24-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All572
J. Sahai, J.1. This is a defendant-tenant's second appeal and arises out of a suit filed against him by the plaintiff-landlord on the basis of permission granted by the State Government under Section 7-F of the U. P. (Temporary) Control of Rent and Eviction Act (hereafter called the Act) for the ejectment of the appellant from a shop situate in the city of Bareilly. The District Magistrate refused to grant the permission under Section 3 of the Act and the landlord's revision application before the Commissioner, Bareilly, failed. Thereafter he filed a revision application before the State Government which succeeded and the permission was granted. On the grant of the permission a writ petition was filed in this Court challenging the order of the State Government and the right of the plaintiff landlord to file a suit on its basis. That petition was dismissed by Bishambhar Dayal, J. and a special appeal against his decision was dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court consisting of Muke...
Babu Nandan Gir Vs. Sub-divisional Officer and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-20-1964
Reported in: AIR1966All158; (1966)IILLJ81All
ORDERR.S. Pathak, J. 1. The petitioner is the Pradhan of the Gram Sabha of a village in the district of Deoria. A complaint was made against him by one Basist Shukla, the second respondent, to the Sub-Divisional Officer, the first respondent, and on the basis of that complaint a number of charges were framed by the first respondent against the petitioner on August 5, 1964, when a notice incorporating the charges was issued to the petitioner and he was asked to show cause why he should not be removed from office. On the same day an order was passed by the first respondent suspending the petitioner and directing him to hand over charge of his office to the second respondent.By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner challenges the validity of the order suspending him. In the counter-affidavit filed by the first respondent it is admitted that the petitioner has been suspended pending enquiry into the charges against him, and legal support for the suspension orde...
Rustam Khan Vs. Ahmad Bux and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-19-1964
Reported in: AIR1966All163
Jagdish Sahai, J. 1. This special appeal is directed against the judgment of N. U. Beg, J., dated 4-2-1960, dismissing Execution First Appeal No. 346 of 1955 filed by the judgment-debtor-Rnstam Khan. 2. Rustam Khan, the judgment-debtor-appellant was a defendant in a suit filed under Section 92, C. P. C. by the respondents-decree-holders in the Court of the District Judge, Agra. The learned District Judge dismissed the suit. Against this decree First Appeal No. 3.54 of 1947 was filed in this Court which was allowed by Agarwala and Asthana, JJ. on 20-4-1953. The operative portion of the judgment of the learned Judge reads: 'The result, therefore, is that we allow the appeal, set aside the decree of the Court below and decree the plaintiffs' suit with costs in both the Courts. The defendants are removed from the office of mutawallis. The Sunni Central Waqf Board will be asked to appoint suitable mutawalli or mutawallis for the waqf. A scheme will be set up for better and proper management...
Jagdish Prasad Pradhan Vs. District Board
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-18-1964
Reported in: AIR1966All26
Asthana, J. 1. This is a plaintiff's appeal from the judgment and decree of the learned Additional Civil Judge of Farrukhabad, dated 2-6-1953, dismissing his suit for a declaration that the resolution of the District Board, Farrukhabad, dismissing him and certain orders passed by it were illegal, ultra vires, unjust and without jurisdiction and tor recovery of a certain amount of money as salary and other allowances and increments earned by him. 2. Jagdish Prasad Pradhau who is the plaintiff appellant in this Court was appointed as an Engineer in the District Hoard, Farrukhabad, which is defendant-respondent in this appeal, some time in March, 1943. The appointment of the appellant was made by the Administrator who was administering the affairs of the Board as it stood superseded. When a new BOARD was elected in 1948 the supersession ceased. It was alleged by the plaintiff-appellant that he received an order of suspension, in October, 1948 and thereafter received a letter, dated 4-4-19...
Nagar Mahapalika Vs. Smt. Sudheshwari Devi and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-18-1964
Reported in: AIR1966All64; 1966CriLJ113
C.B. Capoor, J.1. This appeal by special leave has been preferred by the Nagar Mahapalika, Varanasi, against an order of the learned City Magistrate, Varanasi, acquitting the respondents of the offence under Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act read with Section 7 of that Act, The accusation against the respondents was that they had sold Ghee which, on analysis, was found to he adulterated.2. The defence put forward by the respondents was that at the time of sale it had been declared that the Ghee was being sold for the purposes of burning only and that the respondents sold Ghee for that purpose. On 23-10-1961 Ganga Krishna, the then Food Inspector, attached to the Nagar Mahapalika, Varanasi, went to the shop of the respondents and purchased six Chhataks of Ghee at the rate of Rs. 3 per seer. As provided by the Rules, the sample purchased was divided into three parts each of which wag placed in a phial. The phials were duly sealed and one of them was handed over to the...
Jagannath Prasad Vs. Fateh-uddin
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-17-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All345
Desai, C.J. 1. This is an application under Section 115 of theCode of Civil Procedure for revision of an order passed by a Munsif dismissing the applicant's application under Section 7-B of the U. P. (Temporary) Control of Rent and Eviction Act. The applicantis the landlord of an accommodation which he hadlet to the opposite party. On 4-4-1961 the applicant made an application in the Court of the learned Munsif under Section 7-B stating 'that he is theowner of the accommodation, that the opposite party is his tenant on Rs. 10/- per month as rent and has not paid the rent for 14 months ending on 31-3-1961 and that the cause of action for the application accrued in his favour on 1-6-1960 within the learned Munsif's Jurisdiction and praying that the opposite party be ejected. Section 7-B reads as follows: '(1) When any tenant, who is in occupation ofan accommodation in pursuance of an order madeunder the provisions of Sub-section (2) of Section 7 is in arrears of rent...... for more than ...
D.K. JaIn Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-17-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All525; 1965CriLJ581
ORDERH.C.P. Tripathi, J.1. This revision is directed against an order of the learned Civil and Sessions Judge, Meerut, upholding on appeal the applicant's conviction and sentence of Rs. 1000/- as fine under Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act as recorded by a Magistrate, First Class on 30th January, 1983.2. Messrs. Edward Keventers (S) Private Limited, Delhi, who deal in dairy products and milk, had established a stall at the Nauchandi Fair in the district of Meerut. On 15th April, 1962 at about 7 P.M. Sri Ajmal Husain, Food Inspector Meerut purchased 16 Chhataks of sweetened milk from Vidya Bhushan who was working as salesman at the stall on payment of its price. The sample was divided into three parts and sealed then and there in three separate containers, according to the rules, one of which was handed over to Vidya Bhushan. The other was sent to the Public Analyst and the third was retained in the office of the Medical Officer of Health of the city. The Public Ana...
Municipal Board (City Board) Vs. Sat Pal Pandhi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-17-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All606; 1965CriLJ707
ORDERH.C.P. Tripathi, J. 1. Respondent S. P. Pandhi is the printer, publisher and proprietor of two Weeklies--Himachal Times (English) and Hindi Himachal Times--which are published from Mussoorie. He is a representative of the Press Trust of India at Mussoorie and is also a correspondent of a number of wellestablished and widely circulated newspapers and journals in the country. For about a decade the proceedings of the meetings of the Municipal Board Mussoorie and its other advertisements and notices had been published by him on receipt of publication charges in his weeklies, and his father had been a nominated member of the Board and had also held for some time the office of the Senior Vice-President. 2. It appears that some differences cropped up between the applicant's father on the one hand and the President of the Municipal Board on the other which ultimately led to his resignation from the Board. During the years 1962 and 1963 the respondent published a number of articles and ne...
Smt. Prabhawati Devi Vs. Radhey Shyam Tripathi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-16-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All598; 1965CriLJ705a
ORDERH.C.P. Tripathi, J.1. This is a hard case.2. Applicant Smt. Prabhawati moved the City Magistrate Allahabad under Section 488, Criminal P. C. to award her maintenance allowance from the opposite party who is her husband on the allegations that owing to the negligence and ill-treatment meted out to her by the husband, she had been living along with her children with her mother in the city of Allahabad and that it was not possible for her to go back to the opposite party on account of his and his father's unbecoming and cruel treatment. Opposite party, however, denied her allegations before the trial court and expressed a desire to keep her and the children with him and to maintain them to the best of his resources. The applicant, however, refused to go with him and the learned Magistrate rejected her application for maintenance because in his opinion 'there was no sufficient reason for applicant's refusal to live with her husband.'3. A revision was filed by the applicant before the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »