Allahabad Court April 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.
Sobba Vs. Thakur Thaman Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-21-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All77
Gangeshwar Prasad, J.1. This is an appeal from an order of remand passed by the learned Civil Judge of Aligarh in an appeal arising out of a suit for injunction and demolition.2. Briefly stated the case of the plaintiff was as follows: A certain plot of land and a wellsituate therein belonged to the plaintiff who was formerly a Zamindar and had after the enforcement of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act become a Bhumidhar of the said plot. The well had four pulleys and the plaintiff had been irrigating his field from the eastern pulley's. Another pulley of the well had been in the use of defendant No. 1 and yet another in the use of defendants Nos. 2 to 4. In or about 1946 the defendants obstructed the irrigation of plaintiff's field from the well. This led to the institution of a suit by the plaintiff against the defendants. That suit was decreed but, in spite of it, about a year prior to the institution of the present suit the defendants built a Chabutra on the well a...
Jhanda Ram and Sons Vs. H. C. Garg, Income-tax Officer, Kanpur.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-21-1964
Reported in: [1966]59ITR148(All)
This is a write petition under article 226 of the Constitution directed against a best judgment assessment order made on the 23rd November, 1963, on the allegation that on the 23rd November, 1963, voluntary returns were presented but they were not accepted by the clerk concerned under the instructions of the Income-tax Officer.The facts leading up to this petition are these : The petitioner-firm consists of five partners. The relevant assessment year is 1963-64, year ending 31st March, 1963. On the 9th of May, 1963, the notice under section 139(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), was issued and served on the 28th of June, 1963. The return, therefore, under this notice was due on the 27th of July, 1963. The petitioner applied for adjournment which was granted up to 30th September, 1963. On the 3rd of October, 1963, the petitioner again applied for adjournment and this application was rejected. On 17th October, 1963, a notice under section 142(1) of the A...
The State of U.P. Vs. Ram Pal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-17-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All15; 1965CriLJ1
Uniyal, J.1. This appeal is directed against an order dated 31-8-1962 passed by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Meerut, acquitting Ram Pal respondent under Section 5 or the Explosive Substances Act. The respondent was tried for offences under Section 5 of the Explosive Substances Act as also under Sections 5 and 6 of the Explosives Act. He was convicted of the offence under Section 6 of the Explosives Act and sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment but was acquitted of the charges under Section 5 of the Explosive Substances Act as well as Section 5 of the Explosives Act. While the State has acquiesced in his acquittal under Section 5 of the Explosives Act it has challenged his acquittal under Section 5 of the Explosive Substances Act.2. The facts relating to the recovery or country made bomb material from the possession of the respondent on the night of the 8th January, 1960 have not been disputed. The report of Sri B. N. Dey, Inspector of Explosives, proved that the explosive mate...
Municipal Board Vs. Kripa Ram and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-16-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All160; 1965CriLJ412
H.C.P. Tripathi, J. 1. This is an appeal by leave under Section 417(3) of Cr. P. C. against an order of acquittal recorded by a Magistrate, 1st Class, in a case under Section 299 of the U. P. Municipalities Act, 1916. 2. The Municipal Board of Saharanpur sent information to the City Magistrate that the respondent has put on a khokha (temporary structure of wood) without the permission of the Board, on the Municipal land, which is creating obstruction in the free flow of the traffic on the municipal road which is against law and as such has made himself liable for punishment under Section 299 of the Act. Cognizance was taken by the learned City Magistrate on this information and he transferred the case to the Court of H. P. Srivastava, another magistrate, for trial. 3. The respondent was summoned and the substance of the accusation was stated to him. He admitted that he was occupying a khokha on the land of the municipal board but asserted that the aforesaid khokha had been constructed ...
Baldeo Singh and ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-15-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All433
ORDERJagdish Sahai, J.1. This writ petition which has been filed on behalf of Baldeo Singh, Mamraj Singh and Smt Triveni is directed against the land acquisition proceedings pending in respect of a plot of land which is covered by Leeche and mango trees and forms an orchard. The notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was published in the U. P. Gazette dated November 17, 1962, In this notification there is also a reference to a direction made by the State Government applying the provisions of Section 17(1) of the Act and rendering the provisions of Section 5-A of the Act inapplicable. That part of the notification reads :--'The Governor being of the opinion that the provisions of Sub-section (1) of Section 17 of the said Act are applicable to the said section to direct that the provisions of Section 5-A of the Act shall not apply.'The composite notification under Sections 4 and 17, mentioned above, is dated October 22, 1962. This wa...
Murli Dhar Dharampal Vs. the Sales Tax Officer
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-15-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All483; [1965]16STC21(All)
ORDERS.C. Manchanda, J.1. This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The prayer is for the issue of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the assessment order dated, 80th of December, 1983 whereby the benefit under Section 8(1) of the Central Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as C. S. T. Act) in respect of the inter-State sales was denied because of the petitioner's failure to file the declaration in form 'C' by the 31st March 1963, in accordance with the Circular issued by the Commissioner Sales Tax, Uttar Pradesh, dated 31st January 1963.2. The facts leading up to this petition lie in a very narrow compass. They are: that the petitioner was a dealer in Khali Oil, Kirana and Food grains and carried on business on his own account as well as on behalf of U. P. and Ex- U. P. Principals. In the relevant assessment year 1959-60, the total sales were of Rs. 21, 94,416. 78 np. out of which the sales outside U. P. were of Rs. 16. 7, 212-98 np. The petitioner fil...
Jagannath Mahadeo Prasad Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-14-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All94; [1965]55ITR501(All)
Pathak, J. 1. This is a reference at the instance of the assessee under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income Tax Act. 2. The assessee, an individual, enjoyed income from property, shares in joint stock companies, commission agency and also as partner in a number of firms. He submitted a return of his income for the assessment year 1953-54, disclosing a net profit. This profit was computed after setting off a loss from his share in one of the partnership firms, Kamta Prasad Reghunath Prasad, the loss being determined by taking into account ft sum of Rs. 8,669/- representing the net low suffered by him in speculative transactions and paid through that firm. 3. The Income Tax Officer ignored the loss claimed by the assessee from the firm, but the Appellate Assistant Commissioner found that the assessee had suffered a net loss of Rs. 7,254/-upon the speculative dealings, and directed the Income Tax Officer to carry forward that loss for being set oft against the profits from speculative deal...
Sada Sukh Johri Lal Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Uttar Pradesh.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-14-1964
Reported in: [1965]56ITR433(All)
PATHAK J. - This is a reference under section 66(I) of the Indian Income-tax Act referring the following two questions for decision :'(1) Whether the first proviso to sub-section (I) of section 14 of the Income-tax Act was intra vires of Parliament ?(2) Whether, on a true interpretation of the first proviso to section 24(I), the assessee was entitled to a deduction of the speculation loss of Rs. 1,964 in the computation of the business income under section 10 ?'The assessee is a registered firm carrying on business in ready bardana and sutli and also engaging in speculative transactions. During the assessment proceedings it claimed to adjust the losses in speculative transactions sustained by it against the profits from its other business for the purpose of determining the profits and gains under section 10. This claim was negatived by the Income-tax Officer, and an appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and, subsequently, a second appeal before the Income-tax Appellate Tri...
Kastoori Devi and anr. Vs. Guru Granth Saheb Mauqooa Guru Duwara Shri ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-13-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All193
Pathak, J.1. This is an appeal against an order arising out of execution proceedings.2. The respondents obtained a mortgage decree against the appellants. The property whichof Property Act, 1882, was passed, when the passing, of a mortgage decree did not extinguish either the right to redeem or the security. We are supported In this view by the decision of the Bombay High Court in Shripad Laxman v. Kashibai AIR 1945 Bom 248. The mere fact that the houses in this case were constructed after the mortgage decree was passed does not, in our opinion, disentitle the respondents from selling them along with the property mentioned In the mortgage decree. Section 70 of the Transfer of Property Act would support such sale.was the subject of mortgage was described in the mortgage deed as a house standing on a plot of land, the boundaries of the plot being set out. It seems that after the final decree was passed, the appellants constructed some other houses on the land and transferred them to thir...
Roshan and anr. Vs. Purshottam Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-13-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All287
S.S. Dhavan, J.1. This is a tenant's second appeal from the decree of the 1st Additional Civil Judge Agra confirming the decree for his ejectment and recovery of arrears of rent from him. The appellans were joint tenants of the accommodation in dispute and fell into arrears of rent. The landlord served a notice which has become familiar in this state as a combined notice of demand under Section 3 (1) (a) of the U. P. Control of Rent and Eviction Act and termination of tenancy under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act. The notice itself was addressed to both the tenants (the appellants before me) but the envelope was addressed to one of them. He refused to accept it and it was returned by the post-office to the landlord who then filed the present suit for ejectment and recovery of rent.2. The defendants resisted the suit and denied that they had made any default in payment of rent. They also pleaded that the notice terminating the tenancy was invalid.3. The courts below disbelie...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »