Allahabad Court May 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.
Narmada Shankar Vs. Dan Pal Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-15-1964
Reported in: 1966CriLJ834
S.S. Dhavan, J.1. Notice was issued to six police officials and to Ali Hasan to show cause why they should not be prosecuted for perjury and/or fabricating or using false evidence in a suit for malicious prosecution which was filed by one Narmada Shankar against certain police officials. In response to this notice six of them have appeared while the seventh has not yet been served. The police officials were all posted at Karakat police station, district Jaunpur when the incident occurred. The respondents who have appeared before me are Danpal Singh head constable, Bindeshwari, writer constable, Bhola, Ram Chandra Ahir and Nizamul Haq, constables and Ali Hasan, a witness for the police. The seventh respondent Khalil Ahmad, who was the station officer in charge of Kerakat police station at the time, remained unserved and his case cannot he decided by this order.2. The facts very briefly are these. Narmada Shankar was a government official who was posted as postmaster of Kerakat in May, 1...
Chhagan Lal Rathi Vs. Income-tax Officer, District Iii(i), Kanpur, and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-15-1964
Reported in: [1965]58ITR777(All)
The judgment of the court was delivered byR. S. PATHAK J. - The appellant carried on business as a commission agent. By a notice dated July 15, 1957 he was required by the Income-tax Officer to make payment of a sum of Rs. 36,611.88 due as arrears of tax from a partnership firm which had discontinued its business and of which the appellant was a partner. It is admitted between the parties that the arrears included income-tax as well as excess profits tax. As no payment was made by the appellant, the Income-tax Officer served a notice dated July 29, 1957, purporting to be under section 46(5A) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, upon the Allahabad Bank Ltd., Kanpur, informing the bank that a sum of Rs. 36,611.88 was due from the appellant and that any money held by it, or which may be so held in future, to the credit of the appellant in his bank account, should be paid over to the Income-tax Officer to the extent of that liability. The bank informed the Income-tax Officer on August 9, 1957, tha...
Shri Ram Vs. Thakur Dhan Bahadur Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-13-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All223
Gyanendra Kumar, J.1. This is a second appeal by the defendant arising out of a suit for possession of two plots Nos. 208 and 209 situated in village Raipur, Pargana Kewai in the district of Allahabad. Briefly stated the plaintiff's case was that one Raghunandan Singh was an occupancy tenant of the two plots in suit and had mortgaged the same for Rs. 50/- with Bindra, father of the defendant-appellant about thirty years ago i.e., in or about the year 1921 and that Bindra aforesaid was first in possession of the mortgaged plots and after his death the defendant has continued in permissive possession. The plaintiff's case further was that though the mortgage of an occupancy holding was void yet the plaintiff was entitled to recover possession of the land on payment of the debt of Rs. 50/-to the defendant. The defendant contested the suit, inter alia, on the ground that the mortgage set up by the plaintiff did not exist and was only imaginary, that the defendant was in possession of the p...
Krishneshwari Varshney Vs. Ramesh Chandra Varshney and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-06-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All228
S.C. Manchanda, J. 1. This is a plaintiff's second appeal from the order of the District Judge, Moradabad, dated 16th Oct. 1962, confirming the dismissal of her suit.2. Smt. Krishneshwari Varshney had filed the suit giving rise to this appeal and claimed the following reliefs:(A) It be declared that the plaintiff is the lawfully wedded wife of defendant No. 1. (B) The defendant No. 1 be permanently restrained from contracting any subsequent marriage during the subsistence or the plaintiff's marriage and other defendants be restrained from bringing about and participating in the second contemplated marriage of defendant No. 1 with defendant No. 5. (C) That the defendant No. 1 be ordered to perform conjugal and marital rights as a husband of the plaintiff and in case of refusal a decree for restitution of conjugal rights be passed against him. (D) That the costs of the suit be taxed against the defendants. (E) That any other relief, which may he beneficial to the plaintiff over and abov...
Basantu and ors. Vs. Kanhaiya Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-05-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All263; 1965CriLJ670
Capoor, J. 1. This application came up for hearing before our Brother, Mathur, J., who directed the papers to be laid before the Hon'ble the Chief Justice for referring the following question for decision to a larger Bench: 'Can the High Court interfere with the order of the Nyaya Panchayat passed under the U. P. Panchayat Raj Act and also the order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate in revision under Section 89 of the Act in exercise of the inherent jurisdiction under Section 601-A, Cr. P. C.?' In order to arrive at a correct decision of the question under consideration reference may usefully be made to some of the relevant pro vision a of the U. P. Panehayat Raj Act, 1947, Section 83 of that Act prescribes the procedure for the trial of a civil, criminal or revenue case cognizable by a Nyaya Panchayat. It, inter alia, provides that the Nyaya Panchayat shall follow tne procedure presented by or under the Act and further that the C. P. C. 1908, Cr. P. C. 1898, the Indian Evidence Act, 18...
Gauri Dutt Bhagwan Das Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-05-1964
Reported in: [1965]56ITR423(All)
R. S. PATHAK J. - The assessee, which is registered firm, carried on business in grain and also entered into certain transactions in respect of sarson. During the assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1957-58, the assessee claimed that the losses form the transactions in sarson should be adjusted against the profits from its other business. It alleged that the adjustment should be allowed because the transactions were hedging transactions. The Income-tax Officer, however, found that the transactions were not hedging transactions but were speculative transactions and by reference to the proviso to section 24(1) held that the assessee was not entitled to an adjustment of the losses form those speculative transactions against the profits of the other business. This finding was upheld by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and thereafter by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. The Appellate Tribunal has, upon these facts referred the following question :'Whether on a true interpret...
Gangadhar Baijnath Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-05-1964
Reported in: [1965]58ITR186(All)
The judgment of the court was delivered byDESAI, C.J. - The following question has been referred to this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, at the assessees instance under section 66(1) of the Income-tax Ac :'Whether, in the circumstances of the case, an appeal lay to the Tribunal against the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner dismissing the appeal as incompeten ?'The facts, as stated in the statement of the case, are these. During an assessment proceeding the assessee claimed relief under section 25(3) but the claim was not considered by the Income-tax Officer. The assessee filed an appeal from the assessment order passed against him under section 23 and the Appellate Assistant Commissioner set aside the assessment order and directed the Income-tax Officer to give a finding on the question whether the provision of section 25(3) was attracted by the facts of the case. It is to be noted that Appellate Assistant Commissioner who set aside the order di...
Syed Ashfaq HusaIn Sajjad HussaIn Vs. Sant Ram and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-04-1964
Reported in: AIR1964All420
ORDERG.D. Sahgal, J.1. A suit was filed by the applicant in the Court of the Munsif. Rae Bareli, on the 30th of May, 1959 for recovery of Rs. 132-50 NP. against opposite party No. 1 and one Ram Chandra whose legal representatives are opposite parties Nos. 2/1 to 2/3 in this revision. As the suit was a money suit and was valued at Rs. 132.50 nP. and the learned Munsif Shri M. P. Tripathi at that time was exercising Small .Cause Court powers, it was registered before him as a Small Cause Court suit and would have been tried by him as such. Shri M P. Tripathi, however, was transferred and he handed over charge of his office in the afternoon of 8th June, 1959 before the suit could be decided and the post remained vacant for sometime.It was only on 13th July, 1959 that Shri R. B. Srivastava (sic) did not exercise Small Cause Court powers. A number of Small Cause Court cases however, were on the file of the Munsif, Rae Bareli when Shri R. :B. Srivastava took over charge. As appears from an o...
Raghubir Singh Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-01-1964
Reported in: 1966CriLJ202
ORDERS.D. Khare, J.1. This is an application in revision against an order dated 18th March 1963, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bulandshahr, dismissing the appeal filed by Raghubir Saran applicant against his conviction under Sections 406 and 424, Indian Penal Code, and the sentence of three years' rigorous imprisonment under the first count and two years' rigorous imprisonment under the second count.2. It has been contended before me that the conviction and sentence of the applicant under Section 406, Indian Penal Code, are illegal and that the sentence awarded under Section 424, Indian Penal Code, is severe.3. The facts leading to this revision application might be briefly stated as followx The applicant Raghubir Saran was a partner of a firm Messrs Raghubir Saran and Company, brick-kiln owners. Karaura, within Police Circle Pahasu, District Bulandshahr. Another person of the same name, who happened to be the manager of the C. V. Inter College, Karaura, was also a p...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›