Allahabad Court July 1964 Judgments
Sheikh Maula Bux Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-30-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All14
Nigam, J.1. The judgment in the appeal was delivered by us on 20th December, 1963. The present application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court under Article 134(1)(a) and (c) of the Constitution of India was presented on 15th April, 1964. The office has objected that this application is barred by time. The office report is, however, not quite clear.2. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties on the question of limitation. The learned Junior Standing Counsel has urged that the application is barred by time.3. Facts relevant for the purpose are that an application for a copy of the judgment was filed on 21-12-63 and it was ready for delivery on 8-1-64. Annexure 3 is a copy of the decree. There is no clear indication on the copy of the decree as regards the date of the application for copy and the date of posting of the notice on the notice board but certain figures are mentioned at the foot of the copy on the last page and it appears to us that they furnish satisfactory inf...
Tag this Judgment!R. Christopher Vs. Executive Engineer, Irrigation Workshop and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-30-1964
Reported in: AIR1966All97
ORDERS.N. Dwivedi, J.1. The petitioner was employed as an automobile fitter in the Government irrigation Workshop, Izatnagar, Bareilly. The Executive Engineer, incharge of the workshop, dismissed mm with effect from June 11, 1958. He has filed the present petition against that order. His grievance is: the Executive Engineer has dismissed him from service without observing the procedure prescribed in Article 311(2) of the Constitution. He was not given any opportunity of producing his evidence and of cross-examining the departmental witnesses. He was not given a notice asking him to show cause against the proposed penalty, After the conclusion of the enquiry he was served with the order of dismissal.2. On behalf of the respondents Sri S.L. Mazumdar, Assistant Engineer, Incharge of the workshop, has filed a counter-affidavit. The counter-affidavit alleges that the petitioner was given an opportunity to defend himself, but he did not avail of it. Tt is said that in effect he boycotted the...
Tag this Judgment!Mukhtar Ahmad Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-30-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All191; [1968(16)FLR413]
Uniyal, J.1. This petition for habeas corpus under Section 491 Cr. P. C. has been filed by one Mukhtar Ahmad challenging an order No. 3597 T. Y. A/VIII-D-292 PT/55 Lucknow, dated June 19. 1964 made by the State Government in exercise of the powers conferred by Clauses (a), (b) and (c) of Subsection (2) of Section 3 of the Foreigners Act, 1946 (No. XXXI of 1946) as amended by the Foreigners Laws (Amendment) Act, 1957 (II of 1957), directing the deportation of the petitioner from India on the ground that he was a Pakistani national and, as such, a foreigner. In pursuance of the order aforesaid the petitioner was arrested on 23-6-1964 and was sent to the Pakistan border for deportation under police escort. He could not be sent across the border without a passport as the Pakistani authorities had tightly sealed the border and did not allow anybody to cross the same without traveldocuments. The petitioner was being kept in intention ever since and it was claimed that his detention in police...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Kishan Piarey Vs. Smt. Ram Dei and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-29-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All248
D.S. Mathur, J. 1. This is a Second Appeal by Smt. Kishan Piari against the order dated 2-1-1960 of the District Judge of Bareilly dismissing her appeal and thereby maintaining the order of the insolvency Judge, whereby her exclusive claim to the house in dispute was disallowed. The insolvency Judge while disallowing the exclusive claim of Smt. Kishan Piari upheld the report of the Official Receiver that the insolvent Lachman Singh had one half share in the house. 2. In execution of her decree against Lachman Singh, Smt. Raj Rani, wife of Raghoram, respondent No. 3 had the disputed house attached with the allegation that it belonged to the judgment-debtor. Smt. Kishan Piari thereupon filed an objection under Order 21, Rule 58, C. P. C. claiming to be the exclusive owner thereof. When the objection was dismissed, she instituted suit No. 10 of 1953 in the Court of the Civil Judge, Bareilly, for declaration that she was the owner of the whole of the House and that it was not liable to att...
Tag this Judgment!Aijaz UddIn Vs. Taxing Officer, High Court and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-28-1964
Reported in: AIR1966All227
ORDERS.N. Dwivedi, J.1. The petitioner challenges the order of the Taxing Officer of the Court dated March 5, 1963.2. The facts giving rise to this petition are these: under the provisions of the Town Improvement Trust Act read with the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, the Town Improvement Trust Agra acquired some land of the petitioner in connection with its Raja Ki Mandi street scheme. The compensation for the land was determined by an award on October 24, 1.953. The petitioner was not satisfied with the compensation awarded to him. It appears that the question of compensation was referred to the District Judge under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. While the proceedings were pending before the District Judge, the Town Improvement Trust Act was repealed, and its place was taken up by the Nagar Mahapalika Act. The question of compensation was then referred to the Tribunal constituted under the Nagar Mahapalika Act for determination. The new Tribunal gave its decision on ...
Tag this Judgment!Khurjawala Buckles Manufacturing Co. Vs. Commissioner, Sales Tax and a ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-27-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All517
Desai, C.J.1. This is a petition for certiorari for the quashing of two assessment orders passed by an Assistant Sales Tax Officer, Aligarh, under the U. P. Sales Tax Act, one for the assessment year 1960-61 and the other for the assessment year 1961-62 and two more assessment orders passed by the same officer but under the Central Sales Tax Act, one for the assessment year 1960-61 and the other for the assessment year 1961-62, and mandamus directing the Sales Tax Officer and the Commissioner of Sales Tax, U. P. not to recover from the petitioner the amountsof the sales tax imposed under the impugned assess-ment orders. The petition came up for hearing before our brother Manchanda, before whom there arose the question whether one petition for certiorari for the quashing of distinct assessment orders passed for two years and distinct assessment orders passtd under two Acts was maintainable or not. It may be mentioned that the court-fee payable on a petition for certiorari is Rs. 50/- an...
Tag this Judgment!State of Uttar Pradesh and ors. Vs. Ram NaraIn Lal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-24-1964
Reported in: AIR1966All62
G.C. Mathur, J.1. This is a special appeal against an order of a learned single Judge allowing Writ Petition No. 1437 of 1957 and quashing the order of allotment dated March 27, 1957, the order dated April 1, 1957, under Section 7-A of the U. P. Control of Rent and Eviction Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) made by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Pilibhit, and the order of the Commissioner dated May 9, 1957, in revision.2. The respondent No. 1, Ram Narain Lal, is the owner, of a shop at Pilibhit. One Harish Bajpai was the tenant of this shop. The tenant vacated the same on or about December 30, 1956. Thereafter on January 5, 1957, the respondent landlord wrote to the Rent Control and Eviction Officer intimating that the shop had become vacant and asking that it be released in his favour. This application was received by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer on January 5, 1957. No allotment order was made by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer till March 27, 1957, when h...
Tag this Judgment!Jagat NaraIn and anr. Vs. Laljee and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-22-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All504
Gangeshwar Prasad, J.1. This suit which has given rise to this Second Appeal was for possession of certain plots of agricultural land. Admittedly Mahadeo, who was an occupancy tenant of the plots in suit, mortgaged them usufructuarily to defendants Nos. 1 to 3 for a sum of Rs. 85/- about 15 years prior to the institution of the suit and the mortgagees had continued in possession since then. It was alleged by the plaintiffs that on 14th October, 1958 Mahadeo acquired the rights of a Bhumidhar by depositing an amount equal to ten times the revenue payable for the land and then sold it to the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs thus claimed to be entitled to recover possession of the land on payment of Rs. 85/- or such other sum as may be found due under the mortgage. The learned Munsif granted to the plaintiffs a decree for posses, sion subject to their depositing a sum of Rs. 85/-within one month from the date of the decree.On appeal by the mortgagee-defendants the learned District Judge modifie...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Rajeshwari Misra and anr. Vs. Markandeshwar Mahadeo Trust and ors ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-21-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All211
Desai, C.J.1. This is an appeal from the decision given by the District Judge, Ducknow on an issue in a suit for grant of letters of administration to the estate of one Rani Kakhan. Ram Kakhan died on 5-11-1955 at Lucknow leaving a daughter Smt. Kajeshwari appellant No. 1, three grandsons named Kamestt, Promod and Kavendra (sons of Kajeshwari) and Kheo Kani Devi widow of the predeceased brother lialak Kani. it is said that he and Balak Kam had executed a will on lli/15-5-1045 bequeathing the property left by the survivor of the two to Markande-shwar Mahadeo Trust, 'which had been created by them on 6-1-1942 in respect of some of their properties. On the death of Kam Kakhan the Trust made an application under Section 278 of the Indian Succession Act in the Court of the District Judge, Lucknow for the grant of letters of administration to the estate of the deceased. The property left toy the deceased included money deposited by him in the Allahabad Bank on different occasions.The relatio...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Rajjoo Devi Vs. Nageshwar and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-14-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All267; [1964(9)FLR391]; (1965)ILLJ20All
B.N. Nigam, J.1. Shrimati Rajjoo filed an application under Section 372 of the Indian Succession Act of 1925 praying for a succession certificate in respect of Rs. 1315/12/- at the credit of Girja Dutt Pandey, a peon in the Railway Department as his provident fund. Girja Dutt Pandey retired from service on 27th May, 1954 but before he could withdraw the amount he died on 29th October, 1954. The petitioner claimed herself to be the sister of Girja Dutt Pandey. Three other persons laid claim to the same amount. Radhey Shiam and Radha Krishna stated that they were the sister's song of Girja Dutt Pandey. They also alleged that Girja Dutt Pandey sad made an oral will in their favour and in favour of Ram Kishore and Ram Swarup.It is further pleaded that Shrimati Rajjoo had executed a deed of relinquishment in favour of her sister's sons. Wageshwar also laid claim to the amount as descendant from a common ancestor Daya Ram. The parties proceeded to trial on the basis of nine issues. The learn...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »