Allahabad Court July 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.
Bodhan Vs. Sri Bhundal Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-13-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All309
Gangeshwar Prasad, J.1. These two connected second appeals arise out of two connected suits (suits NOS. 3 and 4 of 1951) filed in the civil court for possession over certain plots of agricultural land. Bhundal Singh and Badri Singh, sons of Dalip Singh, were plaintiffs in both the suits, while Bedhan and Ramapati were defendants in suit No. 3 of 1951 and Sumiran and Bodhan were defendants in suit No. 4 of 1851. In both the suits it was alleged by the plaintiffs that Smt. Rajjo, an occupancy tenant of the disputed plots, executed a deed of gift in favour of Dalip Singh, father of the plaintiffs, on 2nd October 1888, and Dalip Singh entered into possession under it. On 15th May 1915 Dalip Singh mortgaged with possession by means of a deed of mortgage the plots involved in suit No. 3 of 1951 to Ram Bharos who is dead and is now represented by his son Bodhan defendant No. 1. Ramapati defendant No. 2 in that suit was said to be in possession of one of the plots as transferee from Bodhan and...
Balwant Singh and ors. Vs. L. Murari Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-10-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All187
K.B. Asthana, J.1. This is a plaintiffs' appeal whose suit for ejectment of the defendant from a certain shop of which they were the landlords stands dismissed on the ground of insufficiency of the notice to quit. The only point urged in this appeal is that the view of the learned Judge of the court below that a six months' notice to quit was required for termination of the defendants' lease was legally erroneous.2. The plaintiff alleged that the defendant had occupied the shop in 1941 on payment of a monthly rent and the tenancy was from month to month. It was further the case of the plaintiff that having obtained the requisite permission from the District Magistrate under the U. P. Control of Rent and Eviction Act for filing of a suit for ejectment he served upon the defendant a notice to quit under Section 106 (as amended in U. P.) intimating that the tenancy would stand terminated on the 'expiry of thirty days or one month from the receipt of the notice. The defence in the main was...
Satya Prakash Agarwal Vs. the State Transport Appellate Tribunal and o ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-10-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All194
H.C.P. Tripathi, J.1. This writ petition is directed against an order dated 31-7-63 of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal Lucknow, setting aside a resolution of the Regional Transport Authority Bareilly granting permit for a stage carriage to the petitioner.2. The undisputed facts which are relevant to the questions in controversy may be stated briefly:3. The Regional Transport Authority Bareilly, after Inviting applications, granted permits for plying stage carriages on Bareilly Uswan route to five persons in its meeting held on 7/8th of December, 1959. one of these permits was granted jointly to the petitioner and one Smt. Shanti Devi, wife of Sri Ram Agarwal. In the meeting of the Regional Transport Authority the petitioner had appeared and stated that his mother Smt, Kalawatl Devi had Rs. 15,000/- in deposit and had produced her Bank Passbook.4. Appeals were filed against the resolution dated 7/8th of December 1959 of the Regional Transport Authority which were allowed by the A...
Vishwanath and ors. Vs. Jai Mangal Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-10-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All288
Gangeshwar Prasad, J.1. The suit which has given rise to this second appeal was instituted in 1951 for recovery of possession over certain plots of agricultural land. Mata Badal who was an occupancy tenant of the plots in suit died leaving Smt. Shahzadi, his daughter as his heir. Smt. Shahzadi mortgaged the land usufructuarily on 1st June 1909 to Basdeo and others for a sum of Rs. 1500/- and put them in possession, Jai Mangal Lal plaintiff as the heir of Mata Badal, while the defendants are the heirs of the mortgagees. These facts were not in dispute and the main ground on which the suit was contested by the defendants was that the rela-tionship of mortgagor and mortgagee no longer substituted between the parties and the defendants had become tenants of the land in suit. Pleas of limitation, res judicata and estoppel were also taken. The courts below decreed the suit subject to payment of Rs. 1500/- by the plaintiff to the defendants. Aggrieved by the decree passed against them the def...
Betal Singh and anr. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-09-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All78; 1965CriLJ137
Bishambhar Dayal, J.1. This is an application for bail. Their application for bail was rejected by the learned Sessions Judge, Agra. The applicants have been charged of an offence punishable under Rule 125 of the Defence of India Rules. One of the grounds for rejecting the application by the learned Sessions Judge was that a learned single Judge of this Court remarked in Daya Ram v. State, Misc. Case No. 601 of 1984 D/- 10-3-1964 (All) to the effect that no bail could be granted in such cases unless the Court is of opinion that the accused appears not to be guilty of the offence. We have heard learned counsel and have looked into the matter. Rule 155 of the Defence of India Rules is applicable only to those cases where the Central Government or the State Government by notified order specifies that in the case of a contravention of a particular rule, Rule 155(b) would be applicable and bail would not be granted unless the Court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believin...
Kapildeo Rai Vs. Har NaraIn Ahir and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-08-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All313
Gangeshwar Prasad, J.1. These are eighteen connected appeals arising out of eighteen connected and consolidated suits. The trial court disposed of the suits by a common judgment and the appeals against the judgments and decrees of the trial court were likewise disposed of by a common judgment by the court of first appeal. I also propose to deal with these appeals by a common judgment.2. The suits were filed by Zamindars and tenants of village Indarpur against the residents of village Cheruiyan for perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiffs' possession over certain plots of agricultural land and in the alternative for possession. Village Indarpur lies to the east while village Cheruiyan lies to the west of river Sarju, in the district of Ballie it was alleged by the plaintiffs that the land in dispute which was formerly on the eastern side of river Sarju and which used to remain submerged under water of the river during rainy season was transfer...
Chidda Ram Vs. Naru Mal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-08-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All323
K.B. Asthana, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendant against whom a decree for ejectment from a house situate in the city of Agra and for recovery of arrears of rent has been paused. The only point which calls for determination in this appeal is whether the so-called notice to quit or termination of tenancy sent by the plaintiff-respondents, the landlord, and served upon the defendant-appellant, the tenant, was valid and effective within the meaning of Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act. It may be mentioned that the findings of fact recorded against the defendant-appellant on the question of the arrears due, the amount of arrears due and the default in complying with the notice calling upon him to pay up the arrears have not been challenged in this second appeal, it is clear, therefore, that if the appellant succeeds in establishing that the notice was not an effective notice under Section 106, the only consequence would be that the suit of the plaintiffs as far as the ejectm...
Ram Raksh Pal Vs. Brij Nandan Swarup
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-08-1964
Reported in: AIR1967All325
Gangeshwar Prasad, J.1. This second appeal arises out of a suit brought by the landlord of an accommodation for ejectment of his tenant and for rent and damages 2. One Shanti Swaroop was originally the owner of the accommodation and Brij Nandan Swarup alias Brij Nandan La] defendant occupied the accommodation as a tenant oh his behalf on a monthly rent of Rs. 10. Shanti Swaroop made an application to the Rent Control and Eviction Officer for permission to bring a suit for the eviction of the tenant. The Rent Control and Eviction Officer passed an order on the basis of a compromise between Shanti Swaroop and the defendant granting permission to Shanti Swaroop to bring a suit for eviction of the defendant in case the defendant failed to vacate the house by 31st July 1967. The defendant did not, however, vacate the house. Shanti Swaroop did not take any proceeding for the eviction of the defendant and on 17th April 1958 he sold the accommodation to Ram Rakshpal plaintiff. On 6-12-1958 the...
Bharosa and ors. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-08-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All417; 1965CriLJ331
Beg, J.1. The appellants Bharosa, Charittar and Shital were charged with offences under Sections 148, 302/ 149, 328/149 and 323/149, Penal Code and the learned Judge who tried them together with the acquitted accused persons, Dwarika and Deoraj, took the precaution, very properly, of charging them in the alternative with offences under Sections 302, 326 and 323, Penal Code with the aid of Section 34, Penal Code. Charittar appellant was also charged separately under Section 302, Penal Code. The appellants were convicted under Section 304, Part I, Penal Code and Sections 326 and 323, Penal Code read with Section 34, Penal Code, in each case, and were sentenced to seven years, four years, and six months' R. I. respectively.2. According to the prosecution case, Shiv Dayal deceased Girdhari and Bijai, who were alleged to be in possession of plot No. 131 of village Usari Khurd, in the district of Azamgarh had obtained a decree on 18-7-1962 from the Court of a Munsif restraining Sobaran and o...
Nagar Mahapalika Vs. Panna Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-07-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All231; 1965CriLJ537
Capoor, J. 1. This appeal by Nagar Mahapalika, Varanasi is directed against an order of D. N. Tripathi, the then City Magistrate, Varanasi, acquitting the respondent Panna Lal, of the offence under Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act'.2. The respondent carried on business in food-grains etc., in Chateganj Dal Hatta, Varanasi. On 29-4-1961 the Food inspector, Nagar Mahapalika, Varanasi, purchased a sample of Dal Kesari from the shop of the respondent. As required by law, a portion of the sample was sent to the public analyst for examination who reported that the sample contained cent per cent, lathyrus sativus (Kesari) and did not contain added colouring matter. He further opined that lathyrus sativus contained toxic ingredients which rendered the sample of food injurious to health.3. The respondent pleaded that he sold articles used for human as well as animal consumption and that the Dal Kesari which was in his shop was s...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »