Allahabad Court August 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.
Ram Charan Lal Ram NaraIn Vs. Income-tax Officer, Etawah, and Another.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-20-1964
Reported in: [1966]59ITR282(All)
This is a writ petition under article 226 of the Constitution. The relief claimed is for a writ of certiorari to quash two notices issued under section 148 of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1961, dated the 2nd March, 1964, corresponding to section 34(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1922, and for a writ of prohibition restraining the opposite party No. 1 from reassessing the petitioner for the assessment year 1955-56.The facts leading up to this section are briefly these : The petitioner was assessed to income-tax for the assessment year 1955-56, by an assessment order dated the 29th of February, 1960, on a total income of Rs. 56,963 in the status of a Hindu undivided family. This family was carrying on business in the name and style of Ram Charan Lal Ram Narain as commission agents. During the assessment proceedings for 1955-56, a claim for partition under section 25A of the Act of 1922 was put forward on the basis of a partition deed dated the 26th of February, 1952. In that registered partitio...
Kanhiya Lal and anr. Vs. Satya NaraIn Panday
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-19-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All496
Mathur, J.1. This is a revision under section 115, C. P. C. by Kanhaiya Lal and another, plaintiffs, against the order of the Additional Civil Judge of Kanpur, dismissing their appeal and thereby confirming the order of the Munsiff, City, Kanpur, that the relief for permanent injunction amounts to a consequential relief and court-fee was payable on the market value of the bungalow in suit which had been allotted to Satya Narain Pandey, defendant, for occupation as tenant.2. The plaintiffs had prayed for the reliefs: firstly, that it be declared that the allotment order passed by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer on 1-3-1960, which was confirmed on 25-7-1960, was void in law; and secondly, that the defendant be restrained by means of a permanent injunction from taking possession of the accommodation in question as a tenant on the basis ot the allotment order referred to above.3. The plaintiffs had, for purposes of jurisdiction, valued the suit at Rs. 600/-, the annual letting value ...
Kanodia Brothers Vs. Income-tax Officer.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-19-1964
Reported in: [1965]57ITR765(All)
JAGDISH SHAHI J. - This special appeal has been filed by M/s. Kanodia Brothers, a partnership firm registered under the Indian Partnership Act, hereinafter referred to as the appellant, against the decision of a learned single judge (Manchanda J.) dated April 3, 1963, dismissing writ petition No. 86 of 1963 filed by the appellant. The appellant is a partnership of which the following are members in four-anna share each :1. Srimati Hira Mani, 2. L. Murlidhar, 3. L. Satya Prakash Kanodia, and 4. L. Jagmohan Lal.A gentleman by the name of Shahzade Prasad Srivatsava also carried on business at Kanpur. The Indian Army and Police Equipment Factory (hereinafter referred to as the factory) is said to be a partnership business of which Shahzade Prasad is admittedly one partner, the other partners according to Kanodia Brothers being the individual members who constitute the Kanodia Brothers. According to the income-tax department (hereinafter called the department), the factory is an association...
A.K. Brothers Vs. Employees State Insurance Corporation
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All410; [1964(9)FLR345]; (1965)ILLJ1All
Oak, J.1. The question of law referred to us is :'Whether Rule 17 of the Uttar Pradesh Employees Insurance Court Rules, 1952 is ultra vires of the rule-making power of the State?'2. This reference arises out of a proceeding under the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereafter referred to as the Act). Employees State Insurance Corporation, Kanpur filed an application against a firm Messrs A. K. Brothers under Section 75(2) of the Act for the recovery of a certain sum as contribution under the Act. The firm raised various pleas in defence. One of the points raised by the firm was that, the application by the Corporation was barred by time. This plea was overruled by the Employees Insurance Court, Kanpur. That Court passed in favour of the Corporation-applicant a decree for a certain sum.3. Against that decree, an appeal has been filed before this Court. When the appeal was taken up by a learned Single Judge of this Court, the appellant relied upon K. 17 framed by the State Government...
C. Maharaj and Sons Vs. Sales Tax Officer Iv and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-1964
Reported in: [1964]15STC879(All)
ORDERS.C. Manchanda, J.1. These are four writ petitions two against the assessment orders and recovery proceedings under the U.P. Sales Tax Act for the assessment years 1958-59 and 1959-60 and the other two for the corresponding Central Sales Tax assessments and recovery proceedings.2. The facts leading up to these petitions are these : The petitioner was dealing in iron and steel goods in the name and style of M/s. C. Maharaj and Sons, Loha Mandi, Agra, and was the sole proprietor of the business. It is alleged that the business was carried on only till 5th April, 1961. The enquiries made by the Sales Tax Officer also confirmed that the business was closed since a long time.3. The relevant years of assessment are 1958-59 and 1959-60. The assessments were made on the 23rd of March, 1963, and 28th of November, 1963, respectively. There is no explanation as to why the assessments were not made promptly but were delayed. Be that as it may, the petitioner claims that he had no knowledge of...
Punjab Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs. Amrik Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-14-1964
Reported in: AIR1966All216
Gyanendra Kumar, J.1. This is an appeal by the plaintiff-bank which is a limited company. The bank had filed the suit for recovery of Rupees 6,612-12-9 against the defendants on the basis of a cheque for Rs. 5,200 issued by the defendants in favour of the bank on 11th November1947 and a payment-order for Rs. 400 issued the next day. i.e., on the 12th November 1947. Both the cheque and the payment order were dishonoured on account of stoppage of the payment by the defendants. Hence the suit for recovery of Rs. 6,612-12-9 including interest at Rs. 6 per cent per annum, with monthly rests, plus pendente lite and future interest at the rate of Rs. 6 per cent per annum.2. The preliminary facts are not disputed between the parties. The defendants were carrying on business in Peshawar under the name and style of 'Harishmgh Govind Singh', while the plaintiff-bank had one of its branches at Peshawar. The defendants had a cash credit account in the name of their firm with the Peshawar Branch of ...
Ram Charan Bhatt Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-14-1964
Reported in: AIR1967All321; 1967CriLJ835
C.B. Capoor, J.1. This appeal by Ram Charan Bhatt is directed against an order of the learned Special Judge, Allahabad whereby the appellant was found guilty of the offences under Section 161 of I. P. C. and Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and was sentenced to undergo R. I. for a period of one year and each of the aforesaid offences. The appellant was further sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 100and, in default of payment of fine, to undergo further R. I. for a period of two months. The sentences of imprisonment on the two counts were ordered to run concurrently. 2. The appellant was the Secretary of the Nyaya Panchayat of village Purkhas at the material date. One Balai P. W. 5, a maternal cousin of Bhatrodin, P. W. 2, had applied for being granted a loan for the digging of a well in village Benpur Kataiya, P. S. Sarai Aqil. A sum of Rs. 750 was ordered to be advanced as a loan to the aforesaid Balai and a cheque for Rs. 400 as the first instalment of the aforesaid loan w...
Durga Singh Vs. Wahid Raza and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-12-1964
Reported in: AIR1965All226
V.G. Oak, J. 1. This Civil Revision by a defendant arises out of a proceeding for amendment of a decree under Sections 151, 152 and 153, C. P. C. 2. Wahid Raza and others brought a suit against Durga Singh defendant for recovery of possession over certain plots and damages. The suit was dismissed by the learned Munsif of Moradabad, but was decreed in appeal by the Additional Civil Judge of Moradabad. A Second Appeal by Durga Singh defendant was summarily dismissed by this Court under Order XLI, Rule 11, C. P. C. 3. In the plaint the land in dispute was described as two plots situate In village Noorpur. According to the plaintiff's, that description was incorrect. In fact the plots lie in another village Pandit Nagla. The plaintiffs, therefore, filed the application under Sections 151, 152 and 153, C. P. C. before the Additional Civil Judge of Moradabad for amendment of the decree. That application was opposed by Durga Singh defendant. But the learned Additional Civil Judge overruled Du...
Panna Lal Umesh Kumar Vs. Assistant Sales Tax Officer
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-12-1964
Reported in: [1965]16STC146(All)
ORDERManchanda, J. 1. This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The relief claimed is for the issue of a writ of prohibition to the opposite party, the Assistant Sales Tax Officer, Aligarh (hereinafter referred to as the S. T. O.) restraining him from proceeding to recover any tax for the year 1958-59, in respect of the assessment order passed by him on the 18th January, and for quashing the assessment order dated the 18th January, 1964, by the issue of a writ of certiorari.2. The petitioner is carrying on business in the manufacture and sale of hand-made biris at Rewa, Madhya Pradesh. According to the petitioner he was appointing selling agents and one such selling agent appointed was Messrs Ghanshiam and Co. of Aligarh to whom biris were supplied. The assessment order dated 18th January, 1964, was made on Messrs Ghanshiam and Co., Aligarh. The counter-affidavit of the Assistant Sales Tax Officer (hereinafter referred to as the S. T. O.) was to the effect that Mes...
Babu Lal Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-10-1964
Reported in: 1966CriLJ315
M.H. Beg, J.1. There are three appeals before me one by Babu Lal who has been convicted underSub-section 399 and 402. Penal Code and sentenced to four years rigorous imprisonment concurrently under each of the two sections and another by Hardas and Bansi, and a third by Brij Lal who have been convicted similarly and sentenced to four years' rigorous imprisonment underSub-section 399 and 402, Penal Code and also to 18 months' rigorous imprisonment concurrently under Section 19(f), Arms Act by an Additional Sessions Judge of Jhansi.2. It is alleged that the appellants were among the persons who had assembled at a Nala near village Mahroni Khurd having prepared themselves to commit a dacoity at the house of Pandit Gajadhar in village Gangasagar which lay at a distance of about two miles from the place of assemblage. Dhira (P. W. 1) was also invited to join this assembly, but he went to the police station and passed on the in formation to Bhagwati Singh (P. W. 8), Sub-Inspector of Police w...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »