Allahabad Court November 1965 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.
Mohd. Ishaq Vs. State Govt. of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-08-1965
Reported in: AIR1966All280
Desai, C.J. 1. The following question has been referred to a Full Bench by a Division Bench particularly for reconsideration of the decision in Dr. A. C. Dass v. T.R.O. and D.S.O. Lucknow, 1962 All LJ 553:-- 'When a tenant-in-chief vacates an accommodation by subletting it to another person can the District Magistrate pass an order under Section 7(2) of the Act to him to sublet it to another person or to his landlord, e.g. the owner of the accommodation, to let it to another person. In other words, who is the landlord of the accommodation that falls vacant--the tenant-in-chief or the owner--who can be ordered to let?' 2. Since an abstract question is referred to us we are not concerned with the facts and I do not consider it necessary to reproduce them. The question is an abstract question of law, the answer to which does not depend upon the facts at all. 3. 'Accommodation' is defined in section2 (a) of the Temporary Control of Rent and Eviction Act to mean residential or non-residenti...
Kishori Lal Agarwal Vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-08-1965
Reported in: [1966]17STC523(All)
R.S. Pathak, J.1. The petitioner carries on business as a dealer in iron and steel. He was assessed originally on 15th June, 1964, for the assessment year 1960-61 under the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948. Subsequently, the Sales Tax Officer, Sector III, Kanpur, commenced proceedings against him under Section 21 for that assessment year. The petitioner claims that he did not receive any notice under Section 21, and it was only when a notice dated 14th April, 1965, was served upon him three days later informing him that a date had been fixed for hearing of the case that he came to know that proceedings under that provision had been initiated. The petitioner wrote to the Sales Tax Officer pointing out that no notice under Section 21 had been served upon him and the period of limitation of four years from the end of 1960-61 having run out, the proceedings were without jurisdiction. Aggrieved by these proceedings, the petitioner now claims certiorari against them and prohibition restraining the r...
Abdul Rauf Vs. Shamshulhaq and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-05-1965
Reported in: AIR1969All35
Gangeshwar Prasad, J.1. The main question involved in this appeal relates to the validity of a deed of wakf executed by one Sheikh Karamat on 8-2-1932. The material provisions of the deed are as follows. Sheikh Karamat himself would remain in possession of the wakf property in the capacity of a Mutwalli during his lifetime and utilize its income for his own needs ana for those of his wife and other relations. Thereafter, his wife Fahima Bibi would remain in possession of the property as a Mutwalli for her life and spend its income on herself and on the poor, without being accountable to anybody. Upon the death of Fahima Bibi the Mut-walliship would devolve upon Shamsul Haq, Abdul Rauf and Abdul Maruf, the respondents in this appeal, who would spend a sum of Rs. 4 per month out of the income of the wakf property over a Madarsa named in the deed and would appropriate the rest of the income to their own use. After the death of the respondents their descendants, generation after generation...
Phool Chand Gajanand Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U. P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-05-1965
Reported in: [1966]62ITR232(All)
M. C. DESAI, C.J. - The following question has been referred to this court by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, at the instance of the assessee under section 66(2) of the Income-tax Act :'Whether in the circumstances of this case the Tribunal exercised their discretion judicially in refusing to entertain the additional ground of appeal and in deciding i ?'The facts are very short. The assessee carries on business in cloth and of commission agency and money-lending. Its accounting previous year relevant to the assessment year 1955-56 was the period between November 6, 1953, and November 26, 1954. In its accounts of November 25, 1953, and November 27, 1953, there were two cash credit entries of the aggregate amount of Rs. 20,000; it did not include this amount in its return part for assessment year 1955-56. When questioned by the Income-tax Officer it stated that the amount of Rs. 20,000 was advanced to one of the partners by his mother. The Income-tax Officer did not b...
Bankey Lal Vs. Kishan Lal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-04-1965
Reported in: AIR1967All43
S.S. Dhavan, J.1. This appeal is one of two connected appeals by a defendant from two concurrent decrees of the Courts below ordering him to remove obstructions which prevented the plaintiff respondent to use certain par nalas. The plaintiff claimed an easementary right The defendant resisted both suits and contended that the plaintiff had not perfected his rights by prescription. He also pleaded that the easement, if any had been imposed by a mortgagee of the servient tenement in collusion with the plaintiff and had been extinguished on the redemption of the mortgage.2. Both the Courts have found that the plaintiff had perfected his easementary rights and that the easement in each case had not been imposed by any mortgagee.3. It is however, argued by learned counsel for the appellant that the lower appellate Court erred in holding, in appeal No. 258 of 1963 before him, that the plaintiff had acquired a prescriptive right to discharge on the appellant's land filthy water containing fae...
Pratap NaraIn Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U. P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-04-1965
Reported in: [1967]63ITR505(All)
PATHAK J. - The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred two questions to this court for decision :'(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the inclusion of interest of Rs. 3,000 in the assessment was legal and valid?(2) Whether the view taken by the Tribunal that the properties received by an issueless male at a partition between coparceners would be his individual properties and not that of the Hindu undivided family of himself and his wife, is correct'The reference relates to the assessment year 1957-58 for which the assessee was assessed in the status of an individual.The assessee, Pratap Narain, is a partner of a firm carrying on business under the name an style of Devidin Pusulal. He executed a deed on June 21, 1965, purporting to record an agreement between himself and his wife, Ramo Devi, to the effect that a sum of Rs. 50,000 had been transferred by him out of the amount standing to his credit in the books of the partnership firm to her account in tha...
Smt. Sneh Lata Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-03-1965
Reported in: [1966]61ITR139(All)
DESAI C.J. - The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, has under section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, submitted a statement of the case inviting this courts answer to the following question :'Whether, having regard to the powers and the jurisdiction of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner under section 31 of the Income-tax Act, it is open to him to treat the sum of Rs. 30,000 as income from undisclosed sources when it was treated by the Income-tax Officer as income from speculation ?'The facts of the case are very brief. The assessee, at whose instance the statement has been submitted, was (he is dead and is now represented by his widow) a medical practitioner and for the year 1946-47 was assessed by the Income-tax Officer on an income of Rs. 1,50,420. He had returned an income of Rs. 420 only as his professional income. The Income-tax Officer found that he had purchased a house in Mussoorie for Rs. 21,000; when he was asked to explain the source of the money, he...
Chief Inspector of Stamps Vs. Vishnu Pratap Sugar Works
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-02-1965
Reported in: AIR1967All242
ORDERD.S. Mathur, J.1. This order shall govern Civil Revisions Nos. 1005 and 1097 of 1964, both bythe Chief Inspector of Stamps, against the order of the Civil Judge of Deoria passed in two suits instituted by the opposite parties, Vishnu Pratap Sugar Works, Pvt. Ltd., Khadda, and Ishwari Khetan Sugar Mills. Pvt. Ltd., Lachhmigunj.2. The reliefs sought for in the suit instituted by Vishnu Pratap Sugar Works were that the State of Uttar Pradesh, its servants and agents be restrained by a permanent injunction from realising or taking any steps for the realization of the aforementioned sum of Rs. 33,74,754.77 from the plaintiff company as arrears of land revenue or otherwise and, in the alternative the State of Uttar Pradesh be restrained by permanent injunction from realising from the plaintiff company any amount in excess of Rs. 18,000,00 by way of arrears of cane cess and purchase tax for the years 1952 to 1962. The third prayer made, in case none of the above reliefs could be granted ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›