Allahabad Court October 1966 Judgments
Khudi Ram Laha Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U. P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-31-1966
Reported in: [1968]67ITR364(All)
MANCHANDA J. - This is a case stated under section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The question referred is :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the provisions of section 28(1)(c) were attracted ?'The material facts are these : The original assessment of the assessee was completed on 28th January, 1950, on an income of Rs. 8,350 from business and Rs. 100 from property. On 19th February, 1952, a notice under section 34 was issued on the basis of information received that the assessee had purchased a house on 30th August 1948, for Rs. 14,500. The source of money for purchasing that property was not disclosed. The explanation furnished was that, though the sale deed and the property stood in the name of the assessee he was in fact a benamidar for his wife by her mother. The wife did not go into the witness box not was there any other material placed on the record by the assessee, and, a therefore, the sum, of Rs. 14,500 was treate...
Tag this Judgment!Joti Prasad Sharma Vs. Additional Civil Judge, Dehradun and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-25-1966
Reported in: AIR1968All42
ORDERR.S. Pathak, J.1. In a suit filed by the petitioner against the State of Uttar Pradeah for an injunction restraining it from realising an amount under a forest contract, the petitioner applied for inspection and production of certain documents in the possession of the State Government and its officers In opposition to the application, the State claimed privilege in res-pect of the documents and two affidavits were filed before the trial court, one by the Conservator of Forests (Annexure 2 to the counter affidavit) and the other by the Chief Conservator of Forest (Annexure 3 to the counter affidavit) The application was rejected by the trial court by its order of March 17, 1962 (Annexure K to the writ petition) by the following order:'17-3-62283/C2Affidavit filed by the defendant, along with this affidavit an application has been made on behalf of the defendant that the plaintiff he not allowed to Inspect the file A perusal of Section 123 of the Indian Evidence Act makes it clear t...
Tag this Judgment!Radhey Shyam Gupta Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-18-1966
Reported in: AIR1968All342
ORDERD.P. Uniyal, J. 1. This is an application to revise an order of the Sessions Judge upholding the jurisdiction of the Magistrate to proceed with the trial of the accused under Section 333, I.P.C. 2. On an information lodged with the police a case under Sections 228 and 353, I.P.C., was sent up against the accused to the Court of the Magistrate who framed charges against him in these terms:-- 'Firstly, that you on or about the 17th day of August 1953 at about 4 p.m. in Civil Lines at the Registration Office, Orai, intentionally offered insult and caused interruption to R. S. Lal, Sub-Registrar, while he was sitting in a stage of Judicial proceeding, namely, was registering a document, and thereby committed an offence under Section 228, I.P.C. Secondly, that you on the same day at the same time and place assaulted R. S. Lal, Sub-Registrar, a public servant with intent to deter him and prevent him from discharging his duty of registering a deed as public servant, and thereby committe...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. G.P. Gupta Vs. Director, Muslim University Institute of Ophthalmol ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-18-1966
Reported in: AIR1967All411; (1968)ILLJ599All
ORDERK.B. Asthana, J.1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioner, Dr. G.P.Gupta, has questioned the validity of a resolution of the Executive Council of the Aligarh Muslim University dispensing with his services as Lecturer.2. The petitioner was appointed on one year's probation as a Lecturer in the Muslim University Institute of Ophthalmology. The petitioner joined his post in the University on 1-10-1963 after resigning from his post as Ophthalmic Surgeon in the Gandhi Eye Hospital at Aligarh. According to the allegations of the petitioner he successfully completed his probationary period which expired on 30-9-1964 and was entitled for confirmation but to his surprise he was served with an order on 4-12-1964 that his probationary period had been extended by one year. Thereupon the petitioner made a representation on 8-12-1964 to the Vice-Chancellor of the University. According to the petitioner no orders of the Vice-Chancellor on his representation were co...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Vidya Niwas Misra Vs. University of Gorakhpur and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-18-1966
Reported in: AIR1967All426; (1968)ILLJ431All
ORDERK.B. Asthana, J. 1. These two petitions have been consolidated and are being disposed of by a common judgment the parties being the same arid the subject matter also being similar in fact Civil Misc. Writ No. 2373 of 1966 covers the subject matter of the connected Civil Misc. Writ No. 1835 of 1966.2. In petition No. 1835 of 1966 the petitioner Dr. Vidya Niwas Misra, questioned the validity of a reasolution of the Executive Council of the University of Gorakhpur refusing to confirm him in the post of Reader in the University in the Sanskrit Department passed in the meeting of the Council held on 7th May, 1966. This petition was presented in this Court on 20th May 1966 and was admitted on that date. It appears that subsequently at a meeting of the Executive Council of the University held on 9-7-1966 a resolution Was passed refusing to extend the period of probation of the petitioner and terminating his services, This led to the filing of Civil Misc. Writ No. 2373 of 1966 which was p...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Hemlata Agarwal Vs. the Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-14-1966
Reported in: AIR1968All1; [1967]64ITR428(All)
ORDER1. This is a case stated under Section 66(2) of the Indian Income-lax Act. 1922 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The question which was directed to he referred by this Court was:'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Officer had reason to believe that the profits or gains amounting to Rs. 24.500 chargeable to income tax had escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 34(1) (a) of the Income-tax Act?'2. The material facts are these: The relevant year of assessment is the assessment year 1945-46, the previous year being the financial year ending 31st March, 1945. The assessee is the wife of Ganesh Prasad. She was the grand daughter of Raja Sir Moti Chand. She has been assessed in the status of an individual under Section 34(l)(a) of the Act for her failure to explain satisfactorily a sum of Rs. 24,500 out of the total investment of Rs 83,500 made in the purchase on 8-5 1944 of a house propertyat Varanasi in her name. Her husband Ganesh P...
Tag this Judgment!Hargyan and anr. Vs. Banwari Lal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-14-1966
Reported in: AIR1968All275
S.S. Dhavan, J.1. This is a defendants' second appeal from the decree of the Second Civil Judge, Meerut reversing that of the Second Additional Munsif, Ghaziabad and decreeing the plaintig-respondent's suit for their ejectment from four houses. The plaintiff respondent Banwari Lal alleged that he purchased four houses by auction purchase from one Lal Chand who had purchased them in the execution of his decrees against the defendant appellants that the appellants took forcible possession of the houses illegally and he obtained a decree for their ejectment; that subsequently the dispute led the criminal proceedings but the plaintiff and the appellants entered into a compromise under which the appellants were allowed to remain in possesion provided they paid a sum of Rs. 1000 to him; that the appellants did not carry out the terms of the compromise and were liable to ejectment 2. The defendants resisted and denied that the plaintiff was the owner of the houses. They admitted the compromis...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Rup Kishore and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-14-1966
Reported in: AIR1967All504
ORDERV.G. Oak, J.1. The question for consideration in this Civil Revision is whether a certain civil court in district Moradabad is competent to dispose of an objection against an award. The question arises under the following circumstances 2. Rup Kishore is a contractor of district Moradabad. There were certain disputes between Rup Kishore on one side and the Union of India and the Deputy Chief Engineer, Northern Railway, on the other side. On 1-6-1963 Rup Kishore applied to the court of the Civil Judge Moradabad for referring the dispute to arbitration under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). In pursuance of that application, the learned Civil Judge made a reference to arbitration. Later the case was transferred from the file of the Civil Judge, Moradabad to the file of the Judge, Small Cause Court. Moradabad, who had powers of an Additional Civil Judge. The Arbitrator gave his award on 14-5-1966. The award was submitted to court. On 5-7-1065 the ...
Tag this Judgment!Chhote Lal Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-13-1966
Reported in: AIR1968All37; 1968CriLJ15
Mahesh Chandra, J. 1. This is an appeal by Chhotey Lal who has been convicted under Section 302 I P C and sentenced to imprisonment for life 2. Briefly stated the prosecution case was this. Chotey Lal appellant, who is an employee of the Central Railway, lived with his wife Smt. Sheo Kanya in a house in Mohalla Tha-kuryana Jhansi On 16-9 1963 when Chotey Lal returned to his house after finishing his duty at 12 O'clock in the night, his wife opened the door for him He entered the house and bolted the door behind him. As he proceeded inside somebody who had hidden him self in the outer court-yard, suddenly came out. unbolted the main door and ran away The appellant suspected his wife's chastity and consequently stabbed her with the knife (Ex 4) He was seen killing her by Chunbad (P W 1). After murdering his wife the appellant went to the Police Outpost Garhia Phatak six furlongs away from his house, and lodged the first information report (Ex Ka-7) at 4.45 a.m. On the way he broke the bl...
Tag this Judgment!Badri Prasad Gupta Vs. Kripa Shanker Tewari
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-12-1966
Reported in: AIR1967All468; 1967CriLJ1255
Sahgal, J. 1. The appellant who is a life member of the Shyam Lal Gupta Higher Secondary School, Nawabganj in the District of Unnao lodged a complaint against the respondent who was the Principal of that institution, in the court of a Magistrate for an offence under Section 408 I.P.C. The Magistrate in the beginning wanted to try the case as a warrant case, but later on he thought it fit to commit the accused to stand his trial before the court of session. The accused was accordingly committed to the court of session and the Sessions Judge transferred the case to the court of the Assistant Sessions Judge who has acquitted the respondent. It is in these circumstances that the appellant came to this Court and moved an application under Section 417(3) Cr. P.C. for special leave to appeal from the order of acquittal. The leave having been granted, this appeal was filed which has been admitted and that is how it comes up before the Court for hearing.2. A preliminary point was raised on beha...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »