Allahabad Court April 1966 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.
R.S. Mathur Vs. H.S. Mathur and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-21-1966
Reported in: AIR1968All241
Gangeshwar Prasad, J.1. This is an appeal by a complainant against the appellate order of acquittal passed by the learned Sessions Judge of Saharanpur in a case started by the complainant in respect of an alleged contravention of Section 197A of the Companies Act.2. The complaint, was to the following effect. The complainant R. S. Mathur and the three accused viz. Dr. K. L. Endley, H. S. Mathur and K. S. Mathur were shareholders of the Co-operative Company Limited (Distillers) Saharanpur which was said to be a public company H. S. Mathur had been working as managing director of the Company since 1943 and K. S. Mathur had been working as its manager since 1945. Under Section 197A of the Companies Act there could be only one category of managerial personnel after 27-6-1961. but H. S. Mathur and K. S. Mathur had continued as managing director and manager respectively even after that date. At the general meeting of the Company held on 30-9-1961 Dr. K. L. Endley proposed and K. S. Mathur se...
Agarwala Publishing House Vs. Board of High School and Intermediate Ed ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-19-1966
Reported in: AIR1967All91
ORDERW. Broome, J.1. This writ petition filed by a firm of publishers challenges an amendment of the Regulations of the Board of High School and Intermediate Examination, U. P., introduced by a Gazette notification dated 9-6-1959 issued under Section 15 of the Intermediate Education Act, declaring that copyright of the question papers set at examinations conducted by the Board shall vest in the Board and forbidding the publication of such question papers without the Board's permission, which will be granted only if the publisher pays a fee of Rs. 5 for each paper and undertakes not to include in his publication any solutions of the questions.2. Mr. S. C. Khare, who appears for the petitioner, has made the following submissions:1. The new regulation introduced by means of the impugned notification is beyond the scope of the regulation-making power of the Board under Section 15 of the Intermediate Education Act. 2. No copyright can be claimed in question papers set for examinations becau...
Municipal Board Vs. Dhian Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-18-1966
Reported in: AIR1967All491; 1967CriLJ1261
M.H. Beg, J.1. This is an appeal by the Municipal Board of Saharanpur against an acquittal of the respondent from a charge framed for an offence punishable under Section 16 read with Section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, (hereafter referred to as 'the Act').2. It was alleged that the respondent Dhian Singh was selling coloured sweets of which a sample was taken on 31-5-1963. The sample was sent to the Public Analyst to the Government of U. P. for analysis. The result of analysis as given in certificate No. 11652 dated 24-6-1963, which was attached to the complaint purporting to be filed by the Food Inspector Municipal Board, Saharanpur, on behalf of the Municipal Board, showed that the sample was coloured with a coaltar dye metanil yellow (colour index No. 138) which is not one of the coaltar dyes permitted for use in food stuffs, under Rule 28 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Rules, 1955 It was also alleged in the complaint that no change had taken place in...
Jokhan Vs. Ram Deo and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-15-1966
Reported in: AIR1967All212
Gangeshwar Prasad, J.1. This is a defendant's second appeal arising out of a suit in respect of some plots of agricultural land.2. One Sheo Raj was a hereditary tenant of the plots, in suit before the enforcement of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition andLand Reforms Act. He died leaving behind his widow Smt. Sirtaji as his heir. On 18-5-1954 Jokhan defendant, who is a collateral of Sheo Raj, filed suit No. 706 of 1954 in the revenue Court under Section 59/61 of the U. P. Tenancy Act of 1939 impleading Smt. Sirtaji as a defendant. He alleged that the plots in suit were his hereditary tenancy and sought a declaration to that effect by the Court. The suit was decreed on the basis of an admission of Jokhan's claim purporting to have been made by Smt. Sirtaji. On 28-6-1954 Nandan, father of the respondents, filed an application in suit No. 706 of 1954 for setting aside the decree passed in that suit, stating that Smt. Sirtaji had died before the institution of the suit, and that the admission of...
Ram Prakash Agnihotri Vs. the Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-14-1966
Reported in: AIR1967All228; (1967)IILLJ353All
Bishambhar Dayal, J.1. This is a plaintiff's second appeal. The plaintiff was employed by the Western Railway and he was dismissed by an order dated 2-5-1949, but he was reinstated on 18-4-1950. He was again dismissed on 19-8-1950 and was again reinstated on 3-2-1951. For both these periods the plaintiff was not paid his salary as this period was treated 'dias non.' The plaintiff, therefore, filed the present suit in the civil court for the recovery of the salary. The suit was decreed by the court below but has been dismissed by the lower appellate court as barred under Section 22 of the Payment of Wages Act. This second appeal was, therefore, filed by the plaintiff and it was heard by a learned single Judge of this Court who has referred following question for our consideration.'Whether the suit was barred by the provisions of Sections 15 and 22 of the Payment of Wages Act?'2. Section 15(1) of the said Act provides for appointment of a Commissioner etc. as the authority for deciding s...
Subhash Misir Vs. Thagai Misir
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-13-1966
Reported in: AIR1967All148
S.N. Singh, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for declaration of bhumidhari rights instituted by one Smt. Sahebzadi. The facts giving rise to the present appeal are that Smt. Sahebzadi, plaintiff, filed the suit in respect of a number or plots of village Basanipur Tappa Kataura Pargana Silhat, detailed at the foot of the plaint. Her case was that the plots in suit were previously the sir and khudkasht holding of Ram Dhani, her husband, and after his death she became the sir and khudkasht holder and subsequent to the enforcement of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act she became the bhumidhar thereof.It was asserted that the defendant in collusion with the lekhpal fictitiously got his name entered in the revenue records although he never cultivated any of the plots which all along remained in the cultivatory possession of the plaintiff. During the pendency of this suit Smt. Sahebzadi died on 4th August 1961 and the present appellant was substituted in her place. The pr...
Bhan Singh Vs. Regional Transport Authority and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-11-1966
Reported in: AIR1967All163
Bhargava, C.J.1. The question referred for our opinion by the learned single Judge is:'Whether an order passed by the Regional Transport Authority on an application under Sub-section (8) of Section 57 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 is appealable to the prescribed authority under section 64 of the Act?'2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the judgment of Hon'ble R. S. Pathak, J. which has occasioned this reference in this case. Before us as well as before Hon'ble R. S. Pathak, J. the suggestion made was limited to Clauses (a) and (b) of Section 64 of the Motor Vehicles Act so that we are not concerned with the other clauses of section 64.3. It appears to us that so far as Clause (b) of Section 04 is concernedp1 it specifically provides for appeals against orders made under Section 57 (8). Section 57 (8) deals with an application to vary the conditions of any permit by the inclusion of a new route or routes or a new area or, in the case of a stage ...
Ramchandra and Sons Private Ltd. and ors. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-08-1966
Reported in: [1966]36CompCas585(All)
D.P. Uniyal, J.1. These ten connected revisions involve the consideration of identical questions of law and I, therefore, propose to dispose of them by a single judgment.2. In nine of the above cases, three applicants who are a private limited company, managing director and director of the company, have been convicted under Section 220 of the Companies Act for committing default in filing with the Registrar copies of the balance-sheet and the profit and loss account of the company within 42 days of the holding of the annual general meeting. In the last mentioned case they have been convicted under Section 162 for not complying with the provisions of Section 159 which requires every company to file with the Registrar an annual return made by the company within the prescribed period.3. It is not denied--indeed it is admitted--that no general meeting of the company had been called and the balance-sheet and profit and loss account of the company had not been laid before it. It is also admi...
Plastic Products Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-08-1966
Reported in: AIR1967All160
Bhargava, C.J. 1. The question referred for our opinion is :--'Whether in the circumstances and on the facts of the case the litigation expenses amounting to Rs. 29,997 incurred by the appellant company for the protection of its cash resources was an expenditure allowable under Section 10(2)(xv)?' 2. The statement of the case and the judgment of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal show that the assessee was negotiating with Messrs Potta Engineers Ltd. Leeds, in United Kingdom (hereinafter referred to as the United Kingdom Company) for supply of moulds required in the manufacturing of plastic goods by the assessee. The United Kingdom Company brought a suit for damages against the assessee claiming that the assessee had committed breach of contract in respect of the purchase of the moulds. The suit was decreed by the Queens Bench Division for 8,410 as damages along with 2000 as costs. After the decision of the suit which took place on the 18th December 1953, there was a compromise between ...
Rani Ratnesh Kumari Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U. P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-08-1966
Reported in: [1966]62ITR830(All)
V. BHARAGAVA, C.J. - The question referred for our opinion is :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Malikana receipts constituted agricultural income within the meaning of section 2(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, and were therefore exempt from tax under section 4(3) (viii) of the said Act ?'The facts as found by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in its appellate judgment and as given in the statement of the case show that the assessee was receiving a sum of Rs. 8,947 as Malikana in respect of an estate of 133 villages, which had belonged to her predecessor-in-interest. The only point that arose was whether this amount, received as Malikana, was agricultural income, and, consequently, exempt from the applicability of the Income-tax Act.In the appellate order, quotations from various settlement report have been reproduced to show the circumstances under which this Malikana dues became payable. The reference made first is to a settlement report of the d...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »