Allahabad Court May 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.
Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Ghasi Ram Laxmi Narain
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-11-1966
Reported in: AIR1967All546
S.N. Katju, J. 1. These are two appeals preferred by the defendant the Union of India, Second Appeal No. 1063 of 1959 arises out of suit No. 684 of 1956 which was instituted by the joint family firm of Messrs Prabhu Lal Ram Ratan Das through its Karta Sri Deoki Nandan. It prayed for an injuction res train ins the defendant from realising a sum of Rs. 1091/8/. from the plaintiff Second Appeal No. 1062 of 1959 arises out of suit No. 736 of 1956 which was instituted by Messrs Ghasi Ram Laxmi Narain through Sri Ghasi Ram praying for a permanent injunction restraining the defendant from realising Rs. 2845/4/- from the plaintiff firm The plaintiffs in both the suits were dealers in tobacco and they sold tobacco under permits obtained from the Central Excise Department, Agra, to Messrs Ram Lal Jagannath, dealers in tobacco at Jhansi. It was alleged that duty of-/6/- per lb was paid on the aforesaid goods in accordance with law, but subsequently on 21-3-1956 notices were issued to the plaintif...
Amba Prasad and ors. Vs. Jaswant Sugar Mills Ltd. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-10-1966
Reported in: AIR1967All146; (1966)IILLJ702All
Jagdish Sahai, J.1. This special appeal by Amba Prasad and 27 others is directed against the judgment of J. K. Tandon, J. dated 9-12-1960, allowing writ petition No. 1921 of 1959 filed by the respondent No. 1, M/s Jaswant Sugar Mills Limited, Meerut (hereinafter referred to as the Mills).2. The appellants approached the Authority under the Payment of Wages Act (hereinafter referred to as the Authority) under Section 15 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1936 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on the allegation that they were entitled to certain amount of money as retaining allowance which had not been paid to them by the mills. By means of the order dated 15-6-1959, the Authority awarded certain sums to each one of the 28 appellants.3. The mills then filed writ petition No. 1921 of 1959 in this Court and prayed for the quashing of the order dated 15-6-1959 of the Authority. The writ petition was heard by J. K. Tandon J., who allowed it and quashed the order dated 15-6-1959 passed by the Au...
State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. K.K. Modi and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-09-1966
Reported in: AIR1968All197; (1968)IILLJ164All
M.H. Beg, J. 1. This is an appeal by the State against the acquittal of K. K. Modi, the 'Occupier', and Balwant Singh Birdi,the Manager, of Modi Hurricane Lantern Factory, Modinagar, Meerut from charges for breaches of Sections 52 and 63 of the Factories Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and Rule 78 of the U. P. Factories Rules, 1950, read with Section 62 of the Act. 2. The respondents were prosecuted upon a complaint filed by the Chief Inspector of Factories, U. P., in the court of the District Magistrate, Meerut, which was ultimately disposed of by a First Class Magistrate of Ghaziabad who acquitted the respondents of all the charges levelled against them. According to the complaint, P. C. Joshi P. W. 1, Inspector of Factories, Meerut, visited the factory of the respondents at 2.30 P. M. on Sunday, the 4th of November, 1962, and found that 8 workers were working at that time without the delivery of a notice at the office of the Inspector of Factories. Meerut, by the Ma...
Shesh NaraIn Dikshit Vs. Smt. Savitri
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-09-1966
Reported in: AIR1967All156
V.G. Oak, J.1. This is an appeal under the Hindu Marriage Act. Shesh Narain Dikshit filed a petition against Smt. Savitri Devi for judicial separation under Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The petition was dismissed by the learned Judge, Small Cause Court, Kanpur on 23-12-1957. This appeal by Shesh Narain Dikshit is directed against that judgment and decree, dated 23-12-1957.2. Mr. H. N. Seth appearing for the respondent has raised a preliminary objection that the appeal is incompetent. He points out that the judgment under appeal was given by a Small Cause Court. He pointed out that under the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act no appeal lies from a decision of a court of Small Causes (Section 27 of Provincial Small Cause Courts Act).3. The learned counsel for the appellant relies upon Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act states :'All decrees and orders made by court in any proceeding under this Act shall be enforced in like manner as the decr...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›