Allahabad Court December 1967 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 Murti Vs. Sri Subedar and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-1967
Reported in: AIR1969All65
Katju, J. 1. The appellant Ram Murti has preferred this appeal against the order of the District Judge, Pilibhit, sitting as an Election Tribunal, declaring that the election of the appellant as the Adhyaksh of Zila Parishad, Pilibhit was void and that the office of the said Adhyaksh was still vacant. 2. The election for the office of Adhyaksh, Zila Parishad Pilibhit took place in November 1963. 25-11-1963 was the last date for filing nominations when the nomination papers of the appellant Ram Murti, the first respondent Subedar and the second respondent Ganga Prakash were filed. At the scrutiny of the nomination papers the Returning Officer rejected the nomination papers of Subedar under Section 13(c) of the U. P. Kshettra Samitis and Zila Parishads Adhiniyam (U. P. Act 33 of 1961), hereinafter referred to as the Act, on the ground that he being a Sarpanch was disqualified for being elected as the Adhyaksh of the Zila Parishad. The nomination paper of the second respondent was also re...
Raja Yuveraj Datt Singh Vs. Prescribed Authority, Tahsil Lakhimpur and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-08-1967
Reported in: AIR1968All305
Jagdish Sahai, J. 1. This case has beenlaid before this Full Bench on a reference madeby a Division Bench. 2. Raja Yuveraj Datt Singh of Oel is a Bhumidhar within the meaning of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act (hereinafter referred to as the U. P. Z. A. and L. R. Act) as also a tenure-holder of a large number of plots within the meaning of the U. P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act. 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). He is said to have been possessed of 2510.96 acres of land. He made certain transfers., from the land held by him after the 20th of August 1959. 3. In connection with the proceedings under the Act, admittedly he filed no statement under Section 9 of the Act. The Prescribed Authority proceeded itgainst him under Section ,10 of the Act and iprerJared a statement. A notice in C. L. H. Form 4 was issued to Raja Yuveraj Datt Singh who filed objections to the statement and stated clearly in his objections thai he wanted to retain plots situat...
Abdul Wahid Khan Habibullah Khan and ors. Vs. Deputy Director of Conso ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-08-1967
Reported in: AIR1968All402
Jagdish Sahai, J.1. This writ petition has come to us for decision on I reference made by N. U. Beg, C. J. and S. N. Dwivedi, J. By means of the writ petition it is prayed that the orders passed by the Settlement Officer, Consolidation dated 4-6-1960 and the one passed by the Deputy Director, Consolidation dated 2-11-1960 be quashed. There is also a prayer for the issue of any other writ, order or direction as this Court may, in the circumstances of the case, deem it fit and proper to issue.2. The dispute between the parties relates to plot No. 1261/14 area 50 decimal, situate in village Shahpur, pergana Ungli, District Jaunpur. This village came under consolidation operations some time in the year 1956. Lautu, the respondent No. 4 to this petition made an application under Section 8(3) of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The Assistant Consolidation Officer passed an order on 8-10-1957 holding that Lautu was in possession over the plot in di...
Tahir Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-05-1967
Reported in: 1969CriLJ682
S.D. Singh, J.1. This and the connected Appeal No. 912 of 1965 arise out of a dacoity which was committed at 1.30 A. M. on 5th August, 1964, at the house of one Balram in village Khilwara. Report about the occurrence (Ex. Ka-1) was made at police station Jansath by 5 A.M. by Balram, Five persons were prosecuted for having committed this dacoity, but two out of them, namely Chhota and Tufail, were acquitted by the Sessions Judge. The three appellants Tahir, Khalil and Saghir were identified by several witnesses and were consequently Convicted and sentenced to seven years rigor-Bus imprisonment under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code.2. Tahir's case was that after his arrest, he was taken to police station Bhopa and shown to the witnesses there, that he was then brought to police station Jansath and even shown to the witnesses there and thereafter sent to the District Jail. Curiously enough, the prosecution did not examine the two constables, Sumatvir Singh and Ram Kishan, who arreste...
Bisram Singh and ors. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-04-1967
Reported in: AIR1969All521; 1969CriLJ1332
ORDERS.D. Singh, J.1. The applicants Bisram Singh, Bahadur Singh, Mahinder Singh, Gangadin and Sobaran Singh were convicted by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Mainpuri, two of them under Section 148 and the other three under Section 147 and all of them under Section 307 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. Bisram Singh and Bahadur Singh who were convicted under Section 148 have been sentenced to two years rigorous imprisonment thereunder and the other three who have been convicted under Section 147 to one year's rigorous imprisonment and all of them have been sentenced to four years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 307 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The applicants went up in appeal which was dismissed by the Sessions Judge andhence this application in revision bythem.2. There was an occurrence at about 8 a.m. on 23rd September, 1963. Saheb Singh's calf was let loose and had gone to the cattle trough of Bisram Singh and others to which objection was raised ...
Syed Niyaz Ahmad and anr. Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-04-1967
Reported in: AIR1968All430
ORDERSatish Chandra, J.1. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India it is prayed that the Nagar Mahapalika, Varanasi, and the State of Uttar Pradesh be directed to continue to enforce the Nagar Mahapalika Octroi Rules, 1965, and not to give effect to the Transit Pass Rules notified on 18-7-1963.2. The Municipal Board of Varanasi had adopted the system of refundable octroi Under it octroi was charged on all goods entering the municipal limits, but if some of those goods were immediately exported, a proportion of the octroi was refunded. In or about 1953 the State Government promulgated the Transit Pass Rules to regulate the passage of goods in transit through the territories of the Municipal Board. These rules were amended from time to time. In 1960, the Municipal Board became the Nagar Mahapalika, Varanasi. The pre-existing rules continued in force. The Nagar Mahapalika resolved to abolish the refundable octroi and to impose in its place non-refundable octroi. It ...
The State of U.P. Vs. Chandrapal Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-04-1967
Reported in: 1968CriLJ1342
R. Chandra, J.1. This is an appeal by the State, under Sections 417 and 423 of the Criminal P.C., against the acquittal of the respondents, on the charge under Section 147, Penal Code. On 8.11.1963, Mahabir Singh lodged the first in. formation report under Section 323 lead with Section 323 of the Penal Code. The police after due investigation submitted the charge sheet against the respondents for the offences under Sections 147, 323 and 506, Penal Code. The Magistrate who tried the case, framed the charges only under Sections 147 and 323 read with Section 149, Penal Code. No evidence was recorded in the case. The parties filed a compromise, and the Magistrate under his order dated 5th February, 1985, acquitted the accused of both the charges with the following observations:.The offence under Section 323, Penal Code is compoundable without permission and presents no difficulty.Regarding the offence under Section 147, Penal Code which is not compoundable parties have been heard at length...
Ram Dass Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-01-1967
Reported in: AIR1969All109
ORDERS.D. Singh, J. 1. This application in revision arises out of a prosecution under Section 16 read with Section 7(1) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (XXXVII of 1954)2. At about 7-30 a. m. on 25th March, 1965, the Food Inspector K. P. Batish of Hapur Municipality in district Meerut took a sample of milk from the shop of the applicant Ram Dass. He purchased 12 chhataks of milk for 51 n. p. and sealed and signed it in three phials, one of which was given to the applicant, the other retained in the office of the Hapur Municipality and the third sent to the Public Analyst for examination and report. The Public Analyst found, as is indicated by his report Ex. Ka. 3, that the sample was deficient in non-fatty solids to the extent of 21 %, the standard applied being that for mixed cow and buffalo milk the mixture of the two milks being supposed to be half and half. The applicant was consequently prosecuted under Section 16 read with Section 7(1) of the aforesaid Act. He was convi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›