Allahabad Court February 1967 Judgments
State of U.P. Vs. Moti Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-24-1967
Reported in: AIR1968All83
Uniyal, J. 1. This is a Government Appeal against the order of the Civil and Sessions Judge, Deoria acquitting the accused-respondents Moti, Shyam Dutt, Kanhai and Bhardul of the offence under Section 302/34. I. P. C.2. The prosecution story as disclosed in the first information report lodged by Sukhari deceased was as follows: One Smt. Bilari, alleged that she was the sister of Sukhari's father and asserted her title to cultivatory holdings inherited by Sukhari from his father. It was alleged that Shyam Dutt accused was doing pairvi in that suit on behalf of Smt. Bilari as against Sukhari. Shyam Dutt had also appeared as a witness for Smt Bilari in that case. It was alleged that the remaining three accused Moti, Kanhai and Bhardul were helpers and supporters of Shyam Dutt who was the Pradhan of the village. Shyam Dutt had threatened Sukhari with dire consequences several times. On the night between the 25th and 26th September 1963 Sukhari was sleeping outside his house on a cot. At a ...
Tag this Judgment!Pt. Sheo Nath Prasad Sharma Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Lucknow, a ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-24-1967
Reported in: [1967]66ITR647(All)
The petitioner, Sheo Nath Prasad Sharma, has been assessed to income-tax for the assessment years 1944-45, 1945-46 and 1946-47 by assessment orders, all made on July 31, 1950. He challenges the validity of those assessment orders and of the recovery proceedings taken consequent thereto. He proceeded in revision under section 33A(2) to the Commissioner of Income-tax against the assessment orders, and he has also challenged the orders of the Commissioner declining to interfere.Pandit Deo Sharma, elder brother of the petitioner, was a working partner in the firm Messrs. L. N. Gadodia Cawnpore Cotton Mills Agency, which had been appointed as the sole selling agent of the Cawnpore Cotton Mills, Kanpur. As a working partner he was entitled to a one-fourth share in the profits of the firm. Pandit Deo Sharma was also employed to manage a retail cloth shop of the Cawnpore Cotton Mills and was paid a one-fourth share in the net profits accruing to the retail shop.On November 14, 1942, Pandit Deo...
Tag this Judgment!Nagar Das Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U. P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-23-1967
Reported in: [1967]66ITR203(All)
JAGDISH SAHAI J. - At the instance of the assessee, Sri Nagar Das (hereinafter referred to as the assessee), the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay Bench (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal), has submitted statement of the case and refereed the following question of law for the opinion of this court under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the sum of Rs. 6,000 forming part of the sum of Rs. 9,334 being Nagar Dass share of profits in the firm of Hari Prasad Ram Kishan is liable to be taxed in the hands of his Hindu undivided family ?'The reference arises out of the assessment made upon the Hindu undivided family of Nagar Das for the assessment year 1959-60, the accounting year being the year ending Kuar Sudi 9, Samvat 2015. Originally the assessees family had also some other branches joint with it. A partial partition took place in that family some time in the year 19...
Tag this Judgment!U.P. Govt. Through Secy. Home Dept., U.P. Civil Secretariat, Lucknow V ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-1967
Reported in: AIR1968All20; 1968CriLJ7
R. Chandra, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal, and arises out of a suit for declaration.2. Kama Kant Shukla filed the suit alleging that on 20th July 1954, he was posted as a constable at police station Gur Buxganj, district Rae Barcili and was charged by the District Superintendent of Police, that he between 5th and 7th September. 1953 assisted S. O Agya Ram Tewari in extorting a bribe of Rs. 660 from nine persons, in the murder case of Sheo Ram Lodh. As a result of the departmental trial held under Section 7 of the Police Ad. the Superintendent of Police on 10-11-1954, recommended for his reduction to the lowest grade for three years. The Deputy Inspector General issued notice to show cause why the punishment be not enhanced to dismissal. Thereupon he (the plaintiff) submitted his explanation, but the same was rejected, and he was dismissed from service on 21-5-1955 He also filed an appeal to the Inspector General of Police but it was dismissed on 9-9-1955. It was said that serious i...
Tag this Judgment!Farzand Vs. Mohan Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-1967
Reported in: AIR1968All67; (1970)ILLJ241All
ORDERSatish Chandra, J. 1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeks an information in the nature of quo warranto requiring Sri Mohan Singh Munsif, Banda, the first respondent to show cause by what authority he is holding the office of Munsif.2. The petitioner is one of the defendants to a suit for specific performance of a contract of sale instituted by respondent Nos 2 and 3 against the petitioner who is alleged to be a subsequent, purchaser and respondent No. 4, the vendor The suit was filed on 6th of August, 1966, and is pending before Sri Mohan Singh Munsif, the first respondent Sri Mohan Singh was appointed as a temporary Munsif on 1-3-1961 under the U P Civil Service (Judicial Branch) Rules 1951 The petitioner challenges the constitutional validity of these rules. It is urged that the rules being in violation of the mandatory provisions of the Constitution are void and of no legal effect and appointments made thereunder to the Judicial Service of the State are il...
Tag this Judgment!Dalchand Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-1967
Reported in: AIR1969All216; 1969CriLJ585
Mahesh Chandra, J.1. Appellant Dalchand has been convicted under Section 366, I.P.C., and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years and also to pay a fine of Rs. 100 and in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of four months. He has also been convicted under Section 376, I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 100 and in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of four months. The sentences are to run concurrently.2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case was this: At about 9 p.m. on 16-3-1964 Kumari Jeet Kaur, aged about five years, was playing outside the house of her father Jogendra Singh. Dalchand, appellant, came to the house and knocked at the door and was informed by Jogendra Singh's wife Smt. Harbans Kaur that Jogendra Singh had gone to the bazar. The appellant then remained sitting near the wall of the ho...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax, Lucknow Vs. Rameshwar Prasad BaglA.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-1967
Reported in: [1968]68ITR653(All)
JAGDISH SAHAI J. - In compliance with the directions of this court under section 66(2) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay Bench (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal) has submitted the statement of case and referred the following questions of law for the opinion of this court :'(i) Whether there was material for the finding that the shares in question were purchased by the assessee with a view to acquire the managing agency and the control of the company or the shares constituted his stock-in-trade (ii) Even if the shares in question did not constitute the stock-in-trade of 'the assessee', whether the profit made on the sale of shares did not constitute capital gain chargeable to income-tax under section 12B of the Act. ?'The assessment year with which we are concerned in this reference is 1947-48. The accounting year is Dessera 2002-2003, corresponding to October 16, 1945, to October 5, 1946.The asse...
Tag this Judgment!Hindustan Metal Works and Others Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax U. P. ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-1967
Reported in: [1968]68ITR798(All)
DWIVEDI J. - These petitions are connected together as they raise a common question of law. A learned Single Judge, before whom these petitions were listed for hearing, has referred them to a large Bench for decision. They have been listed before us for hearing.In the Petition No. 3605, the petitioners are : (1) Hindustan Metal Works (hereinafter called the firm), (2) Mrs. Uma Lal, (3) Mr. Tarachand Agrawal and (4) Mr. Jawahar Lal; the respondents are (1) The Commissioner of Income-tax, U. P., and eight Income-tax Officers. One of the Income-tax Officers is of Meerut, two of Aligarh and five of Agra. The Superintendent of Police, Aligarh, is the tenth respondent.In the Writ Petition No. 3606, the only petitioner is Sri Ram Babu Lal. The respondents are the same as the respondents in the first writ petition.In the Writ Petition No. 3607, the sole petitioner is the Bijli Cotton Mills (P.) Ltd., Hathras (hereinafter called the company). The respondents are the same as in the first petitio...
Tag this Judgment!Jawahar Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-10-1967
Reported in: AIR1968All87; 1968CriLJ230
ORDERGangeshwar Prasad, J. 1. This application in revision raises the question whether an Additional District Magistrate can sanction a prosecution under Section 39 of the Arms Act without being empowered by the State Government to do so.2. The applicant was convicted under Section 25 of the Arms Act by the trying Magistrate and his conviction was upheld by the Sessions Judge. It is not in dispute that the sanction on the basis of which the prosecution started had been given by an Additional District Magistrate, and the learned Assistant Government Advocate has, after enquiry, state before me that the Additional District Magistrate, who sanctioned the prosecution, had not been directed or empowered by the State Government to Act under Section 39 of the Arms Act.3. The contention of the learned counsel for the applicant is that the Additional District Magistrate was incompetent to accord the sanction This point was raised before the trying Magistrate as well, but he took the view that s...
Tag this Judgment!Ali Jan Iman Ali and anr. Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-07-1967
Reported in: AIR1968All28; 1968CriLJ9
G.D. Sahgal, J.1. Ali Jan and Mahadeo, residents of village Birampur, Police Station Mitauli in the district of Kheri who were tried along with eight other persons have both been convicted for offences under Sections 399 & 402 of the Indian Penal Code and S. 25(1)(a) of the Arms Act, the other co-accused being acquitted. For the offence under Section 399 they have each been sentenced to seven years' rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 402 to five years' rigorous imprisonment and for the offence under Section 25(1)(a) of the Arms Act to 2 years' rigorous imprisonment, the sentences being ordered to run concurrently.2. The prosecution case is that on the 13th of April, 1964 at about 6.45 P. M. Sub-Inspector V. D. Yadav (P. W. 15), Station Officer in charge Police Station Mitauli, received information from an informant that a dacoity was going to be committed at the house of one Paragi Gadaria in village Bojhia and that a gang of dacoits would collect for the purpose in th...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »