Allahabad Court August 1967 Judgments
Vivekanand Nand Kishore Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-26-1967
Reported in: AIR1969All189; 1969CriLJ460
ORDERJ.N. Takru, J.1. Vivekanand has filed this revision against the revisional judgment and order of the learned Civil and Sessions Judge, Allahabad, rejecting his application praying for the dropping of the proceedings initiated against him under Sections 406, 420, 467 and 471, I. P. C.2. The facts giving rise to this revision lie within a narrow compass. It appears that the applicant presented an application before the Compensation Officer, Meja on the 19th, November. 1958 praying for the withdrawal of a sum of Rs. 80-98 P. which was payable as compensation to one Bans Bahadur. The application was accompanied by a Vakalatnama purporting to be signed by Bans Bahadur. The case for the prosecution is that the said Vakalatnama was forged by the applicant as Bans Bahadur had died some time before, and that after withdrawing Rs. 80.98 P. on the strength of it, he misappropriated the said sum. When the matter came to the knowledge of the A. D. M. (E), Allahabad he made a report to the Poli...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Ghulam Vs. Smt. Dalloo and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-26-1967
Reported in: AIR1969All409
A.K. Kirty, J.1. In this appeal by the plaintiff the point for consideration is whether the suit was barred by limitation. The two courts below have dismissed the suit holding that it had been filed beyond the period prescribed under Art 99 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1908.2. The material facts about which there is no controversy now are that there was a joint decree for money against the appellant and respondent No. 1 in execution of which some property belonging to the appellant was sold; that on 28-1-1954 the appellant filed an application under order XXI, Rule 89, C. P. C. and deposited Rs. 1751/-; that the sale was set aside by the executing court by an order dated 6-2-1954; that the appellant would be entitled to a decree for Rupees 1439/- by way of contribution from respondent No. 1 if the suit is not barred by limitation and the decision of the courts below dismissing the suit as barred by limitation is wrong. The courts below have held that the starting point of limitation u...
Tag this Judgment!Chhotey Lal, Kanpur Vs. Income Tax Officer and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-24-1967
Reported in: AIR1968All273; [1968]69ITR709(All)
Dwivedi, J. 1. The facts giving rise to this appeal are these :-- There was a business firm known as Niranjan Lal Ghanshyam Das. The firm was doing business at Daranagar in the District of Allahabad. It had five partners. The appellant was one of them. It was dissolved on April 11, 1948.2. The firm was assessed to income tax for the assessment year 1948-49 on February 2, 1950. On January 17 1951 a penalty of Rs. 6,000 was imposed on the firm under Section 28 of the Income Tax Act 1922 (hereinbelow called the Act). The penalty was not paid, and on November 12, 1961 the Income Tax Officer imposed a penalty of Rs. 600 for default in payment of the penalty imposed under Section 28. The appellant was then asked to pay the amount of the second penalty He protested and filed a writ petition in this Court. The petition was dismissed on merits by a learned single Judge; hence this appeal.3. Counsel for the appellant has challenged the validity of the imposition of a penalty on a penalty. Counse...
Tag this Judgment!Shyam Lal Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-23-1967
Reported in: AIR1969All183; 1969CriLJ456
ORDERJ.N. Takru, J.1. This criminal reference has been made by the learned Sessions Judge of Mathura in the following circumstances.2. According to the prosecution, Nur Singh Dutt. Head Constable, and the other prosecution witnesses saw Shyam Lal accused writing down some numbers on a piece of paper and Har Prasad accused offering two annas on number 98, When the latter saw the police they took to their heels. They were, however, arrested and from the possession of Shyam Lal two parchas with some numbers written on them, two pieces of cardboard, a pencil, and Rs. 2.25 were recovered, while from the possession of Har Prasad eight annas were recovered. On these allegations Shvam Lal and Har Prasad were prosecuted under Section 13 of the Gambling Act and were convicted and sentenced to a fine of Rs. 150 in default to one month's R. I. each. As the case was tried summarily Shyam Lal went up in revision to the Sessions Judge, Mathura, who feeling satisfied that the examination of the accuse...
Tag this Judgment!Satyesh Dutt Misra Vs. Munnoo Devi Kahar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-21-1967
Reported in: AIR1968All362
Jagdish Sahai, J.1. This is an application made by Sri Satyesh Dutt Misra (hereinafter called the applicant) for the stay of the execution of the ejectment part of the decree until the review application made by the applicant has been disposed oi.2. Our brother, Lakshmi Prasad, had dismissed a second appeal filed by the applicant on the ground that no question of law was involved in that appeal. The only question that was urged before Lakshmi Prasad, J. was whether the house in dispute was constructed in 1960 or earlier He was of the opinion that the question was one of pure fact. He felt himself bound by the finding recorded by the first appellate Court that it was constructed in 1951. After the judgment had been sealed and signed on 26th July, 1967, the applicant made an application for the review of that judgment on 4th of August, 1967. The ground on which the review application is founded is that a learned single Judge of this Court (Dhawan J.) has in Khiva Ram v. Prabha Devi, 1965...
Tag this Judgment!Ganga Ram Vs. A.S.D.O., Etamadpur, Firozabad, Agra and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-1967
Reported in: AIR1968All353
Oak, C.J.1. This Special Appeal arises out of proceedings under the U.P. Panchayat Raj Act. Ganga Ram was the Pradhan of Gaon Sabha or Dharera in tahsil Etmadpur, district Agra. Shri Verma was the Additional Sub-Divisional Officer. Etmadpur. He passed an order suspending Ganga Ram from the office of Praddhan of the Gaon Sabha. Ganga Ram filed a writ petition challenging the order of suspension. The writ petition has been dismissed by a learned single Judge of this Court. Ganga Ram has, therefore, filed the present special appeal.2. The sole point urged before us by Mr. K. C. Saxena appearing for the appellant is that Shri Verma had no power to pass any such order suspending a Pradhan of a Gaon Sabha. Chap. VII of the Panchayat Raj Act deals with external control. According to Clause (g) of Sub-section (1) of Section 95 of the Act, the State Government may suspend or remove a member of a Gaon Panchayat or an office bearer of a Gaon Sabha. Section 96-A of the Act empowers the State Gover...
Tag this Judgment!K.B. Sharma S/O Sri Ram Swarup Vs. Transport Commissioner, U.P., Luckn ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-16-1967
Reported in: AIR1968All276; (1969)IILLJ594All
ORDERLakshmi Prasad, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The petitioner was a Stenographer in the office of the Transport Commissioner. By an orderdated March, 31, 1953, he was allowed to officiate as Head Clerk superseding some of his seniors. Uma Prasad Saxena, H. C. Pande II and D. D. Joshi were already then officiating as Head Clerks. In the year 1961 there fell a permanent vacancy in the office of the Head Clerk. Then arose the question as to which of the officiating Head Clerks was to be confirmed. After taking into consideration the relative, merits of all the four namely the petitioner and the above named three officiating Head Clerks, it was decided on 15-4-1961 that the petitioner be allowed to be confirmed with effect from 9-5-1960 superseding his above named three seniors Sarvasri Uma Prasad Saxena. H. C. Pande II and D. D. Joshi. It has been stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that subsequent to the confirmation of the petitioner his...
Tag this Judgment!Sheshnath Vs. Regional Transport Authority, Gorakhpur and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-16-1967
Reported in: AIR1968All355
Satish Chandra, J.1. The petitioner was appointed as a bus conductor in the Uttar Pradesh Government Roadways. In respect of certain incidents that happened on 31-3 1963 the petitioner was charge-sheeted. He was asked to explain them and ultimately the that ter was reported to the Regional Transport Authority The matter was taken up by the Authority on 6-8-1966 in the presence of the petitioner. Ultimately, the Authority resolved to disqualify the petitioner from holding of obtaining a conductor's licence in Uttar Pradesh for a period of six months from the date of enforcement of this order in his licence It was further resolved that the General Manager, U. P. Government Roadways, be requested to take strict disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner. This order was passed under Section 21-F of the Motor Vehicles Act, Sub-section (4) of Section 21-F runs as follows:--'Any person aggrieved by an order made under Sub-section (1) may, within thirty days of the service on him of the o...
Tag this Judgment!Nathu Ram Vs. Smt. Atar Kunwar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-14-1967
Reported in: AIR1969All191; 1969CriLJ517
ORDERGangeshwar Prasad, J.1. This is a reference by the Civil and Sessions Judge of Orai recommending that the order of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Jalaun dated 4-1-1965 by which he directed payment of maintenance allowance to a wife in a proceeding under Section 488 Cr. P. C. be set aside and the application for the allowance be rejected.2. The claimant is Smt. Atar Kunwar and she claimed maintenance from her husband, Nathu Ram, for herself and for her two children. The claim was contested by Nathu Ram who, while admitting that the claimant was his wife, denied that she was entitled to maintenance. After taking the evidence of the parties, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Jalaun granted to the claimant an allowance of Rs. 30/- per month from the date of the application. Against this order Nathu Ram filed an application in revision in the Court of Session, and that has led to the reference.3. Admittedly, Smt. Atar Kunwar was married to Nathu Ram about eight years before the commenceme...
Tag this Judgment!Ahmad Ali and ors. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-10-1967
Reported in: 1969CriLJ833
ORDERRajeshwari Prasad, J.1. This petition in revision has been filed by four persons Ahmad Ali Arsh Mohammad (son of Maqtool), Aas Mohammad (son of Bhurey) and Habib. These petitioners along with others were convicted and sentenced for offences under Sections 399 and 402, Indian Penal Code, by Sri S. S. Agrawal, Assistant Sessions Judge, Meerut on 5th December 1964. Some of the present petitioners along with others were also convicted for offence under Section 25, Arms Act.2. There was an appeal from that order of conviction before the learned Session Judge, Meerut which was dismissed on 24th March 1965. Jail appeals in that connection were also dismissed.3. Sardar Noor Khan (P. W. 1) Station Officer, police station Ghaziabad received information at about 8 P.M. on the 5th March 1964 through an informer that the gang of dacoit Aas Mohammad of Bulandshahr were preparing to commit dacoity at the house of one Niaz Ali Patwari of village Mirzapur in the district of Bulandshahr. He also ca...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »