Allahabad Court September 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.
Miss Hardevi Malkani Vs. State and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-12-1967
Reported in: AIR1969All423; 1969CriLJ1089
ORDERRajeshwari Prasad, J.1. This is a petition in revision filed by one Miss Hardevi Malkani.2. The petitioner was convicted for the offence under Section 499 punishable under Section 500 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for 20 days. That order of conviction was made by Sri Dinesh Chandra Verma, Judicial Officer Chhibra-mau, Fatehgarh,3. The petitioner filed an appeal before the Sessions Judge, Farrukhabad. The learned Sessions Judge partly allowed the appeal and while maintaining the order of conviction he reduced the sentence of fine of Rs. 500/- to Rs. 200/- only. The fine was made payable within 15 days. In default, the petitioner was ordered to undergo simple imprisonment as directed by the learned Magistrate.4. The prosecution of the petitioner was based upon a complaint filed by Nathoo Lal, Nathu Lal is the father of one Kumari Uma Rani. The petitioner is the Principal of Inter College for Girls,...
Maqbool Raza Ghaffar HussaIn Vs. Joint Director of Consolidation, U.P. ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-11-1967
Reported in: AIR1969All26
ORDER1. This reference arises out of consolidation proceedings. The consolidation authorities held that the fifth respondent Hasan Raza was the Adhiyasi of the land in dispute, being in possession of the same in the years 1356F and 1359F. The main question that arises for consideration in this case is whether it was open to the consolidation authorities to go into the question as to whether Hasan Raza was the Adhivasi or the Sirdar of the land in dispute once a compensation statement had been prepared under Section 240-D and had become final under Section 240J of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act), in which the petitioner, Maqbul Raza had been shown as the 'Adhivasi'.2. The submission of the petitioner is that in view of the provisions contained in Chapter IX-A of the Act once a compensation statement becomes final, the entry in it showing a particular person as 'Adhivasi' is conclusive. The case was referred to a larger Bench becaus...
Firozabad Glass and Chemical Industries Ltd. and anr. Vs. Income-tax O ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-07-1967
Reported in: [1969]72ITR775(All)
Jagdish Sahai, J. 1. In these two writ petitions common submissions have been made. We are, therefore, disposing them of by a common judgment. The petitioners in Civil Misc. Writ No. 901 of 1967 are the Firozabad Glass and Chemical Industries Ltd. and Sri Shrigopal Chandra, while in Civil Misc. Writ No. 902 of 1967 the petitioners are Firm Madan Mohan Damma Mal and Sri Shrigopal Chandra. In Civil Misc. Writ No. 901 of 1967 there are five respondents while in Civil Misc. Writ No, 902 of 1967 there are nine respondents. Respondents Nos. 1 to 5 in both the writ petitions are common. At the material time the petitioners were carrying on business in the town of Firozabad in the district of Agra.2. By means of these writ petitions a large number of orders are sought to be quashed. It is not necessary to mention all those documents. The main relief sought by the petitioners in the two writ petitions is that the assessment orders made against them for the assessment year 1962-63 be quashed,3. ...
Malik Singh Tirath Singh Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, U. P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-05-1967
Reported in: [1968]70ITR805(All)
PATHAK J. - This reference has been made at the instance of the assessee under section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1922.During the pendency of the reference, Sri V. P. Tewari entered appearance as counsel on this court. Notice was served upon the assessee accordingly, and an opportunity was given to engage another counsel to represent it in the case. The case has now come on the hearing, but the assessee is absent and nobody appears on behalf of the assessee.At the outset the question arises whether in the absence of the assessee, or any counsel engaged to represent it, it is obligatory upon the court to consider the statement of the case submitted by the Tribunal and to express its opinion upon the question of law referred to it.Sub-section (1) of section 66 provides for a reference to the High Court for its opinion upon the question or question of law referred to it. Sub-section (5) of section 66 provides.'The High Court upon the hearing of any such case shall decide the questions o...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›