Allahabad Court October 1968 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.
Pritam Singh Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-16-1968
Reported in: AIR1969All513; 1969CriLJ1329
Tripathi, J.1. This revision has come up before us on a reference made by our learned brother Seth, J.2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass:--Applicant Pritam Singh and opposite party Raghubir Singh were employed in the railway workshop at Khanalampura in the district of Saharanpur. Applicant is a Sikh and Raghubir Singh belongs to Scheduled Caste. On 25th March, 1966, at about 9 P. M. it is alleged that the applicant while driving a trolley trampled over the foot of the complainant When the complainant protested he was beaten by the applicant with a broken axle causing injuries on his chest and waist. Raghubir Singh lodged a report at police station Khanalampura, got himself medically examined and filed a complaint in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, Saharanpur against the applicant on 26th of March, 1966, under Sections 323 and 504 I. P. C. The Magistrate examined the complainant under Section 200 Cr. P. C. and after taking some evidence under Section 202 of the Code ...
Deoki Nandan Vs. M.L. Gupta, Sales Tax Officer
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-16-1968
Reported in: [1969]23STC481(All)
R.L. Gulati, J.1. This and the connected writ petitions are being disposed of by this common order as they are of the same petitioner and raise identical questions. The petitioner in all these writ petitions is one Sri Deoki Nandan, who carries on business of sarrafa and pawning at Lakhna in the district Etawah under the name and style of Hulas Rai Raghunandan Lal.2. On 30th January, 1966, Sri M. L. Gupta, Sales Tax Officer, Etawah, made a raid at the business premises of the petitioner to search and seize the books of accounts and other documents connected with the business activities of the petitioner. There is considerable controversy as to what exactly happened at the time of the search and seizure. According to the petitioner, all books of accounts including those pertaining to the business of pawning were indiscriminately seized and carried away by the raiding party which included Sri M. L. Gupta, Sales Tax Officer, Etawah, Servasri K. C. Saxena and A. H. Rizvi, Assistant Sales T...
Hind Auto Indo Ltd. Vs. Premier Motors (P) Ltd. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-15-1968
Reported in: AIR1970All165
ORDERM.H. Beg, J.1. This is an application by a company under Section 391(1) of the Companies Act which has given rise to preliminary questions at the outset before the issue of any notice either to the Central Government under Section 394-A or to the share-holders of the company. Mr. Jagdish Swarup, learned counsel for the applicant company, submitted that no notice at this stage need be given either to the Central Government or to the share-holders because all that was prayed for, by means of summons in Form 33, was a set of directions for convening, holding and conducting of meetings after the appointment of a chairman for the consideration of a scheme by equity and preference share-holders of the company. It was submitted that neither the Central Government nor the share-holders had a locus standi before meetings had been convened and had considered the proposed amalgamation of the company with M/s. Automobile Products of India Ltd., Bombay.2. Mr. S.N. Kacker has appeared on behalf...
Hakim Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-14-1968
Reported in: AIR1970All151
Jagdish Sahai, J.1. in all these writ petitions the question involved is the same, i.e., whether a notification under Sub-section (4) of Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act) can be issued if a notification under Section 17(1) of the Act has not already been issued. Since that is the only question * raised in these petitions, Instead of a question being referred to us, the petitions have been referred to us for decision.2. Desai, C. J. and R. N. Sharma, J. In Sheikh Ghulam Maula v. State of U. P., 1964 All LJ 928 - (AIR 1964 All 353) took the view that a notification under Section 17(4) of the Act without there being an earlier notification under Section 17(1) of the Act would be invalid.3. Section 17 so far as it is relevant for our purposes reads:--'17(1) in cases of urgency, whenever the appropriate Government so directs, the Collector, though no such award has been made, may, on the 'expiration of fifteen days' from the publication of the...
Maharaja Dharmendra Prasad Singh and anr. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh a ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-11-1968
Reported in: AIR1969All484
Sahai, J.1. This case has come to us on a reference made by a Division Bench of this Court consisting of two of us. (Lakshmi Prasad and Gur Sharan Lal, JJ.).2. In First Appeal No. 29 of 1961 the Stamp Reporter reported a deficiency of Rs. G632.50 in Court fee. The report of the Stamp Reporter was contested by the learned counsel for the appellant before the Taxing Officer (Deputy Registrar). The Taxing Officer held by means of an order dated 5-9-1961 that the report of the Stamp Reporter was correct and in fact there was a deficiency of Rs. 6632.50. He however allowed a month's time to the appellant to make good the deficiency. A request was made to the Taxing Officer to make a reference to the Judge appointed by the Chief Justice to decide generally references made by the Taxing Officer under Section 5 of the Act, hereinafter called the Taxing Judge, (Sahgal, J.). This, the Taxing Officer refused to do. Dissatisfied with the refusal of the Taxing Officer to make a reference to the Tax...
Concrete Spun Pipe Works Vs. Sales Tax Officer
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-10-1968
Reported in: [1969]24STC48(All)
R.S. Pathak, J.1. The petitioner is a partnership firm carrying on the business of manufacturing and selling reinforced cement concrete spun pipes. It was assessed for the assessment years 1962-63, 1963-64 and 1964-65 under the U.P. Sales Tax Act in respect of its turnover of those years. The Sales Tax Officer, who made the assessment, applied a rate of 2 per cent, to the turnover for the purposes of determining the tax liability. On 27th February, 1968, a notice under . 22 of the Act was issued by the Sales Tax Officer informing the petitioner that in his view the spun pipes sold by the petitioner fell under the description 'sanitary fittings' and that, therefore, instead of the rate of 2 per cent., the turnover attracted the rate of 7 per cent and that be proposed to rectify the assessment for the three assessment years. The petitioner challenges the jurisdiction of the Sales Tax Officer to issue the notice under section 22 of the Act and to take proceedings consequent thereto.2. It ...
Bhagwan Das Vs. Northern Railway (by Chief Mechanical Engineer, Headqu ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-07-1968
Reported in: (1970)ILLJ237All
Jagdish Sahai, J.1. This special appeal by Bhagwan Das is directed against the Judgment of B.N. Nigam, J., dated 23 March 1966, dismissing Writ Petition No. 379 of 1964, filed by the appellant.2. The appellant was in the service of the Union of India in the capacity of storekeeper in the Northern Railway. He was posted at Lucknow in the year 1951. A shortage of white metal in his charge was discovered in that year. He was departmentally chargesheeted on 9 June, 1951, but, before the departmental enquiry could proceed any far, a criminal prosecution was launched against him the Court of Sessions. On 29 October 1954 he was acquitted by the Sessions Judge of Lucknow. On 6 April 1955 the appellant received a show case notice issued by the works manager, Workshops, Alambagh Northern Railway, Lucknow, in connexion with the departmental proceedings that were going on against him. He submitted an explanation, but the name was rejected by means of an order dated 30 May 1955. In this order it wa...
Radha Vilas Karyalaya, Varanasi Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax, Luckno ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-07-1968
Reported in: [1969]71ITR279(All)
V. G. OAK C.J. - The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, has referred the following two questions of law to this court.'(1) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, and having regard to the deed executed by the assessee on August 13, 1936, the whole of the income from the business styled as Radha Vilas Karyalaya is the income of the assessee and assessable in its hands or that half of the income belongs to a separate trusts styled as Sri Ram-Lakshman-Janki ?(2) Whether the order passed by the Tribunal dated July 8, 1958, under the signature of four of its members is valid in law ?'This reference governs six assessment years, viz., 1951-52, 1952-53, 1953-54, 1954-55, 1955-56 and 19956-57. For the first five assessment years, Sita Ram, deceased, was assessed as an individual. He died on April 1, 1955. An association of persons under the style of M/s. Radha Vilas Karyalaya was assessed for the 6th assessment year 1956-57. For the same assessment year 1956-57, Sita ...
Smt. Rohini Kumari Vs. Narendra Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-05-1968
Reported in: AIR1970All102
Rajeshwari Prasad, J.1. This second appeal has come up before us on account of an order of reference made by Hon. Asthana, J. when the second appeal was listed before him for hearing.2. The second appeal arises out of proceedings under Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and is directed against the order of the learned Civil Judge, Hamirpur, which was confirmed in appeal by the Distract Judge, Banda.3. The respondent Sri Narendra Singh happened to be Yuvraj of the estate known as 'Sarela Estate' and he was married to the appellant, who is the daughter of Maharaj Kumar of Aliraipur Estate. The marriage had taken place sometime in January 1945. The marital life of the party went on smoothly for about two years when it is said that the appellant left for Alirajpur in February 1947 at a time when her husband was out of station. As she went to her father's place she took away all her belongings including valuables and jewelleries received by her either from her parents or from her fa...
Steel Enterprises (Private) Ltd. Vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh and an ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-03-1968
Reported in: [1970]26STC133(All)
R.S. Pathak, J. 1. M/s. Steel Enterprises (Pvt.) Ltd., the petitioner in this and the connected cases, is a private limited company owning a rolling mill situated at Kanpur. The petitioner says that it purchases steel billets and steel ingots from Tata Iron & Steel Company Limited and other steel manufacturing companies and after converting them into bars and flats in its mills, it sells them to different dealers. The petitioner filed the return of its turnover, for the quarters ending 30th June, 30th September and 31st December, 1967, under the U.P. Sales Tax Act and under the Central Sales Tax Act. As according to it, the turnover of the bars and flats sold by it was not liable to tax, it stated in the return that the tax liability was nil. Therefore, it did not deposit any tax in respect of this turnover before filing the quarterly returns. The Sales Tax Officer finding that no tax had been deposited by the petitioner in respect of the turnover for the quarters ending 30th June and ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›