Allahabad Court April 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.
Firm Birohichand Badri Vishal and ors. Vs. Firm Gangadhar Baijnath
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-11-1968
Reported in: AIR1970All43
A.K. Kirty, J.1. This appeal by the judgment-debtors arises out of execution proceedings. The relevant facts lie within a narrow compass. Suit No. 71 of 1954 was filed by the respondent against the appellants for the recovery of Rupees 23,408/5/3 with pendente lite and future interest. It was decreed with costs by the 2nd Civil Judge, Kanpur on 18-12-1959; pendente lite and future interest at the rate of 6% per annum was also awarded. The first application for execution of the decree was made on 18-10-1960, giving rise to execution case No. 49 of 1960 in the Court of the 1st Addl. Civil Judge, Kanpur. It, however, appears that an application was in the first instance made on 17-9-1960 in the Court of the 2nd Civil Judge, Kanpur, which had passed the decree, and. as prayed by the decree-holder, a certificate transferring the decree for execution was sent to the Court of the 1st Additional Civil Judge,Kanpur. In that Court an application in the prescribed form, was submitted by the decre...
Shyama Charan Sri Ram Saran Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-08-1968
Reported in: AIR1969All61; 1969CriLJ129
R. Chandra, J. 1. This is a Jail appeal by Shyama Charan (40), resident of village Malhpur Kaurha, Police Station Kant, district Shahjahanpur, against his conviction under Section 302, I. P. C. by the Sessions Judge, Hardoi. He has been awarded death penalty. The Sessions Judge has also made the usual reference for confirmation of the death sentence. Since this was a capital sentence case, and the appellant could not afford to engage a counsel, Shri J. N. Misra was appointed amicus curiae to represent him. We have heard Shri Misra for the appellant and the Assistant Government Advocate for the State. 2. Shyama Charan appellant is a Sadhu. He probably belongs to the sect of 'Dandi Sadhus' who carry a stick with them which is regarded sacred. The case of the prosecution in short was, that on 29th May, 1967 at about 3 P. M. he visited village Mahmudpur, police station Pali, district Hardoi. When he was going on the village pathway he passed through a chabutra which was situated close to t...
Mazharul Islam and ors. Vs. Khacher Bux and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-08-1968
Reported in: AIR1969All554
Dwivedi, J.1. This second appeal was heard by Sri Justice Seth. He has formulated two questions and referred them to a larger Bench, for opinion. These questions are:--' (1) whether title to a property in case of auction sale by the Custodian passes on the date of the sale or on the date of deposit of the sale amount or on the date when the sale deed is executed in respect of such sale?(2) Whether in case of auction sale by Custodian execution of sale deed is essential in law?'2. It is not necessary to mention facts of the case, for we think that the questions referred to us are pure questions of law. Section 10(2)(o) of the Administration of Evacuee Property Act is the only material provision. It is necessary to interpret this provision for answering these questions.3. Section 10(2)(o), in so far as it is material for our purpose, reads:--'. . . . .the Custodian may, . . . transfer in any manner whatsoever any evacuee property, notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in any...
Rajendra Prasad Oil Mills, Kanpur and anr. Vs. Smt. Chunni Devi and or ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-04-1968
Reported in: AIR1969All1
B. D. Gupta, J.1. The following question has been referred for being answered :--'Whether a limited company falls within the meaning of the expression 'person' as used in Rule 10 of Order 30 of the Code of Civil Procedure?'The circumstances in which this question arose have been set forward in the order of reference dated the 17th of August, 1967, passed by a Division Bench of which I was member, but may again be briefly summarised as follows:2. Murli Dhar Verma, the predeces-sor-in-interest of the respondents to this appeal, instituted the suit giving rise to this appeal for recovery of money as damages and interest. The sole defendant to the suit, as originally filed, was described as follow :--'Rajendra Prasad Oil Mills, Kanpur, through the Director Bishan Dayal, son of Lala Kishori Lal....'As a result of an application for amendment, which was allowed, the description of the defendant was modified as follows :--'Rajendra Prasad Oil Mills, Kanpur; through -- (1) Bishan Dayal, son of...
Mst. Sardaran and ors. Vs. Sunderlal Baldeo Prasad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-03-1968
Reported in: AIR1968All363
1. This is a plaintiffs appeal arising out of a suit for possession and a sum of Rs. 200 claimed as damages. 2. Initially the suit was filed on 30th September, 1954 in the Court of Munsil On the plea taken in defence that the suit was under-valued and on proper valuation it would be beyond the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Munsif, the plaint was returned for presentation to the proper Court and that order was upheld in appeal. Thereafter the plaint was presented in the Court of Civil Judge, Hardoi in the year 1956 where it came to be registered as suit No. 19 of 1956. 3. The pedigree no more in dispute and material for purposes of appeal may oe given as below:-- Sultan Khan=First Wife | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | | Mahid Ali=Batulan Muntai Asiran Imtiazan=Abdullah | | | | | ---------------------------- Sakina | | | | | | Rafiq Aziz | | | ---------------------------------------------------------------- | | | | | | | Alijan...
Zonal Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India Vs. Hari Om Varshan ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-03-1968
Reported in: [1968]38CompCas497(All); [1968(17)FLR309]
1. This special appeal is directed against the order of S.N. Dwivedi J. dated May 9, 1966, by which he allowed Writ Petition No. 4027 of 1958 and quashed an order of the divisional manager of the Life Insurance Corporation of India (Agra Division) dated August 18, 1958, dismissing the petitioner from service.2. The petitioner, Hari Om Varshany (the present respondent) was employed in the Life Insurance Corporation as a field officer at Moradabad. Complaints were lodged against him by certain persons, accusing him of misappropriating various sums of money which he had collected on behalf of the Corporation. A departmental inquiry was held by a committee consisting of two members appointed by the divisional manager (Agra Division) and evidence was recorded from the 1st of April to the 7th of April, 1958. The committee came to the conclusion that the charges were proved, and on June 16, 1958, notice was served on the petitioner asking him to show cause ' why a suitable penalty should not ...
Gopi Chand Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-03-1968
Reported in: 1969CriLJ1153
ORDERH.C.P. Tripathi, J.1. Applicant Gopi Chand was convicted by a Magistrate First Class under Section 8/7 of the Essential Commodities Act and sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000/-. In default of payment of fine be was directed to undergo three months' further rigorous imprisonment. He came up in appeal before the learned Civil and Sessions Judge Agra. The learned Judge by his order dated September, 21, 1966, remanded the case to the trial Magistrate with a direction that he will record the evidence on the question of relationship between Jadhav Ram and Gopi and also their business relationship....' This revision is directed against the aforesaid order of the Civil and Sessions Judge.2. I have heard learned Counsel for the applicant and for the State.3. It appears that the Sessions Judge did not appreciate the scope of Section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Section 428 is not meant for filling the latches left in the prosecution case or for al...
Gulab Chand Dhanna Lal Vs. Income-tax Officer.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-03-1968
Reported in: [1969]71ITR349(All)
B. D. GUPTA J. - This is an appeal under Chapter VIII, rule 5, of the Rules of court, against the judgment and order Manchanda J., dated the 28th of March 1962, whereby the appellants petition under article 226 of the Constitution was dismissed. After hearing learned counsel for the appellants in support of this appeal, we find it devoed of merit.The petitioners having filed their income-tax Officer return regarding the assessment year 1946-47, the Income-tax Officer passed the order of of assessment on the 21st of February, 1951. By that order the petitioners were assessed, under section 23 of the India Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), on an income of Rs. 1,17,932. An appeal filed by the petitioners was allowed, in part, by the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner dated the 21st of May, 1953. There-after the petitioners moved the Commissioner under section 33A of the Act. By an order dated 19th October, 1954, the Commissioner accepted the petitione...
Vishwanath Vs. State and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-02-1968
Reported in: AIR1968All415; 1968CriLJ1640
Uniyal, J. 1. One Vishwanath filed a complaint against Harnam Singh accused under Section 448 I. P. C. alleging that the accused had committed criminal trespass over a portion of an abadi plot belonging to him with intent to intimidate insult or annoy him. The trial court convicted the accused under Section 447 I. P. C and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month the court held that the complainant was entitled to be restored to possession and accordingly ordered delivery of possession of the property to him under Section 522 Cr. P. C.2. Harnam Singh accused filed an appeal against his conviction and the learned Civil & Sessions Judge set aside the conviction holding that the possession of the accused was not wrongful and that he has been in continuous and peaceful possession of the property from before. In the result the appellate court ordered redelivery of possession of the property to the accused under Sections 522/423 Cr. P. C.3. The complainant the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›