Allahabad Court July 1968 Judgments
State of U.P. Vs. Janni and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-31-1968
Reported in: AIR1970All235; 1970CriLJ441
K.N. Srivastava, J. 1. This is an appeal against the judgment and order passed by Sri M. P. Gautam, Magistrate 1st Class, Roorkee, district Sahranpur, acquitting the respondents of an offence under Section 323, I. P. C., and Section 147, I. P. C. 2. The facts, giving rise to this appeal, are as follows. Faiyaz, who is a resident of Sikandarpur, thana Fatehpur, district Sahranpur, lodged a report on 30-1-1965 at thana Fatehpur. The allegations in the report were that a nephew of Faiyaz was taking his bullocks to the field for ploughing. The bullocks damaged the crop of Aziz. The nephew of Faiyaz immediately drove out the bullocks, but he was slapped by Aziz and Idris. Faiyaz asked them not to slap his nephew. Thereupon all the respondents assaulted him with lathis. Faiyaz received a number of injuries. His injuries were medically examined. The Police registered a case against the respondents under Section 147, I. P. C. and Section 323, I. P. C. After completing the investigation, the po...
Tag this Judgment!State of U.P. and anr. Vs. Sure and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-30-1968
Reported in: AIR1969All245
Rajeshwari Prasad, J. 1. As a result of the direction given by Division Bench, this special appeal has been referred for decision to a Full Bench. 2. The material facts leading up to the special appeal are these. 3. A notification dated February 11, 1963, was published in the U. P. Gazette dated February 16, 1963 under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, notifying that the land mentioned in the schedule was needed for a public purpose. A number of plots were mentioned in the schedule which are situate in village Gursarai, Fergana Garoth, district Jhansi. Some of these plots belonged to the respondent Shri Surey and the other respondents. The purpose for which acquisition was made as disclosed in the notification was for establishing Irrigation Demonstration-cum-Research Farm. This was followed up by another notification dated February 25, 1963, under Section 17(4) of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter called 'the Act'), The last notification runs as hereunder:-- 'In continuati...
Tag this Judgment!R.B. NaraIn Singh Sugar Mills Ltd., Lhaksar Vs. Commissioner of Sales ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-30-1968
Reported in: AIR1969All516; [1969]23STC314(All)
Pathak, J.1. The assessee, M/s. R.B. Narain Singh Sugar Mills Ltd. of Lhaksar, district Saharanpur, was assessed to Sales Tax under the Central Sales Tax Act for the assessment year 1957-58. During the assessment proceedings a contention was raised before the Sales Tax Officer that the turn-over of Ra 1,30,813-25 was exempt from Central Sales Tax inasmuch as it consisted of Sales made to dealers in Jammu and Kashmir and therefore must be considered as made in the course of export outside the territory of India. The submission rested on the fact that the Central Sales Tax Act had not been made applicable in the State of Jammu and Kashmir. That contention was accepted by the Sales Tax Officer. The Commissioner of Sales Tax applied in revision. The revision application has been allowed by the Additional Judge (Revision) Sales Tax, who has held that the turnover was clearly taxable under the Central Sales Tax Act. At the instance of the assessee, the following question has been referred to...
Tag this Judgment!Sahaj Ram Rehandmal Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-25-1968
Reported in: [1969]23STC109(All)
R.S. Pathak, J.1. The petitioner entered into an agreement with the North Eastern Railway 'for the manufacture and supply of quarry products from a private quarry at Kanakpur'. The Railway paid the petitioner on account of the ballast and boulders supplied by the petitioner at certain rates specified in the schedule of rates, which was made part of the contract. The contract also included a list of special conditions.2. In the assessment proceedings for the assessment years 1958-59, 1960-61, 1961-62 and 1962-63 the Sales Tax Officer assessed the petitioner to sales tax upon the turnover of the ballast and boulders. In appeal by the petitioner the Judge (Appeals) Sales Tax confirmed the assessment in respect of ballast and boulders. The petitioner proceeded in revision before the Judge (Revisions) Sales Tax but was also unsuccessful there. At the instance of the petitioner the following question of law has been referred in the instant case for the opinion of this Court :Whether in the c...
Tag this Judgment!Masitullah Khan and ors. Vs. the Collector and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-23-1968
Reported in: [1969]23STC106(All)
R.L. Gulati, J.1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution arises out of the proceedings for the recovery of the arrears of sales tax.2. One Abdul Majid Khan was assessed under the U.P. Sales Tax Act for the assessment years 1952-53, 1953-54 and 1954-55 resulting in a total demand of sales tax in the sum of Rs. 4,617.40 The tax was not paid by Abdul Majid Khan and in 1957 he died. The present petitioners are his three sons. Their complaint is that without any prior notice to them, proceedings for the recovery of the arrears of tax due from their late father were commenced against them and on 15th March, 1968, a sale proclamation was issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Shahjahanpur, acting on behalf of the Collector under the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act for the sale of their house situated in Deoria and their certain zamindari plots situated in the same village. The sale proclamation stated that the property was to be sold for the recovery of a sum of Rs. ...
Tag this Judgment!New Victoria Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court and or ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-12-1968
Reported in: AIR1970All210; 1970CriLJ436
ORDERM.H. Beg, J.1. The petitioner, the New Victoria Mills Ltd., Kanpur, prays for a writ of certiorari to quash the award of a labour Court dated 16-9-1966 (Annexure 27 to the writ petition) and consequential directions. The impugned award was given after this Court had caused, on 6-8-1963, in Civil Miscellaneous writ petition No. 2720 of 1959 connected with civil miscellaneous writ petition No. 2014/58, a previous award dated 26-6-1958 given by the same Labour Court adjudicating the same question between the same parties. Mr. Justice Dwivedi had ordered in that case:--'I direct the Labour Court to re-hear the dispute and decide the question of fair hearing in the light of my judgment.' The question for adjudication before the Labour Court was framed as follows:-- 'Whether the employers have wrongfully and/or unjustifiably dismissed Sri Jagannath, son of Sri Kunji, T. N. 9, and Sri Chhotey, son of Sri Chhedi, T. N. 3, sweepers, with effect from February 7, 1967, if so, to what relief ...
Tag this Judgment!Raghubir Saran Vs. O.P. Jain, Additional Munsif (i) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-12-1968
Reported in: [1969]73ITR482(All)
R.L. Gulati, J. 1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is an offshoot of a litigation between a landlord and his tenants. The petitioner is the tenant and was one of the defendants in a suit filed by the landlords for arrears of rent and eviction of the tenants. Sri Debi SahaiGupta, the opposite party No. 3, is the landlord and Sri Gopal Swamp, the opposite party No. 2, is his minor son.2. Sri Debi Sahai and his son, Gopal Swarup, filed a suit which is now pending in the court of the 1st Additional Munsif, Bulandshahr. As stated above, the suit was for the recovery of arrears of rent and for the ejectment of the tenants including the petitioner from a shop of which the opposite parties Nos. 3 and 2 claim to be the owners. The petitioner as well as the remaining two defendants resisted the suit on the ground that the petitioner, and not the opposite parties Nos. 3 and 2, was the landlord.3. It appears that the petitioner is the ostensible owner of the property in dispute...
Tag this Judgment!Rameshwar Oil Mills Vs. Additional Revising Authority, Sales Tax, Vara ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-09-1968
Reported in: [1969]23STC465(All)
S.N. Dwivedi, J.1. The facts are not in dispute ; the parties are at variance about the application of the law to the undisputed facts. So there arises a neat point of law.2. There was a firm of certain partners. The firm was known as Jeet Mai Kalloo Mal. It was carrying on the business of manufacturing mustard oil. Radha Krishna Maheshwari was a partner of the firm. The firm was dissolved during the assessment year 1961-62. The assets of the firm were distributed amongst the partners. A certain quantity of mustard oil fell to the share of Radha Krishna Maheshwari. On 8th November, 1961, Radha Krishna Maheshwari set up his own business of manufacturing mustard oil. He started the new business in the name of Rameshwar Oil Mills. The mustard oil which had fallen to his share in the distribution of the assets of the dissolved firm was sold by him for Rs. 33,887. The Sales Tax Officer assessed sales tax on the sale of this oil. In appeal, the appellate authority held that sales tax could n...
Tag this Judgment!Aluminium Corporation of India Ltd. Vs. Lakshmi Ratan Cotton Mills Co. ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-08-1968
Reported in: AIR1968All601
M.H. Beg, J. 1. In this case, after the framing of issues on a winding up petition of a creditor and before the case could be taken up for final hearing, an application was filed under Order XI, Rule 2, Civil Procedure Code, on behalf of the petitioning creditor for leave to deliver interrogatories. As many as 94 questions were listed. It was noted on the application that the questions were required to be answered by Shri. Ramgopal Gupta, Shri Ram Prasad Gupta, Shri Pushoa Raj Gupta, Shri S. D. Garg and Shri Gulab Chand Jain, without specifying which questions were to be answered by which party. After considerable argument on the question whether the interrogatories were covered by the issues framed, an order was passed on March 21, 1968, granting leave, under Order XI, Rule 2, Civil Procedure Code, to deliver these interrogatories upon the company. Before granting leave, the case of each side had to be carefully examined. It was found that matters arising in the case covered a fairly ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›