Allahabad Court February 1969 Judgments
Srivastava (S.P.) and anr. Vs. Banaras Electric Light and Power Compan ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-27-1969
Reported in: (1970)ILLJ394All
Gangeshwar Prasad, J.1. This special appeal originally came up for hearing before a Division Bench consisting of Jagdish Sahai and B.D. Gupta, JJ., who referred a question involved in the appeal to a Full Bench. A Full Bench was accordingly constituted and it recorded its answer to that question-vide S.P. Srivastava and Anr. v. Banaras Electric Light and Power Company, Ltd., Varanasi and Ors. 1968-II L.L.J. 483. The appeal was then laid before us for hearing.2. The facts are not in controversy. The appellant, S.P. Srivastava, was an employee of respondent 1, Banaras Electric Light and Power Company (hereinafter called the company) and he was employed under a written agreement dated 11 July 1956. Under Clause 7 of the agreement each party was entitled to terminate the contract of service by giving one month's notice to the other party or paying one month's salary in lieu thereof. In December 1956, a certain sum of money was received as bonus not by the employee to whom it had to be disb...
Tag this Judgment!Rama Prasad Ghildyal Pahari Vs. Hindi Sahitya Sammelan and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-27-1969
Reported in: (1970)ILLJ399All
Gangeshwar Prasad, J.1. This Special appeal is directed against the judgment of a learned single Judge dated 16 April 1968, by which he dismissed a writ petition filed by the appellant.2. The appellant was the Examination Registrar (Pareeksha Yojak) of Hindi Sahitya Sammelan (hereinafter called the sammelan), an institution having for its object propagation of Hindi in the country. Previously, the sammelan was a society registered under the Societies Registration Act. In 1961 the Parliament enacted the Hindi Sahitya Sammelan Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act), whereby the sammelan was declared an institution of national importance and incorporated, and provisions were made for its administration. The appellant was appointed as Registrar by means of a resolution dated 23 September 1951, of the executive committee of the sammelan. The resolution stated that the appointment was to remain temporary till 31 December 1951, and would be made permanent thereafter if the work of the appel...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Ram Nath Vs. Sri Kedar and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-27-1969
Reported in: AIR1970All406
ORDER1. This civil revision by the plaintiff arise out of a suit for the recovery of a sum of money. The suit was brought by a firm Harsukbrai Sagarmal through Sagarmal against Achhaibar and others to recover Rs. 840 on account of the price of cloth purchased by defendants from the plaintiff and on account of interest on the price of the cloth. The suit was filed on 30-4-1957. Later the plaintiff applied for amendment of the description of the plaintiff The amendment, was allowed on 13-8-1962. The words 'Firm Harsukhrai Sagarmal Makua Baragaon Zariya' preceding the word 'Sagarmal' were deleted from the description of the plaintiff. Various pleas were raised in defence. It was pleaded that the claim was barred by time. Munsif, Mohamdabad, who tried the suit, overruled the plea of limitation raised in defence, and held that the claim was within time. The plaintiff's claim was partly decreed. The trial Court passed a decree for a sum of Rs. 647/-/3 with interest. 2. The defendants appeale...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Vishnawati Vs. Bhagwat Vithu Chowdhry
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-26-1969
Reported in: AIR1970All389
G.S. Lal, J. 1. This second Civil Appeal arises out of a suit for ejectment from a house and recovery of arrears of rent. The suit was decreed by the trial Court and an appeal from the judgment and decree of the trial Court was dismissed. 2. The suit was instituted by Bhagwat Vithu Chowdhry (respondent in this appeal) against Smt. Vishnawati (appellant in this appeal) claiming that he had terminated the tenancy by notice to quit and had obtained the permission of the District Magistrate under Section 3 of the U. P. (Temporary) Control of Rent and Eviction Act, 1947 to get over the bar to the institution of the suit created under that section. Admittedly the appellant's husband Gaya Prasad Shukla was originally the tenant of the house on a monthly rent of Rs. 35 from its former owner Lala Mangli Prasad. The house was sold by Lala Mangli Prasad to one Smt. Vidyawati. The latter in turn sold it to the respondent. After the purchase of the house, which professedly was for the purpose of hi...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner, Sales Tax, U.P. Vs. Ram Bilas Ram Gopal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-26-1969
Reported in: AIR1970All518; [1969]24STC508(All)
Pathak, J.1. The assessee deals in foodgrains and oil-seeds at Maudaha in the district of Hamirpur. He supplied foodgrains to the Regional Food Controller under the U.P. Wheat Procurement (Levy) Order, 1959. The turnover of foodgrains so supplied was assessed to sales tax under the U.P. Sales Tax Act. On appeal by the assessee. the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) Sales Tax excluded that turnover from assessment The Additional Judge (Revisions) Sales Tax upheld the exclusion, holding that the supplies effected by the assessee to the Regional Food Controller did not amount to a sale for the purpose of Section 2(h) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act. At the instance of the Commissioner of Sales Tax, the Additional Judge (Revisions) has referred the following questions:--(1) Whether the sales made to the Regional Food Controller under the U.P. Procurement (Levy) Order, 1959, are sales within the meaning of 'Sales' under Section 2(h) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act? (2) Whether in the circumstances of t...
Tag this Judgment!Bhagwan Industries Private Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-26-1969
Reported in: [1970]25STC420(All)
R.S. Pathak, J.1. The assessee, M/s. Bhagwan Industries Private Limited, carries on the business of selling atta, maida and suji. It was assessed for the assessment year 1957-58 to sales tax under Rule 41(5) of the U.P. Sales Tax Rules. The net turnover was determined at Rs. 46,00,000. The assessment was made ex parte as the assessee did not produce its account books. Then, on September 13, 1961, the Sales Tax Officer issued a notice calling upon the dealer to appear with its account books on September 27, 1961. He stated that certain purchases and sales made by the assessee during the years 1957-58 and 1958-59 had come to his notice and required verification. The notice warned that in case the assessee failed to appear it would be presumed that all sales and purchases effected by it had not been entered in its books and accordingly action under Section 21 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act would be taken. The assessee did not produce its account books. Subsequently on March 13, 1962, the Sales...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner, Sales Tax, U.P., Lucknow Vs. Prayag Chemical Works, Nain ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-1969
Reported in: AIR1970All191; [1970]25STC85(All)
Dwivedi, J. 1. Section 3 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act imposes a tax on the sale of goods. Section 3-A (1) empowers the State Government to notify that the turnover in respect of any goods or class of goods shall be liable to tax at such single point in the series of sales by successive dealers as it may specify in the notification. Section 3-A (2) empowers the Government to fix the rate of tax not exceeding the maximum mentioned therein. 2. Acting under Section 3-A, the Government issued a notification on March 31, 1956. Head 7 of the notification specifies 'chemicals of all kinds.' According to the notification, sales of chemicals of all kinds, which are manufactured in Uttar Pradesh, shall be liable to tax at the point of sale by the manufacturer and in case of goods imported from, outside U.P., at the point of sale by the importer. 3. The opposite party is a manufacturer of, and dealer in, sodium silicate and washing soap. In the assessment year 1958-59 the opposite party admittedly so...
Tag this Judgment!Ram NaraIn and Brothers Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-1969
Reported in: [1969]73ITR423(All)
T.P. Mukerjee, J.1. This reference under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), raises certain important questions of law on which there have been no authoritative pronouncements so far.2. The applicant in this case is the firm styled as M/s. Ram Narain and Brothers of Lucknow, which was constituted under a deed of partnership dated June 18, 1953. It was accorded registration under Section 26A of the Act during all relevant years. There were seven partners including one Sri Ram Narain. Their shares, which are unequal, are mentioned in Clause (iv) of the deed of partnership. The business of the partnership was that of a dealer in iron and hardware goods. On October 14, 1954, the firm purchased a property consisting of certain leasehold rights in plots Nos. 90, 91 and 92 in an industrial area of Lucknow, together with the superstructure standing thereon, including a lime mill, a godown, quarters and outhouses, etc., for a sum of Rs. 27,000....
Tag this Judgment!Bans Bahore and ors. Vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-19-1969
Reported in: AIR1970All353
ORDERK.N. Srivastava, J.1. The facts giving rise to this writ petition are as follows:--2. Chhedi, the father of Bans Bahore and Ram Bahore petitioners and their uncle Chunna were Zamindars in village Barkuiyan, Tappa Kandar, district Basti. They mortgaged their entire Zamindari property situated in the aforesaid village to Mahadeo Ram and his brothers. The disputed land was sir and khudkasht of the petitioners. The mortgagees transferred their mortgagee rights to certain persons. Shitla Prasad, Ram Prasad and Oudh Prasad, opposite parties Nos. 6 to 8 are the representatives in interest of the purchasers of part of the mortgagee rights. The contesting opposite parties are sons of Ganesh and Ram Lochan, who were also the purchasers of the mortgagee rights. The mortgage was executed in 1926. The sale of the mortgagee rights took place in 1938.3. After enforcement of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition & Land Reforms Act, the purchasers of the mortgagee-rights partitioned the mortgagee rights a...
Tag this Judgment!Babboo Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-18-1969
Reported in: AIR1970All122; 1970CriLJ196
ORDERB.D. Gupta, J.1. This is a revision by one Babboo who stands convicted for the offence punishable under Section 16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, hereinafter referred to as the Act.2. The prosecution case was that, on the morning of the 21st of July, 1966, the applicant was found on the Rewa Road near village Sarangpur, within the jurisdiction of police station Ghurpur in the district of Allahabad, transporting cow's milk for sale, sample whereof was purchased by Sri B.L. Sharma, a Food Inspector, and, on examination of the said sample by the Public Analyst, the same was found deficient in non-fatty solid contents. The applicant pleaded not guilty and stated that he was transporting the milk for his own use and not for sale. The learned Magistrate accepted the prosecution case, rejected the defence and convicted the applicant, awarding him rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year. An appeal to the learned Sessions Judge having failed the applicant filed this rev...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »