Allahabad Court March 1971 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.
Onkar Nath JaIn Vs. U.P. Co-operative Cane Union's Federation Ltd., Lu ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-22-1971
Reported in: AIR1971All569
Dwivedi, J.1. The plaintiff-applicant instituted a suit in the court of the Civil Judge, Agra, against the defendant-opposite party for recovery of a certain amount. The claim was based on a contract between the parties. The defendant made an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act for stay of proceedings in the suit. It was alleged that the contract contains an arbitration clause which provides for settlement of disputes arising out of the contract by the Cane Commissioner, U. P. or an arbitrator appointed by him. After hearing the parties, the Civil Judge stayed the proceedings in the suit. This order was made on February 4, 1963.2. More than two years thereafter the plaintiff applied to the Civil Judge for recall of the stay order on the allegation that the defendant has not done all that was necessary to be done by him for proper conduct of arbitration proceedings. The Civil Judge did not accept the contention of the plaintiff. He held that the plaintiff should have tak...
Sultan Singh Vs. Assistant Registrar Incharge Jhansi Division, Jhansi ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-19-1971
Reported in: AIR1972All159
Pathak, J.1. The petitioner Sultan Singh, applies under Article 226 ofthe Constitution for an order directing the Assistant Registrar, Incharge, Jhansi Division, not to enforce the bye laws framed by him in respect of the Jhansi District Co-operative Bank Limited, and also prays that the bye-laws be quashed.2. The Jhansi District Co-operative Bank Ltd., (which for convenience we may refer to as 'the Bank') is a cooperative society registered in 1932 under the Co-operative Societies Act, 1912, and constituted, it is said, with the sole purpose of providing banking facilities to its members. Under the bye-laws, as amended from time to time, the Board of Directors of the Bank included a Director elected by the share-holders. The petitioner acquired a block of shares in the Bank in 1961 and became a shareholder. In 1962, he was elected by the share-holders as Director, which office he continued to hold by virtue of successive elections. The petitioner alleges that in 1969 his name was take...
Mohd. YasIn and ors. Vs. Abdul Wadood and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-19-1971
Reported in: AIR1971All571
C.S.P. Singh, J.1. Yasin and his three brothers had been allotted a Chak in village Bangawan and another Chak in village Chaura. The plots comprised in the Chak of both the villages consisted of Bhumidhari and Sirdari holdings. Yasin wanted to transfer some plots comprised in his Chaks to his nephews and he moved an application for the grant of permission under Section 5 (c) (ii) of the Consolidation of Holdings Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The permission was accorded. Subsequently, however, he executed four sale deeds, viz. (Exts. 13 and 4) in respect of plots situate in village Bangawan and (Ex. 2) in respect of plots situate in village Chaura in favour of persons other than in whose favour sanction had been accorded. It appears that, thereafter, he changed his mind and filed the present suit for cancellation of the sale-deeds executed in favour of vendees-defendants. He was joined in this suit by his other co-sharers. The main contention on behalf of the plaintiff was t...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hari Om Co.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-18-1971
Reported in: [1972]86ITR216(All)
H.N. Seth, J.1. At the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, the Tribunal has referred the following question for the opinion of this court: 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessee-firm as constituted by the deed of partnership dated July 2, 1954, was entitled to registration under Section 26A of the Indian Income-tax Act,-1922?'2. The assessee-firm applied for registration under Section 26A, Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, on the strength of a deed of partnership dated July 2, 1954. The deed of partnership indicated that 18 persons were entering into partnership. The Income-tax Officer found that some of these persons were partners in their individual capacity and certain others had entered into partnership as representatives of their Hindu undivided families and one party, Trijugi Narain, was a partner in a firm, M/s. Kalka Prasad Bhagwati Prasad. According to the Income-tax Officer, Trijugi Narain became a partner in the assessee-firm because of ...
Bibi Ahmadi Begum Vs. Controller of Estate Duty
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-18-1971
Reported in: [1972]83ITR303(All)
Pathak, J.1. The Board constituted under Section 4, Estate Duty Act, 1953, has referred the following question under Section 64(1) of that Act (as it stood prior to its amendment in 1958) for the opinion of this court: ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the value of the haveli was correctly included in the principal value of the estate of the deceased, as the value of property deemed to pass on his death under Section 10 of the Act '2. Mohd. Obedulla Khan died on March 7, 1958. On his death his widow, Bibi Ahmadi Begum, as the accountable person under Section 53 of the Act, filed an account of the properties comprised in the estate of the deceased. The net value of the estate was assessed at Rs. 40,025. The Assistant Controller of Estate Duty, Meerut, determined the principal value of the estate passing on the death of the deceased at Rs. 7,99,474 and the estate duty payable thereon at Rs. 1,11,144.80. Among other properties it included the value of a haveli ...
Gajadhar Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-17-1971
Reported in: 1971CriLJ1361
ORDERH.C.P. Tripathi, J.1. Applicant Gajadhar Prasad was convicted by a Magistrate First Class for an offence Under Section 380 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment.2. On appeal, his conviction and sentence were confirmed by the learned I Temporary Civil and Sessions Judge, Hamirpur.3. The prosecution story in brief is as follows :Motilal, brother of applicant Gajadhar Prasad and Banshidhar (P.W. 8) jointly obtained a Truck on hire purchase agreement from Reliable Finance Corporation Private Ltd., New Delhi. On 2-10-1961, Moti Lai and Banshidhar agreed that Moti Lai alone should use the truck and be liable for the dues of the Reliable Finance Corporation Private Ltd. The aforesaid agreement was reduced into writing on a stamp paper Ex. Ka-1. Both the parties handed over the agreement deed (Ex. Ka-1) to one Chandra Shekhar (P.W. 1) for its safe custody. The instalments due on hire purchase agreement to Reliable Finance Corporation Private Ltd., fell...
Smt. K.L. Sehgal Vs. the Commissioner, Allahabad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-16-1971
Reported in: AIR1971All573
Oak, C.J.1. The main question raised in this special appeal is whether a revision under Section 3 of the U. P. (Temporary) Control of Rent and Eviction Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) can be dismissed in default. The matter relates to a certain house at Kanpur. Dr. (Smt.) Mitter is the owner of the house; and Smt. Sehgal occupied a portion of the house as Dr. (Smt.) Mitter's tenant. The landlady applied for permission under Section 3 of the Act for eviction of the tenant. The Additional District Magistrate, Kanpur passed an order on 9-12-1968 granting the requisite permission to the landlady. The tenant filed a revision against the Additional District Magistrate's order granting permission. The Commissioner, Allahabad fixed the hearing of the revision at Kanpur on 19-3-1969. When the Commissioner took up the case at Kanpur on 19-3-1969, no one appeared before him on behalf of the tenant-revisionist. The Commissioner thereupon dismissed the tenant's revision in default.2. Again...
Ram Chand and Sons Sugar Mills (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-ta ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-15-1971
Reported in: [1977]107ITR539(All)
R.S. Pathak, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that no appeal lay to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner from the order of the Income-tax Officer levying penal interest ?'2. The assessee is a private limited company and runs a sugar mill at Barabanki. While taking assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1955-56 the Income-tax Officer discovered that the assessee, which had come into existence in January, 1952, had not submitted an estimate of the tax payable by it under Section 18A(3), Indian Income-tax Act, 1922, and had not paid the advance tax before 15th March, 1955. He made an order charging interest under Section 18A(6) of the Act. The assessee appealed to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, but the Appellate Assistant Commissioner took the view that no appeal was maintainable in respect of the levy of interest under Section 18A(6). His...
Roop NaraIn Ramchandra (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-15-1971
Reported in: [1972]84ITR181(All)
Satish Chandra, J.1. This is an application under Section 151, Civil Procedure Code, praying that the court may be pleased to recall its order dated March 31, 1970. On that day, the case was listed for orders with a report that the applicant had not filed the requisite number of paper-books in spite of the expiry of the time granted by the Registrar for that purpose. The applicant failed to file the requisite copies of the paper-book even on that day. He did not even appear in court on that day. For this reason, this Bench on order returned the reference unanswered.2. The reference was under Section 66(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1922. That Act does not confer any power on the High Court to recall an order returning a reference unanswered. Rule 13A of Chapter XXVII of the rules of the court confers a discretion upon this court to return a reference unanswered, if the party concerned fails to prepare or cause to be prepared the paper-book within the time allowed by the Registrar for that ...
P.K. Banerji Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax Overruled
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-15-1971
Reported in: [1972]83ITR117(All)
Pathak, J.1. The Appellate Tribunal, constituted under the Wealth-tax Act, has referred the following question : ' Whether the interest of the assessee in the trust fund amounted to an annuity exempt under Section 2(e)(iv) of the Wealth-tax Act '2. The assessee is Pranab Kumar Banerji, son of late Shri Pearey Lal Banerji, and the reference relates to the assessment years 1957-58 to 1961-62. 3. Shri Pearey Lal Banerji created a trust by an indenture of trust dated October 26, 1937. The corpus of the trust consisted of Government securities of the face value of Rs. 10,00,000. The Imperial Bank of India, Calcutta, was constituted the trustee, and the securities were transferred to it. By virtue of a power to modify or alter the trust reserved by the settlor the trust deed was subsequently modified. A supplementary deed of trust dated April 28, 1950, was executed. Reading the two deeds together, the terms of the trust appear to be as follows: The trustee would pay the net income of the tru...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »