Allahabad Court January 1972 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.
Maharaja Dharmendra Prasad Singh and anr. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh a ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-03-1972
Reported in: AIR1973All174
Om Prakash Trivedi, J. 1. This first appeal has been filed by Maharaja Dharmendra Prasad Singh and Maharani Raj Lakshmi Kumari Devi against the judgment and decree passed by the Judicial Officer (Assistant, Collector, First Class) Gonda dated 1-12-1960 in the following circumstances:On 21-11-1956 Maharaja Sir Pateshwari Prasad Singh, proprietor of the then Balrampur Raj, filed a suit in the Court of the Judicial Officer Balrampur, district Gonda under Section 209 of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act. The plaintiff claimed to have acquired bhumidhari rights under Section 18 of the said Act over Plots Nos. 1647, 1648, and 1977 in village Baghelkhand, Pergana Tulshipur, Tahsil Balrampur, district Gonda, the plaintiff having claimed also to have planted trees over the said land and being owner thereof. It was alleged that the State of Uttar Pradesh had illegally and without any right or title forcibly got the trees cut down and wood removed from the plots having dispossess...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Motilal Bankers
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-03-1972
Reported in: [1973]88ITR391(All)
Pathak, J. 1. A Hindu undivided family, of which Motilal was the karta, carried on several businesses. One of the businesses consisted of money-lending and it was carried on under the name and style of Motilal Bankers. During the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1961-62, with which we are concerned, the karta, Motilal, entered into partnership with Narendra Kumar, an undivided junior member of the family. Narendra Kumar brought in a sum of Rs. 5,000 to the business and became an eight anna partner in it. 2. For the assessment year 1961-62, the partnership firm applied for registration under the Indian Income-tax Act and thereafter declarations were filed for the assessment years 1962-63 and 1963-64 in accordance with Section 184(7) of the Act. The Income-tax Officer declined to register the firm for these three years, holding that it had not been proved that Narendra Kumar had brought in the capital alleged, and, further, that an undivided junior member could not become a ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›