Allahabad Court September 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.
Sakhawat and ors. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-22-1972
Reported in: 1973CriLJ1476
P.N. Bakshi, J.1. Sakhawat and five others have been convicted by the I Class Magistrate, Rampur under Section 13 of the Gambling Act and have been sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 50/- each and in default to simple imprisonment for 15 days. They filed a revision before the District Judge, Rampui who has made a recommendation to this Court for setting aside the conviction and sentence imposed upon them.2. The case for the prosecution is that at about 1 p.m. on 17-12-1970 the accused were found gambling on the Chabutra of Jee Sukh's Rahat close to a village pathway in village Bexua. It is said that the accused were playing the game of 'Mang Patta' and one of them was demanding a Ghulam (Jack) on a bet of -/8/-. Another accused was dealing the cards. The police party is alleged to have apprehended the accused on the spot and recovered some cash from their person as well as playing cards and cash etc. from the board. The accused pleaded that they were falsely implicated due to enmity with t...
Firm Munshi Lal Hari Om Raj Nandi and ors. Vs. Bankey Lal Hira Lal and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-21-1972
Reported in: AIR1973All302
R.L. Gulati, J. 1. This is a plaintiffs second appeal. 2. The plaintiffs are commission agents. The defendants had placed an order with the plaintiffs for the supply of Arhar after purchasing it from the open market at the prevailing market rate. The plaintiffs were to get a fixed commission. The plaintiffs purchased Arhar, a part of which was sent to the defendants by Rail and was accepted but the remaining stock was refused by the defendants. The plaintiffs re-sold that and claimed from the defendants a sum of Rs. 1649.77 P. on account of loss suffered on re-sale of Arhar. 3. The suit was resisted on a number of grounds, one of the grounds being that the plaintiffs had purchased Arhar at a rate higher than the rate at which they were authorised to purchase. The trial Court dismissed the suit. On appeal the lower appellate Court has decided the appeal only on one point, namely, that before the resale, the plaintiffs ought to have given a notice to the defendants and for that purpose h...
Achchaibar Vs. Dy. Director of Consolidation, Jaunpur and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-20-1972
Reported in: AIR1973All141
ORDERR.B. Misra, J.1. The present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution arises out of proceedings under the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act.2. The dispute between the parties relates to plots appertaining to khata No. 174 of village Bhatkhin. District Jaunpur. The disputed plots were re-corded in the names of respondents Nos. 2 to 4 as their sirdari The petitioner Achhaibar along with certain other per-sons, who are not parties before this Court, filed an objection under Section 9 of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act Their claim was that they along with Smt. Dhiraji were the tenants of the disputed plots and after the death of Smt. Dhiraji, they alone became the sole tenants. They tried to connect themselves with Smt. Dhiraji by a pedigree. They also set up an alternative case that Smt. Dhiraji, the recorded tenant, surrendered the disputed plots in favour of Iqbal Ahmad, the Lambardar, under a registered surrender deed dated 10th June, 1949. The plots were, thereaft...
Anwar Khan Vs. the Deputy Director of Consolidation and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-19-1972
Reported in: AIR1973All146
ORDEROmprakash Trivedi, J.1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by Anwar Khan.2. The dispute relates to certain agricultural land which in the basic year was recorded in the name of the petitioner. Earlier it was recorded in the name of petitioner's father Imamuddin Khan. Objections under Section 9 of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act were filed both by the petitioner and respondents 2 to 6. The petitioner claimed to be the exclusive sirdar of disputed plot No. 57 on the basis that his father was recorded in possession over the disputed land in the Khasra for 1359 Fasli and that the petitioner himself had acquired title over the land by adverse possession. Respondents 2 to 6 contested that the petitioner had any title, their main ground of attack being that the petitioner's father having migrated to Pakistan before coming into force of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, no benefit from the fact of petitioner's father's pos...
Shyam Manohar Shyam Sunder Vs. Commissioner, Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-19-1972
Reported in: [1973]31STC369(All)
N.D. Ojha, J.1. This is a reference under the U. P. Sales Tax Act. The assessee, Shyam Manohar Shyam Sunder, is a dealer in ornaments and bullion. On 10th December, 1959, the Sales Tax Officer (S. B.), raided the business premises of the assessee and recovered double set of account books. The assessee subsequently made a statement on 16th December, 1959, wherein it admitted additional tax liability on account of the escaped turnover for the quarters of the year 1959-60 in respect of which returns had been submitted by that time as also in regard to some earlier years. The assessee on the same date gave a bank draft for Rs. 10,000 and stated that the amount of tax payable by it may be realised out of it and that a sum of Rs. 4,200 may be adjusted as penalty for the year 1959-60. Acting upon the said statement the Sales Tax Officer issued a notice to the assessee to show cause as to why a penalty may not be imposed for the year 1959-60 under Section 15-A of the U. P. Sales Tax Act (herei...
Badri Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-19-1972
Reported in: 1973CriLJ1478
K.N. Srivastava, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment and order passed by the First Temporary Civil and Sessions Judge, Allahabad, convicting Badri appellant under Section 304, IPC and sentencing him to five years' R. I.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal are as follows:-Badri Prasad appellant is resident of village Kashia Pachhi Police Station, Kokhraj District Allahabad, Smt. Gulabia (deceased) was his wife. According to the prosecution, Smt. Gulabia had illicit connection with one Nathu. This was resented by the appellant. At about 10.00 p.m. on 13-1-1969 the appellant, his wife and their children were sleeping inside the house. A small child was sleeping on the cot of the deceased. After Smt. Gulabia and the children fell asleep, the appellant placed the aforesaid child on his cot. He then took out a Phaura and gave a number of blows with it on the neck of Smt, Gulabia. Smt. Gulabia then died. The outer door of the house had been chained from inside. The appellant then p...
Bharit and Ors. Vs. the Hon'ble Board of Revenue, U.P., at Allahabad a ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-15-1972
Reported in: AIR1973All201
Satish Chandra, J.1. A learned Single Judge has referred the following two questions of law to a larger Bench:'1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of this case the possession of Jagan from the date of the transfer of occupancy tenancy in his favour would be permissible on behalf of the transferor or adverse to his interests? 2. In case the possession of the original transferee was permissive in its nature will the possession of his heirs subsequent to his death continue to be permissive or will it become adverse to the rights of the original transferor?' 2. The writ petition in which the reference has been made arose out of a suit for ejectment and possession under Section 209 of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act filed by the respondents. The plaintiff respondents claimed to be occupancy tenants of the plots in dispute. On 18th Octobar, 1948 they executed a deed of sale of their rights in the plotsin dispute in favour of one Jagan, the father of the petiti...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Mansa Ram and Sons
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-15-1972
Reported in: [1977]106ITR307(All)
R.L. Gulati, J. 1. This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'new Act'), at the instance of the Commissioner of Income-tax, U.P. II, Lucknow.2. The assessee is a Hindu undivided family which carries on business at Dehra Dun. For the assessment year 1951-52 an assessment order was passed against it under Section 23(3)/31/33 of the Income-tax Act, 1922 (hereinafter referred to as the 'old Act'), on a total income of Rs. 1,38,284 which included a sum of Rs. 1,00,000 as income from undisclosed sources. The sum of Rs. 1,00,000 was comprised of two sums of Rs. 50,000 each. The first sum of Rs. 50,000 was made up of four items credited on differentdates in September, 1950, in the names of two members of the assessee-family in the suspense account in the Mussoorie set of accounts of the assessee. The other sum of Rs. 50,000 appeared as cash credit in the names of the members of the assessee-family in the account books of M/s. Veer Indu...
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Agrawal Commercial Corporation
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-15-1972
Reported in: [1973]31STC32(All)
R.L. Gulati, J.1. At the instance of the Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P., Lucknow, the Judge (Revisions) Sales Tax, Lucknow, has submitted this statement of the case, under Section 11(3) of the U. P. Sales Tax Act. The following two questions of law have been referred :(1) Whether galvanised iron wire in coils sold by the assessee comes under the category of 'iron goods' liable to tax as 'hardware' under Notification No. ST-1367/X-1045(19)-1960 dated 5th April, 1961, or as 'wares made of any metal or alloy' under Notification No. ST-2104/ X-902(16)-62 dated 21st May, 1963, or as unclassified items under Section 3 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act or as 'iron and steel' liable to tax at single point under Sub-section (1)(d)(iv) of Section 3-AA of the U.P. Sales Tax Act?(2) If the answer to question (1) above is that galvanised iron wire in coils comes under the category of 'iron goods', whether the learned additional revising authority has erred in law in holding it as coming under the category...
Raghunath Prasad Vs. Smt. Urmila Devi and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-14-1972
Reported in: AIR1973All203
ORDERT.S. Misra, J.1. This revisional application is directed against the order dated 29-10-1971 passed by the learned District Judge, Varanasi in the case No. 2 of 1971 which has been filed by the applicant claiming a decree against the Opposite Party No. 1 for restitution of conjugal rights.2. On 14th April, 1971, the applicant filed an application before the court below praying that the Opposite Party No. 1 be directed to produce herself for reconciliation and to produce herself before the lady Doctor of Civil Hospital, Varanasi for her medical examination. The Opposite Party No. 1 filed an objection to the said application on 15-5-1971. She alleged inter alia that as there had been 'chhuttam chutta' (perhaps meaning thereby 'divorce') between the parties the applicant was not entitled to have the medical examination of the Opposite Party No. 1. It was, however, not alleged in her aforesaid objection that she would not appear before the Court in connection with the proposed reconcil...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »