Allahabad Court January 1974 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.
Brindaban Vs. Ram Lakhan Lalji and Mahadeoji and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-21-1974
Reported in: AIR1975All255
T.S. Misra, J.1. This appeal arises out of a suit for declaration that the plaintiff No. 2 is the Sarbarakar of theplaintiff No. 1 and for the removal of the defendant No. 1 from the management of the temple and the properties of the plaintiff No. 1 and the charge of the same to be handed over to the plaintiff No. 2 as the Sarbarakar of the plaintiff No. 1. The suit was filed by the idols Ram Lakhan Lalji and Mahadeo Ji through Rameshwar Bajpai as the plaintiff No. 1 and Rameshwar Bajpai as the plaintiff No. 2 against Brindaban, the first defendant, and Prakash Narain. The latter was impleaded as a pro forma defendant. The material facts may be briefly stated as follows :2. One Jagannath was the owner of the properties in dispute. He had a brother by name Shy am Lal who had died in 1893 leaving behind a widow Smt. Kaushalya. Jagannath had a son Jwala Prasad who had pre-deceased him leaving behind his widow Smt. Narayani and a son Durga Prasad. Jagannath died in 1904. Durga Prasad also ...
Shobha Ram Vs. Inamul Haq
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-18-1974
Reported in: AIR1974All253
T.S. Misra, J.1. This is an application under Rule 3 of Order 23 of the Code of Civil Procedure for recording the compromise and deciding the second appeal as well as the cross-objection in terms of the conditions of the compromise. This application has been signed by Shobha Ram, the appellant, as well as his counsel. It has also been signed by one Safaruddin, special attorney of Inamul Haq, and by the counsel for the respondent. The application was sent to thecourt below for verification. There an objection was filed that Safaruddin had no authority to compromise the matter on behalf of Inamul Haq. It appears that an application for amendment of the compromise petition was also filed. Consequently the Additional Civil Judge sent back the whole record to this Court. The said application for amendment was dismissed by this Court on 6th April 1973. On that date Sri Faujdar Rai, learned Counsel for the respondent, stated that the alleged compromise is not lawful. He prayed for and was all...
Firm Naraindas Pitamchand Vs. Firm Shanker Lal Mohandas and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-18-1974
Reported in: AIR1974All255
A. Banerji, J.1. This is plaintiff's appeal in which he has prayed for a decree in the further sum of Rs. 3,301.16 P. against the Union of India respondent No. 5.2. The plaintiff had filed a suit for the recovery of Rs. 6,920.19 P. against thedefendants. Defendants first set were consignors and they are residents of Aligarh, whereas defendant second set was the Union of India which owns the railways. A consignment of maize was despatched from Nizamabad Railway station in Andhra Pradesh on the 19th September, 1964. This consignment reached Aligarh at the destination station on 3rd of October, 1964. The consignee after inspecting the goods was of the opinion that the goods had deteriorated and were damaged and asked for, an open delivery. The railways had asked that before any assessment of damage was done, the consignee better take book delivery and that was done. On the 10th of October, 1964 an officer of the railways expressed his inability to make the assessment as the damages were b...
Smt. Masoom Banoo Vs. Hari Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-18-1974
Reported in: AIR1974All462
Satish Chandra, J. 1. This appeal arises out of a suit for ejectment of the respondent Hari Singh under Section 209 of the Zamindari Abolition Act. 2. Smt. Masoom Banoo, the plaintiff-appellant and Abu Zafar were the co-tenants in the holding in dispute. Abu Zafar migrated to Pakistan. On 17th November, 1953, his half share in the holding was declared an evacuee property. The Custodian, Evacuee Property, allotted the half share of the evacuee to Hari Singh, respondent. 3. Smt. Masoom Banoo applied for the separation of her interest in this' composite property. The Competent Officer acting under the Evacuee Interest (Separation) Act, 1951, decided to transfer the half evacuee share to the non-evacuee applicant, namely Smt. Masoom Banoo. Accordingly, he executed a deed of sale in her favour on 8th October, 1960. Hari Singh filed an appeal against order of the Competent Officer transferring the share of Abu Zafar to Smt Masoom Banoo. Meanwhile, the Custodian Evacuee Property appears to ha...
ElgIn Mills Compny Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-17-1974
Reported in: 1978(2)ELT43(All)
C.S.P. Singh, J.1 The petitioner is an incorporated company and carries on business of manufacturing and selling cotton textiles. Excise duty is leviable on various qualities of cloth manufacturing by the company. The Union of India by Notification No. 111/62 of the 13th June, 1962 fixed different rates of excise duty on grey and processed cloth. This notification was subsequently clarified by Revenue letters F. No. 4/16/62-CXVlI-dated, 11th July, 1962, whereby it was stated that scoured cloth would be taxable at the duty applicable to grey cloth. It appears that duty was being charged for scoured cloth at the same rate as on processed cloth, which duty was higher than that of grey cloth. The petitioner made representations against this enhanced duty, but the Excise Inspector continued to issue demand notices in respect of scoured cloth at the rates applicable to processed cloth. The petitioner being unable to obtain relief at the hands of the Department filed suit Nos. 38 of 1967 and ...
State of U.P. Vs. Santosh Kumar Capoor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-17-1974
Reported in: 1975CriLJ734
ORDERYashoda Nandan, J.1. The relevant facts giving rise to this revision are that as a consequence of a First Information Report lodged by Sri K. N. Srivastava, Principal of the K. N. Government College. Gyanpur, district Varanasi (hereinafter referred to as the 'College') at Police Station Gyanpur, a charge sheet was submitted against the opposite party Santosh Kumar Capoor, in the Court of the learned Magistrate at Gyanpur, for offences punishable under Sections 420 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Magistrate proceeded under Chapter XVIII of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the 'Code') and committed the opposite party to the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Varanasi at Gyanpur, for trial for the offences under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Additional Sessions Judge framed charges against the opposite party and proceeded with the trial. After the greater part of the prosecution evidence had been recorded by the l...
State of U. P. Vs. Bans Raj Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-17-1974
Reported in: 1974CriLJ1240
J.M.L. Sinha, J.1. This appeal arises out of the judgment and order D/- 16th of December, 1969 passed, by Sessions Judge, Gorakhpur, acquitting the respondent of the offence under Section 3(a) of the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act, 1966.2. The facts leading up to the present appeal can briefly be stated as under:The respondent, during the period in question, was employed as aLoco-shed Driver in the North Eastern Railway at Gorakhpur. On 24th of September 1968 Sri S.L. Mehta and Sri R.S. Pandey, Sub-Inspectors, C.I.D. took a search of his house and recovered a Large amount of property, which according to the prosecution belonged to the railway administration. It included a green dari (Exh. II), a mosquito curtain (Exh. III), four pillow cases (Exhs. V to VIII), 33 Engine headlight bulbs of 250 Watts (Exh. XIII), 5 bulbs of 32 Watts (Exh. XIV), 11 bulbs of 24 Watts (Exh. XV), 2 stainless tumblers (Exh. XVIII) and I bucket (Ext. XIX), all of which carried the I.R. (Indian Rail...
State of U.P. Vs. Ram Charan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-15-1974
Reported in: 1974CriLJ1247
P.N. Bakshi, J.1. This is a Government appeal against the acquittal of Ram Charan respondent for an offence under Section 3 of the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act 1966.2. The prosecution case is that at about 12.15 in the night of 28th and 29th March, 1969 Ratan Lal a senior Rakshak of the Railway Protection Force and some other members who were on patrol duty apprehended the respondent near coach N. R. 2418 on the railway line No. 1 holding a dynamo belt Ex. I in his hand. The respondent is also said to have made a confessional statement which was recorded by Sri Rahim Uddin, A.S.I. of R.P.F. It appears that the matter was enquired into by the officers concerned of the R.P.F. and a complaint was made by Sri Rahim Uddin Special Railway Magistrate, Jhansi who took cognizance of the case. The trial Magistrate after a consideration of the evidence on the record arrived at a conclusion that the offence against the respondent had been established. He, therefore, convicted the res...
Het Ram and ors. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-15-1974
Reported in: 1974CriLJ871
B.N. Katju, J.1. Het Ram Sobaran and Ram Lal have filed this appeal against the judgment of Sessions Judge Farrukhabad dated 4-8-1972 passed in Sessions Trial No. 114 of 1972 convicting them under Sections 302/34 and 307/34 IPC and sentencing them to imprisonment for life and ten years R. I. respectively, .2. The case of the prosecution is that on 24-12-1971 at about 3 a. m. Rati Ram deceased along with his son Rajaram (PW 2) and nephew Dwarika (PW 2) left their village Uliapur in order to sell potatoes which were loaded in their bullock carts. At about 3, 30 a. m. when they had covered a distance at about 3/4th of a mile and were between villages Jhausa and Rampura they were surrounded toy the three appellants. All the three appellants were armed with Karaulis and Sobaran was also armed with a lathi and Het Ram was also armed with a pistol. Sobaran gave a lathi blow to Raja Ram and thereafter all the three appellants began to assault Rati Ram deceased and Raia Ram with Karaulis. Rati ...
Raghunath Das Prahlad Das Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-11-1974
Reported in: [1974]104ITR95(All)
H.N. Seth, J. 1. At the instance of the assessee, Messrs. Raghunath Das Prahlad Das of Mathura, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench B, has referred the following question in respect of the assessment year 1963-64 for the opinion of this court:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, theTribunal was right in holding in law that the loss of Rs. 46,275 arose tothe assusseo from speculative transactions within the meaning of Section 43(5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and; consequently, could not be setoff against other income of the assessee ' 2. The assessee is a registered firm working as commission agent in a number of commodities such as coconut, munghpali, sarson, etc. It also purchased and sold those commodities on its own account. In respect of those commodities the assessee also entered into transactions which admittedly were speculative transactions. During the months of September and October of 1961, which fell within the previous year relevant to t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »