Allahabad Court November 1977 Judgments
Shashi Kant Rai and ors. Vs. Regional Transport Authority, Varanasi Re ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-30-1977
Reported in: AIR1978All68
B. N. Sapru, J. 1. The petitionerswere operators of stage carriages on (i) Jaunpur-Minhajpur, fii) Jaunpur-Saidpur via Kirakat, (iii) Jaunpur-Kirakat, (iv) Jaunpur-Ghazipur via Kirakat, Aurihar and Sadipur and (v) Jaunpur-Dhobi via 'Kirakat routes. They held valid permits to operate their stage carriages over these routes. 2. A draft scheme under Section 68-C of the Motor Vehicles Act was published in the U. P. Gazette dated 26th August. 1961. Certain objections challenging the scheme under Section 68-C of the Act were filed. The scheme was however, approved and was published in the U. P. Gazette dated 2-6-1973. Consequential orders under Section 68-F (2) (b) cancelling the petitioners' permits were made. 3. The approved scheme prepared under Section 68-D was challenged in writ no. 6734 of 1973. The aforesaid writ petition was allowed by this Court by its judgment D/- 21-12-1973. The Court quashed the notification dated 18th August, 19-61 and the order of respondent No. 2 viz., the Joi...
Tag this Judgment!Jagannath Prasad Vs. Sant Hardasram Sevashram and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-30-1977
Reported in: AIR1978All250
M.N. Shukla, J. 1. This is a defendants' appeal presented along with an application under Section 5 read with Section 14 of the Limitation Act. It arises out of a suit valued at Rs. 29,617.10, which was decreed by the trial Court on 2-6-1975. Aggrieved by the decree the defendant-appellant filed an appeal on 4-8-1975 in the court of the District Judge, Varanasi, which was registered as Civil Appeal No. 495 of 1975. As early as 19/20-11-1975, the plaintiff moved an application praying that the appeal be rejected on the ground that in view of the valuation of the original suit mentioned above, the appeal lay to the High Court. The said objection was ordered to be put up for orders on 22-1-1975. On that date the present appellant moved an application No. 160, asking for 15 days' time for replying to that objection. The case was adjourned to 6-12-1975 on which date again the Court passed an order directing the objection 15 (c) to be put up on 3-1-1976. It appears that on that date, respond...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Ishwar Devi Vs. Reoti Raman and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-30-1977
Reported in: AIR1978All306
T.S. Misra, J. 1. This appeal arises out of a fatal accident case. One Mahesh Vijai Singh left his house situate in Bazar Jhau Lal for Ghasiyari Mandi, Lucknow on the night intervening 4th and 5th May, 1968 at about 9.40 P.M. He was going on foot. When he reached Kothi No. 16 on R. K. Tandon Road, Lucknow in front of Kotwali, Qaiser-bagh, he was knocked down by motorcycle No. UPZ 2719 which was being driven by Reoti Raman Rastogi. The injuries which he sustained proved to be fatal and he died after about four hours of the accident. He was survived by his widow, a son and a daughter who were his dependents. Shrimati Ishwar Devi, his widow, was about 50 years old whereas his daughter Km. Kumkum was 16 years old and his son Dinesh Kumar was 14 years old. Mahesh Vijai Singh,the deceased, was a licensed typist. He carried on his profession in the premises of this Court at Lucknow and it was alleged that his monthly income therefrom was about Rs. 400 per month. Smt. Ishwar Devi filed a claim...
Tag this Judgment!Suraj Kumar Pandey Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-30-1977
Reported in: [1978]42STC452(All)
C.S.P. Singh, J.1. The question referred is :Whether there was any material for not accepting the account books or for the view that the account books cannot be accepted in toto 2. The dispute relates to the assessment year 1966-67, i. e., for the period 1st April, 1966, to 31st March, 1967. On 3rd February, 1967, a survey was conducted at the business premises of the dealer in which certain papers relating to the period 2nd April, 1965, to 27th November, 1965, were found. Assessment for that period was made on the basis of the survey. However, the accounts of the assessee for this assessment year were also rejected on the basis of this survey, although the Judge (Revisions) was alive to the fact that inasmuch as the survey did not disclose any incriminating material for the year in question it could not be used as a basis for rejecting the accounts of the assessee. The approach of the Judge (Revisions) is clearly wrong. As the survey did not yield anything as respects the assessment y...
Tag this Judgment!islam Khan Vs. Munir
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-25-1977
Reported in: 1978CriLJ202
ORDERV.N. Varma, J.1. This revision has arisen of a case Under Section 145, Cr.PC2. The subject-matter of dispute 8n this case is a flour mill installed in a house in Mohalla Balaha Nagar P. S. Kotwali district Oral. The case originally taken by the applicant was that he was the owner of the flour mill and had been in possession of it, but, of late, the opposite party has started laying claim to it. He was also trying to dispossess him. There was thus a dispute as a result of which there was an apprehension o breach of peace. Accordingly he moved the Magistrate concerned (Sri S. B. Sri-vastava, Executive Magistrate, Orai) to take suitable action against the opposite party. The Magistrate called for a report from S.O.P.S. Kotwali. On the basis of the report submitted by S. O. KotwaB, the Magistrate issued a notice against the parties Under Sections 107/117, Cr.PC Subsequently, the proceedings were changed and a preliminary order Under Section 145(1) Cr.PC was passed on 21-8 1&76, and th...
Tag this Judgment!Mahesh Kumar and anr. Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-25-1977
Reported in: 1978CriLJ390
ORDERP.N. Harkauli, J.1. Mahesh Kumar and Mohd. Abbas, applicants were convicted by the learned Tehsildar-Magistrate Second Class, Naraini, district Banda Under Section 160 read with Section 34 I.P.C. and sentenced to a fine of Rs. 50/- each. In default of payment of fine the defaulter was ordered to undergo one month's simple imprisonment. This order was passed on 10th of January 1973.2. On the 15th of January 1973 the applicants moved an application for revision before the learned Sessions Judge. When this revision application came up for hearing on 9-3-1973 the applicants moved an application before the learned Sessions Judge praying that the application for revision might be treated as an appeal on the ground that the revision was filed in a hurry and at that time it was not noticed that the impugned order was passed by a Magistrate of the Second Class and not by a Magistrate of the First Class and because of this mistake a revision had been filed instead of an appeal. It was oppos...
Tag this Judgment!Aas Mohammad and ors. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-25-1977
Reported in: 1978CriLJ381
S. Malik, J.1. This is an appeal by Aas Mohammad, his brother Ehsan AH and Hasan Khan, the brother-in-law of Ehsan Ali, against the judgment dated 1H-9-1972 of the Civil and Sessions Judge, Rampur, convicting them Under Section 396 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing each to imprisonment for life.2. The prosecution has proved by cogent evidence including the statements made by P. W. 1 Mohammad Jan, P. W. 2 Shaqoor and P. W. 3 Maseeta that an armed da-coity was committed by about ten persons during the night between the 26th and 27th of Oct. 1971 at about midnight in village Chakia Mazra in the house of P. W. 1 Mohammad Jan at a distance of about five miles from police station Kemri. During the dacoity Mohammad Nabi, the father of Mohammad Jan and also Mohammad Jan were beaten by the dacoits in order to extract information about the valuables and Mohammad Nabi was shot dead. First Information Report of the incident was lodged by Mohammad Jan at police station Kemri on the 27th morni...
Tag this Judgment!Gajram Singh and anr. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-25-1977
Reported in: 1978CriLJ387
ORDERH.N. Kapoor, J.1. This revision has been filed by Gajram Singh and Ramgopal against the order and judgment dated 19-8-1976 of the First Addl. Sessions Judge of Rampur in Cr. Appeal No. 107 of 1974 confirming the order of the II Addl. Munsif-Magistrate, Rampur dated 4-8-1976 by which both the applicants were convicted under Rule 114 of the D.I.R. and each of them sentenced to four months' R.I. together with a fine of Rs, 500/- and in default of payment of fine each of them was vto undergo further R.I. for two months.2. The prosecution case is that on 26-12-1975 S. O. Shahabad accompanied by another Sub-Inspector and the Marketing Inspectors A. K. Srivastava and H. C. Goel and some constables went on checking duty. They inspected the house of the applicants and found a rice huller established inside the house on a platform. It was in a proper working condition and some rice and husk was also found lying there. They had no licence for the same. Both the applicants were present there ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Mukund Lal and Sons.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-20-1977
Reported in: (1978)7CTR(All)74
C. S. P. Singh, J. - The Additional Revising Authority Sales Tax, Allahabad has at the instance of the Commissioner of Sales Tax, U.P. referred the following question for our opinion :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case Shakkar would be liable to tax vide Notification No. ST-7122/X-900(16)-64, dated 1-10-1964, or shall be liable to Sales Tax as unclassified item ?'The dealer carried on business in Gur and Shakkar etc. The turnover of Shakkar was included on the ground that its first purchase was taxable under Notification No. St-7122/X-900(16)-64, dated 1-10-1964, issued under S. 3-D of the U.P. Sales Tax Act. The appeal filed by the dealer succeeded and a revision by the Commr. of Sales Tax against that order failed. Relevant entry in the notification is to the following effect.'Gur ........... 3 paisa per rupee.The question whether Gur and Shakkar are the same commodities, was considered in the case of C.S.T. Lucknow vs. M/s. Navin Traders Etawah. It was held t...
Tag this Judgment!Hukan Chand Goyal Vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-18-1977
Reported in: AIR1978All176
K.N. Singh, J.1. The petitioner is a Notary for the district of Muzaffar-nagar appointed under the Notaries Act, 1952. On 14th October, 1970, the State Government issued a circular order directing the District Judges of the State to make recommendations for the appointment of additional Notaries. The Government order stated that the Government was satisfied that the average income of a Notary should not be less than Rs. 300/- per month and on this principle wherever necesarv more notaries should be appointed. The order further directed the District Judge to examine the question on the principles enunciated in the order and if necessary to recommend for the appointment of additional hands as Notaries. The District Judge, Muzaffarnagar, on scrutiny found that the average monthly income of the two Notaries working in the district of Muzaffarnagar was Rs. 1300/-per month, he thereupon invited applications for the appointment of Notaries. The petitioner and certain other persons thereupon f...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »