Allahabad Court April 1977 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.
iqbal Singh and ors. Vs. Ram NaraIn and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-06-1977
Reported in: AIR1977All352
J.M.L. Sinha, J. 1. This is a First Appeal from order dated 20th December, 1975, passed by the Civil Judge, Allahabad in proceedings under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act.2. The facts of the case, briefly, stated are as under:The parties entered into a partnership business to carry out contract work of the Government and in that connection an agreement was entered into between them. One of the clauses in the agreement provided for settlement of all disputes between the parties by arbitration. Dispute having arisen, the respondents gave notice to the appellants determining the partnership and asking for appointment of arbitrators. That having proved abortive, the plaintiff appellantsmoved an application under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act. The application was resisted by the respondents inter alia, on the ground, that, the partnership, being unregistered, the application under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act was barred by Section 69 of the Indian Partnership Act. This objection ...
Jhau Lal and ors. Vs. Nagar Mahapalika, Lucknow and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-06-1977
Reported in: AIR1977All504
Hari Swarup, J. 1. Certain petitioners have challenged through the present writ petition the validity of the Aliganj Street and City Expansion Scheme, an improvement scheme under the Nagar Mahapalika Adhiniyam. Another petition was filed earlier by some other persons in which the same scheme was challenged on various grounds, Learned counsel for the petitioners has not taken us over again the same grounds. We take it that he has argued those grounds and our judgment on those points is the same as is contained in our judgment in Writ Petition No. 137 of 1974, Mahabir Singh Kotwali v. Nagar Mahapalika LKO.2. The first contention is that the declaration having not been made within the time limit fixed by Section 4(2) of the Land Acquisition (Amendment and Validation) Act, 1967, Act No. 13 of 1967, the whole proceedings had become void and the scheme frustrated. Sub-section (2) of Section 4 reads as under:--'Notwithstanding anything contained in Clause (b) of Sub-section (1), no declaratio...
Ramji Mal Govind Ram Vs. Commissioner, Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-06-1977
Reported in: [1977]40STC200(All)
D.M. Chandrashekhar, J.1. The following question has been referred for opinion of this court:Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, there was any material in support of the turnover assessed by the Judge (Revisions) 2. It is not necessary to give the facts in detail. Suffice it to say that the assessee's account books have been rejected by the revising authority and it has not been challenged by the assessee.3. It has been alleged by the counsel for the assessee that the revising authority has committed an error of law inasmuch as the turnover has been fixed without adverting to any material on record.4. The principles governing best judgment assessment have been settled by a series of decisions by the Supreme Court. In estimating the turnover in a best judgment assessment, an element of guess-work is inevitable. However, (he courts have held that in making a best judgment assessment the assessing authority should not be arbitrary, capricious or vindictive.5. No doubt, th...
M/S. Ramji Mal Govind Ram Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-06-1977
Reported in: (1977)6CTR(All)166
ORDERD. M. Chandrashekhar, J. - The following question has been referred for opinion of this Court :'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, there was any material in support of the turnover assessed by the Jude (Revisions.)?'2. It is not necessary to give the facts in detail. Suffice it so say that the assessees account books have been rejected by the Revising Authority and it has not been challenged by the assessee.3. It has been alleged by the counsel for the assessee that the Revising Authority the turnover has been fixed without adverting to any material on record.4. The principles governing best judgment assessment have been settled by series of decisions by the Supreme Court. In estimating the turnover in a best Judgment, an element of guess work is inevitable However, the Courts have held that in making a best judgment the assessing authority should not be arbitrary, capricious of vindictive,5. No doubt, the Revising Authority in this case has not referred to any s...
Similesh Kumar Vs. Gaon Sabha Uskar Ghaziapur and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-05-1977
Reported in: AIR1977All360
Satish Chandra, J.1. I have had the advantage of reading the judgment prepared by Hon. K. C. Agarwal, J. I entirely agree. I would, however, like to make a few observations.2. In Dhulabhai v. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 1969 SC 78 Hidayatullah, C. J., speaking for the Supreme Court, laid down that questions of the correctness of orders are for the decision of the authorities created by a statute, and a civil suit does not lie if the orders of the authorities are declared to be final, or there is an express prohibition under a particular Act.3. The last Sub-section of Section 198 of the Zamindari Abolition Act declares that the orders of the Collector are, subject to a revision under Section 333, 'final'. This thus bars a suit or any other proceeding in a civil court. The order passed by the Collector or an order passed by the Board of Revenue in a revision filed against the order of the Collector, if any, gains finality between the parties. These orders settle and conclude the rights ...
Vineet Kumar Vs. Smt. Bhagwandei
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-05-1977
Reported in: AIR1977All403
ORDERM.P. Mehrotra, J.1. This revision is directed against an order whereby the trial court rejected a preliminary objection which was raised on behalf of the defendant to the maintainability of the suit.2. The brief facts are these: An award was made the rule of the court in Misc. Case No. 64 of 1974 by the court of the District Judge, Rampur. Subsequently, Smt. Bhagwandei, the plaintiff-opposite party, filed regular suit No. 64 of 1975 in the same court seeking a declaration that the decree passed in the aforesaid Misc. Case No. 64 of 1974 was null and void and inoperative. She contended that she never entered into any arbitration agreement and was never any party to any arbitration proceedings. She further alleged that the application whereby she was alleged to have moved the District Judge in the aforesaid Misc. Case for making the award of the arbitrator the rule of the court was not made by her and her alleged signature thereon was forged. In other words, her challenge was that t...
Lala Laxmipat Singhania Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-05-1977
Reported in: [1977]110ITR289(All)
D.M. Chandrashekhar, J. 1. The petitioner is a Hindu undivided family assessed to income-tax. In this petition under article 226 of the Constitution, its grievance is in regard to interest payable to it on advance tax deposited by it in excess of the amount of tax which it was ultimately held liable to pay.2. For the assessment year 1970-71, the petitioner deposited Rs. 73,398 as advance tax. On November 25, 1972, the Income-tax Officer made the assessment resulting in a demand of an additional amount of Rs. 65,940 (over and above the amount of advance tax already deposited).3. Against the order of assessment, the petitioner appealed to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner who allowed the appeal in part. To give effect to the appellate order, the Income-tax Officer, by his order dated November 5, 1973, recomputed the income and the tax payable by the petitioner. On November 19, 1973, he rectified his order and found that a sum of Rs. 36,058 was refundable to the petitioner.4. The petit...
Newspapers Ltd. Vs. Ratna Shankar Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-04-1977
Reported in: AIR1977All356
R.B. Misra, J.1. These three appeals are directed against the common judgment and decrees of the First Addl. District Judge, Allahabad dated 20th of April, 1974 in two connected suits and arise in the following circumstances.2. Late Sri Jai Sankar Prasad was a voracious writer. He has written dramas, novels, Essay, stories and poetry. By 16th of Dec. 1936 he had completed 24 books, on which date he entered into an agreement with the Newspapers Ltd. Allahabad a public limited company, carrying on business of printing, publishing and bringing out a Hindi Daily Newspaper known as 'Bharat'.3. Under the agreement it was stipulated that Newspapers Ltd. at its own risk and expense would produce and publish the 24 books mentioned in the agreement and any other book that might be written, compiled or edited by the author in question; that during the legal term, of restricted copyright the publishers shall have the exclusive right of producing and publishing the works and the author will not dur...
Smt. Lakshmi Devi Vs. Smt. Kala Devi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-01-1977
Reported in: AIR1977All509
M.P. Mehrotra, J. 1. The is the (plaintiff's second appeal and arises out of a suit which was filed by the original plaintiff Lalaram under Order XXI, Rule 63, C.P.C There were three defendants in the suit, Baburam was the defendant No. 3 and he happened to be the only son of the plaintiff, The latter died during the pendency of the appeal in the lower appellate court and his widow Smt, Plata Devi was brought on record as the legal representative of the deceased plaintiff, She also subsequently died and one Smt. Chandra Kanta Devi also died and then Smt. Lakshmi Devi was brought on record as her legal representative. Smt. Lakshmi Devi and before her Smt. Chandra Kanta Devi were brought on record on the basis of the respective wills in their favour alleged to have been executed by their predecessor-in-interest.2. The original plaintiff Lalaram deceased sought a declaratory relief to the effect that the property mentiened in the plaint was not attachable and saleable in the execution of ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›