Allahabad Court September 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.
Tungal Ram Vs. Smt. Leelawati
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-13-1977
Reported in: AIR1978All46
ORDERN.D. Ojha, J.1. The applicant is the defendant in a suit. After the plaintiff's wit-nessesg had been examined and cross-examined and the plaintiff closed her evidence an application was made for amendment of the written statement by the applicant on the ground that shortly before the defendant had met the plaintiff and was told by her that she had not instituted the suit at all. On the basis of this alleged conversation the written statement was sought to be amended incorporating a plea that the plaint was liable to be rejected not having been filed by the plaintiff. This application was dismissed by the Munsif. He disbelieved the applicant's version in regard to his meeting the plaintiff and the talk which is said to have taken place between the parties. The Munsif took the view that the defendant's version in this behalf did not inspire confidence. He also took the view that no case had been made out for amendment in the written statement after the close of the evidence by the p...
Haji NizamuddIn and ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-13-1977
Reported in: AIR1978All271
K.N. Singh, J. 1. This writ petition is directed against the order of the Controller, Sunni Board of Waqfs, Lucknow directing the Collector, Muzaffarnagar to recover possession of the land from the petitioners. 2. There is a waqf known as Waqf Takia Shah Islam in the district of Muzaffarnagar in respect of some landed property. The waqf property is subject to the administration and control of Sunni Central Board of Waqfs, constituted under the Muslim Waqfs Act, 1960. It appears that Babu Imam Bux, who was an erstwhile Mutawalli of the said waqf granted a lease of the property in question in favour of the petitioners. That lease was renewed in the year 1961. It further appears that the Central Board of Waqfs received information that the property of the Waqf Takia Shah Islam had been let out in an unauthorised manner to the petitioners. The Controller of the Waqf Board issued a show cause notice dated 28th March, 1977 calling upon the petitioners to restore back the possession of the pr...
Girdhar Prasad and ors. Vs. Joint Director of Consolidation and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-12-1977
Reported in: AIR1978All7
K.N. Seth, J.1. In consolidation proceedings Smt. Rukmini filed an objection to the effect thet the plots in dispute were occupancy holding of her husband Behari. In June, 1908, these plots were mortgaged by Kaushilaya, the pre-decessor-in-interest of Behari, in favour of Sri Khireshwar, predecessor-in-interest of the petitioners. She claimed that Behari died after the date of vesting and since Behari was recorded as tenant-in-chief, after his death she inherited the land in dispute, as Sirdar and the petitioners were mere Asamis. The claim was contested and it was pleaded that the petitioners, who were ex-Zamindars, being in possession of the land in dispute, acquired Bhumidhari rights. In the alternative it was asserted that mortgage of the occupancy holding being void and no suit having been filed for possession within the period of limitation, the petitioners acquired Sirdari rights on the date of vesting.2. The Consolidation Officer accepted the claim of the petitioners that they ...
Smt. Kailashwati Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-12-1977
Reported in: AIR1978All181
K.C. Agarwal, J.1. This writ petition challenges the notification dated 12-10-1976 issued under Section 4 read with Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act (briefly stated as 'the Act'). The notification was issued by the State Government for acquiring a number of plots situated in village Hafizabad Mewala, district Meerut. Amongst the various plots mentioned in the said notification, one of them was plot No. 93, measuring 1 Bigha 9 Biswas. This plot belongs to the petitioner. The notification stated that the land mentioned therein was required for construction of a Market Yard by the Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti, Meerut (hereinafter referred to as the Mandi Samiti). As in the opinion of the State Government, the purpose for which the land was acquired was urgent, the Governor exercising his power under Section 17(1) and (1-A) as well as Sub-section (4) of the aforesaid section, dispensed with the proceedings under Section 5-A of the Act. This notification further contained a direction t...
Arun Kumar and ors. Vs. Smt. Chandrawati Agrawal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-12-1977
Reported in: AIR1978All221
B.N. Sapru, J.1. The facts necessary for the decision of this second appeal can he narrated in brief. A suit was filed in forma pauperis by the plaintiffs who claimed themselves to be sons and daughters of Gaya Prasad, defendant No. 3. It is stated that Gaya Prasad executed a conditional sale of the disputed house No. 8, Khushal Parbat, Allahabad in favour of defendant No. 4, Chaudhary Naunihal Singh. Subsequently, in the year 19.59, the defendant No. 3 and defendant No. 4, namely. Gaya Prasad and Chaudhary Naunihal Singh respectively, sold the house to Smt. Chandrawati Agarwal and Smt. Shakuntala Devi who were defendants Nos. 1 and 2 in the suit. The plaintiffs' allegations were that at the relevant time when the sale-deed was executed, they were minors and the sale-deeds were not for their benefits. It is further stated that the sale had been executed by Gaya Prasad without obtaining the permission of the District Judge and, as such, it was in violation of the provisions of Section 8...
Smt. Kunti Devi and ors. Vs. Radhey Shyam
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-09-1977
Reported in: AIR1978All185
M.P. Mehrotra, J.1. This second appealarises out of a suit for permanent injunction which the plaintiff sought against the defendants seeking to restrain the latter from dispossessing the former from a portion in house no. Section 15/15-16 situated in Mohalla Ghausabad in Varanasi. The plaintiff, in brief, claimed to be a tenant of the said portion and the defendant No. 4, Smt. Kunti Devi, was alleged to be the landlady. The defendants, Nos. 1 and 2, namely, Raj Kumar-singh and Harish Chandra, are the sons of the defendant No. 4 and the defendant No. 3. Maniram, is the husband of defendant No. 4. The portion in dispute was claimed to be in the tenancy of the plaintiff at the rate of Rs. 10/- per month and he also claimed that he had been doing his Motor Car repair work in the said accommodation. The plaintiff's case was that even though he was a tenant at the said rate, the defendants never gave him a rent receipt even though as tenant he had been regularly paying the rent. It was alle...
Gopal Krishna Vs. Lal Kishan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-08-1977
Reported in: AIR1978All48
M.P. Mehrotra, J.1. This second appeal arises out of a suit for declaration, possession and for damages for use endoccupation.2. The fiacts in brief are these : In the district of Agra in Tehsil Kiraoli there is village known as Chauma Shah-pur. The village is in two parts-- one is known as Chauma and the other is known as Shahpur. An old temple of Shri Gopal Krishna Bankey Behariji is said to exist at Shahpur and the plaintiff No. 1 is said to be the said deity installed in the said temple. Plaintiffs Nos. 2 to 6 reside in the said village and worsnip in the said temple. The deity sued through Baba Premanand whoclaimed to be the manager and pujari of the deity in the said temple. It was alleged that the defendant, Shri Lal Kishan, was formerly managing the said temple end was the pujari of the same. He left managing the plaintiff No. 1 and kept some idols in his own residential house situated at Chauma and began to claim that the old temple of the plaintiff No. 1 was at his residentia...
Zila Parishad Vs. K.C. Saxena and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-06-1977
Reported in: 1977CriLJ1747
ORDERH.N. Kapoor, J.1. These two revisions are directed against the same order dated 12-7-1977 of the Sessions Judge, Etawah allowing Cr. Revision No. 38 of 1977 and setting aside the order dated 23-6-1977 passed by the Addl. District Magistrate, Etawah Under Section 144, Cr. P. C. The Zila Parishad is represented by Sri N. S.Chaudhary, Sri K. C. Saxena is represented by Sri Virendra Saran while Raj Bahadur who was allowed to be impleaded subsequently in both these cases is represented by Sri Birendra Dikshit and Sri H. N. Misra. The order Under Section 144, Cr. P. C. prohibited persons other than the Zila Parishad from holding the cattle market in Baipura and Rajmau area within a radius of four kilo-metres from that area for a period of two months. The Magistrate was satisfied that there was apprehension of breach of the peace and so he passed the prohibitive order. Kailash Chand Saxena alone had filed a revision before learned Sessions Judge. He was interested in holding the cattle m...
Vineet Kumar Vs. Smt. Bhagwan Dei
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-02-1977
Reported in: AIR1978All312
ORDERM.P. Mehrotra, J.1. This application is palpably based on a false allegation. It has been stated in para 14 of the affidavit in support of the review application:'That against the order of the District Judge, Rampur, the applicant filed the Civil Revision No. 455/76 in this Hon'ble Court which was decided on merits without the hearing of the counsel for the applicant Sri H.S. Nigam. The case was not actually argued by Sri H, S. Nigam as it appears from the judgment and ordersheet. Only the rulings mentioned in the judgment of the lower court below which were cited, have been mentioned in the court's judgment at the High Court.'A reference to the judgment and order-sheet itself will show that this allegation is absolutely incorrect. The order-sheet dated 4th April, 1977 has clearly mentioned that Shri H.S. Nigam, for the applicant, and Shri H.S. Joshi for the opposite party were heard in part and then it was directed to be listed as a part-heard case on the next date. The order she...
Steel Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-02-1977
Reported in: 1978(2)ELT153(All)
J.M.L. Sinha, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by Steel Enterprises (Private) Ltd., Kanpuf, challenging the validity of the order dated 28-2-1975 (Annexure VI to the writ petition) passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Kanpur.2. Very briefly stated the facts were as follows :-The petitioner runs a factory under the name and style of Indian Rolling Mills. It is situated in Fazalganj, Kanpur, on 31st of July, 1974, the Excise authorities seized the stocks of the factory. Under section 110 of the Customs Act, where any goods are seized and no notice in respect thereof is given under Clause (a) of Section 124 of the same act within six months of the date of the seizure, the goods have to be returned to the person from whose possession they were seized. However, according to the proviso appended to Sub-section (2) of Section 110, the aforesaid period of six months can, on sufficient cause, be extended by the Collector of Customs for a period not exceeding six months. On 8th of Ja...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »