Allahabad Court April 1980 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.
Syed Manzoor HussaIn and ors. Vs. Hakim Ali Ahmad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-29-1980
Reported in: AIR1980All389
Deoki Nandan, J. 1. This is a plaintiff's second appeal. The appellants are the heirs and legal representatives of the plaintiff Syed Manzoor Hussain.2. The property, bearing at present municipal No. 97/120 of Talaq Mohal at Kanpur, was originally purchased by one Syed Moqbool Hassain in. the name of his wife Mst. Sayeeda Khatton through a sale deed dated 9th Aug., 1937 from one Mohd, Ishhaq. The sale deed provided that a strip of land four feet wide shall be left for the purposes of passage to the mosque which is situate to the north of the property. The land of passage is shown by letters 'A' 'B' 'C' 'D' on the map annexed to the plaint. The dispute relates to this passage. It is undisputed that the deceased plaintiff Syed Manzoor Hussain became the owner of the property by way of transfer. According to the plaintiff's case a number of doors and windows etc.. of the house No. 97/120, which was situate on both the sides of the passage land, opened on it. The plaintiffs and their prede...
Controller of Estate Duty Vs. Smt. Kalawati Devi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-28-1980
Reported in: (1980)18CTR(All)269; [1980]125ITR762(All); [1980]4TAXMAN250(All)
Satish Chandra, C.J.1. One Ram Swarup died on 19th December, 1971, leaving behind his widow, Smt. Kalawati Devi, and one married daughter, Smt. Usha, to succeed to his estate. The widow, as an accountable person, filed a statement of the estate under the E.D. Act. She claimed that in the HUF properties her husband had a one-third share, which alone passed on his death to herself and her daughter. This plea was repelled. The Asst. Controller held that the deceased was the exclusive owner, and so the entire property passed on his death. The matter was taken up in appeal. The Appellate Controller confirmed the finding of the Asst. Controller. The accountable person took up the matter to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. There reliance was placed on Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The Tribunal held :' In the present case, the property had come to the family of the deceased on a partition of the bigger HUF. It was, therefore, joint family property and was treated as such in th...
Raj Bahadur Singh Vs. Mahadeo Prasad Halwai
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-25-1980
Reported in: AIR1981All58
K.C. Agarwal, J. 1. This is a defendant's appeal arising out of a judgment and decree of the Additional District Judge, Gorakhpur, decreeing the suit for recovery of Rs. 8,600/- together with pendente lite and future interest. 2. The facts are these : The plaint allegations were that on February 12, 1972 the plaintiff advancedRs. 5,000/- to the defendant in cash who agreed to pay interest at the rate of Rs. 2/- per mensum. He executed an agreement on the same day undertaking not to sell the property mentioned in the agreement and would pay the sum borrowed within three years from 12-2-1969 tailing which the plaintiff would be entitled to realise the aforesaid sum along with interest. The plaintiff alleged that later it transpired that the defendant had only a fractional share in the property and, therefore, could not execute a sale deed in respect of the entire area. On learning this the plaintiff demanded his money but when the defendant failed to pay the same, he had to bring the sui...
Singhal Engineering Co. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-25-1980
Reported in: AIR1980All365
M.N. Shukla, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 39(1) of the Arbitration Act in which interpretation of Section 12 of the Arbitration Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) is involved. Briefly, the facts are that the dispute between the plaintiff-appellant and the opposite parties was referred by virtue of an arbitration agreement to two arbitrators, one of whom was nominated by the appellant contractor and this arbitrator was Lt. Col. D.K. Ghosh and the second arbitrator was Sri D.D. Sanyal, Engineer, who was nominated by the State of U.P. The former accepted the appointment on 15-10-1972, while the latter accepted the appointment on 24-10-1972. The sitting of the arbitrators could not actually commence before 22-1-1973. It appears that on account of these circumstances the time of one month during which the umpire ought to have been appointed was lost and the arbitrators failed to appoint an umpire as required by paragraph 2 of the first schedule of the Arbitration Act, 1940. Th...
Bachchu Lal (In Jail) Vs. the Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-25-1980
Reported in: 1981CriLJ71
ORDERM. Murtaza Husain, J.1. This revision is directed against the appellate order dated 9-1-1978 passed by the 1st Addl. Sessions Judge, Baharaich whereby he upheld revisionist's conviction under Section 135(b) of the Customs Act, 1962 and Section 85 of Gold (Control) Act, 1968 ordered by the C.J.M., Baharaich. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate had awarded one year's Rule I, to the revisionist on each count. While maintaining his conviction for those offences, the learned 1st Addl. Sessions Judge reduced the revisionist's sentence of one year's Rule I. on each count to six months' R. I.2. The case under revision arose on the basis of a complaint dated 3-9-73 filed by the respondent against the revisionist in the Court of C.J.M. Baharaich alleging that at 1 p.m. on 16-10-70 in Hanuman Gali in the Bazar of Bahraich the respondent was found to be in possession of a piece of foreign gold, bearing No. 9990 and weighing 114.700 gms., which was primary gold and which could not be legally...
D.P. Titus Vs. L.W. Lyall
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-25-1980
Reported in: 1981CriLJ68
M. Murtaza Husain, J.1. This appeal has been filed by a complainant after obtaining special leave from this Court against the order dated 11-5-78 passed by a Magistrate of the 1st Class at Lucknow whereby he has acquitted the respondent of charges under Sections 295 and 448, I.P.C.2. A Church building, with appurtenant residential quarters and open compound, lies in Mohalla Saadatganj in the city of Lucknow. These premises undis-putedly belong to Methodist Church of Southern Asia. In these premises the respondent was running a nursery school and a charitable dispensary since before the filing of the complaint which has given rise to this appeal. The complainant appellant, D.P. Titus, is the District Superintendent of Methodist Churches in Southern Asia. He filed a complaint with the allegations that in the year 1955 the respondent was appointed Pastor of Saadatganj Church which was consecrated property for worship by the Christians. It was entrusted to the respondent in the aforesaid c...
Abdul Jabbar and ors. Vs. 2nd Additional District Judge, Orai and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-24-1980
Reported in: AIR1980All369
A.N. Verma, J.1. These are two connected petitions arising out of two suits filed by the plaintiffs-respondents against the petitioners in each of the two petitions for the eviction of the petitioners.2. The relevant facts are these: The respondents Nos. 3 and 4 (in Writ Petition No. 5955 of 1979) filed two suits against the petitioners of the two petitions on the ground that they were the tenants of the respective accommodations and despite a notice determining the tenancy, they did not vacate the accommodation in dispute.3. The petitioners contested the two suits and denied the title and ownership of the plaintiffs. The petitioners asserted that they were themselves the owners of the property in dispute. They also denied having been served with any notice.4. The trial court accepted the version of facts as given by the petitioners and dismissed the two suits,5. The landlords filed Revisions under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act and the same have been allowed. The ...
Smt. Gita Devi Vs. Smt. Munder Devi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-21-1980
Reported in: AIR1980All372
A. Banerji, J. 1. This is a second appeal by the plaintiff-appellant. It raises a very interesting question under the Succession Act.2. The question is whether the daughter of a legatee who dies in the lifetimeof the testatrix succeeds to the legacywhen the will gave the estate to twodaughters of the testatrix equally. Thecontention on behalf of the appellant isthat she succeeds to the legacy of herdeceased mother in view of the provisions of Section 109 of the Indian SuccessionAct, hereinafter referred to as the Act.Learned counsel for the respondent contended that the provisions of Section 107of the Act would be applicable becauseunder the will the properties of the deceased testatrix were bequeathed to thetwo daughters equally. The trial courtas well as the lower appellate court bothhave taken the view that the appellantdoes not succeed to the legacy. The lowerappellate court has based its conclusionon the use of the expression 'legacy'and 'any child' in Section 109 to meanone legat...
Ku. Aamina Saadat Ali Vs. Municipal Board, Bahraich
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-18-1980
Reported in: AIR1980All376
T.S. Misra, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the appellate court below whereby the suit of the plaintiff was dismissed. Raja Syed Mohd. Saadat All Khan had tiled the suit alleging that he was the Zamindar of Mohal Abu Jafar in the city of Bahraich, that plots Nos. 6454, 6455 and 6456 of the First Settlement of 1857 lay in the said Mohal and were owned and possessed by him and that the Municipal Board, Bahraich, without any right threatened to make certain constructions over the plots in question. Hence the suit was initially filed on 25th October, 1962 for a permanent injunction to restrain the Municipal Board from making any construction on the said plots of land. However, during the pendency of the suit the Municipal Board constructed certain shops over the said land. The plaint was consequently got amended and a relief for delivery of possession by removal of the offending constructions was sought for.2. The suit was contested by the Municipal ...
Shikshak Bandhu Karyalaya Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-17-1980
Reported in: [1984]56STC313(All)
R.M. Sahai, J.1. M/s. Shikshak Bandhu Karyalaya runs an Examination Board for conducting terminal and annual examination of classes VI and VIII of various schools. In 1972-73 it set papers for those examinations, printed them in the press and supplied it to the schools who were inclined to order for the same. It was held by assessing authority that supply of such paper was sale and the assessee was a dealer liable to pay tax on it. In revision a number of contentions were raised but they were rejected. The learned counsel for assessee has reiterated all those submissions which were raised before revising authority and has submitted that assessee is not liable to pay any tax on sale of the examination papers as the work done by assessee was in nature of works contract. It was also alleged that the papers sold by assessee were in fact brochures or book-lets and they being exempt from payment of tax the revising authority committed an error in levying tax on turnover of supply of papers. ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »