Allahabad Court January 1981 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.
Sheo NaraIn Singh Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-16-1981
Reported in: 1981CriLJ635
ORDERMurlidhar, J.1. This is a complainant's revision against a revisional order of the Sessions Judge by which the Magistrate was held to have no jurisdiction to take cognizance of the revisionist's complaint under Sections 120B, 420, 468, 471, I.P.C. and to issue a search warrant in accordance with Section 93, Cr. P.C.2. The brief facts are that the revisionist filed a complaint against Ram Awatar Agarwal, Chairman and Bharat Bhushan, Manager of the Sanyukt Chhetriya Gramin Bank which is a statutory body with majority share capital held by Central and State Governments. There can be no question that the accused would in their capacity of Chairman and Manager be public servants. However, the complainant's case was that certain examination was to be held for recruitment of some categories of employees for the bank and the two accused persons settled with him that they would get his nephew appointed provided he paid them Rs. 10,000/- of which Rs. 2,000/- were paid by way of first instal...
Chandra Swaroop Sinha Vs. Smt. Manorama Sinha
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-15-1981
Reported in: AIR1981All230
Mithal, J. 1. First Appeal No. 80 of 1978 and Second Appeal No. 1167 of 1968 have both come up before this Court on a reference made by Hon'ble Deoki Nandan, J., vide his order of reference dated 23rd August, 1979. 2. In First Appeal No. 80 of 1978 the point before the learned single Judge was about the maintainability of the appeal as it was directed against a decree passed by the Judge, Small Cause Court, Varanasi, while deciding the proceedings under the Hindu Marriage Act. Since the learned single Judge had already referred Second Appeal No. 1167 of 1968 Smt. Mithilesh Kumari v. Ambika Prasad Tiwari for re-consideration by the Division Bench of the decision of Hon'ble Oak, J. in Shesh Narain Dixit v. Smt. Savitri (1966 All LJ 833) : (AIR 1967 All 156) the question involved in First Appeal No. 80 of 1978 was also referred to this Bench. 3. In Second Appeal No. 1167 of 1968 the appellant had filed a petition against her husband in the District Court. Varanasi, for annulment of her ma...
Haji Lal Mohd. Biri Works Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-15-1981
Reported in: (1981)21CTR(All)90; [1982]134ITR718(All); [1981]6TAXMAN228(All)
Sinha, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following two questions for the opinion of this court:' 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, there was any material for the Tribunal to disallow the sum of Rs. 20,795 on account of loss by fire ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the payment of sales tax composition fee of Rs. 1,91,887 was an allowable expenditure for the assessment year 1968-69 ' 2. The facts relevant to the first question are as follows:The assessee deals in the business of manufacture and sale of biris. In the previous year relevant to the assessment year 1968-69, the shop of the assessee at Meerganj was set on fire in communal disturbance. According to the assessee, a wall clock of the value of Rs. 100, 40 bags of biris valued at Rs. 10,400, match boxes of the value of Rs. 3,794, furniture worth Rs. 1,500 and cash amount of Rs. 5,000 were burnt. The total loss was calculated by him at Rs. 20,795 and...
Hausala Bux Singh and anr. Vs. Smt. Prembala and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-15-1981
Reported in: 1981CriLJ1077
ORDERMahavir Singh, J.1. This petition has been moved by the applicants to quash the proceedings under Section 147, Cr.P.C. pending in the Court of City Magistrate, Lucknow against them at the instance of opposite party No. 1.2. The relevant facts are that the applicants and opposite party No. l are in possession of two adjoining portions which were initially part of one house but later on, the heirs of the original owner transferred their respective half shares to the two sides. The applicant's wife purchased the eastern portion while the husband of the opposite party No. 1 purchased the western portion. There was an intermertiary wall between the two. The applicants are father and son. In their portion there was a Barotha (portico). It was through this Barotha that the main door of the portion of opposite party No. l opened and thereafter they went out through the northern door.3. According to the case of the applicants, a latrine of the old type, i.e. service latrine existed in this...
Jiya Lal and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-13-1981
Reported in: AIR1981All72
Hyder, J.1. The controversy in this writ petition covered a wide range during the course of the arguments at the bar. We feel that it would not be necessary for us to deal with all the submissions urged on behalf of the parties as this writ petition must succeed on a short point.2. The petitioners, who are eleven in number, are holders of Stage Carriage Permits. Their vehicles ply on Muzaffarnagar Charthawal Garni Kalan route. On the said route, just before Chartha-wal, the road crosses the river Hindan. In the year 1965, the State of U. P. constructed a bridge of sufficient strength to allow heavy vehicles to pass over it. A total sum of Rs. 6,70,000/- was spent by the State Government on the construction of the bridge and its approach roads. There is no serious controversy between the parties in so far as these facts are concerned.3. The Indian Legislature passed Indian Tolls Act, 1851 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1851). It is an Act enabling the Government to levy tolls on...
Dharampal Gir and anr. Vs. Smt. Angoori Devi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-13-1981
Reported in: AIR1981All164
V.K. Khanna, J. 1. This is a plaintiff's second appeal arising out of a suit for restraining the defendant by means of a permanent injunction from alienating the properties detailed at the foot of the plaint. 2. According to the plaintiff's case one Narottam Gir had half share in plots Nos. 24l measuring 3 Bighas 5 Biswas and 599 measuring 5 Biswas situate in Sikandrabad, district Bulandshahr. The aforesaid Narottam Gir had four sons, namely, Dharampal Gir, Parmeshwari Dayal Gir, the two plaintiffs, Madan Gir, the deceased husband of defendant-respondent, Smt. Angoori Devi, and Pooran Gir. Madan Gir husband of defendant-respondent Smt. Angoori Devi, pre-deceased his father Narottam Gir and after his death Smt. Angoori Devi, defendant-respondent, went away to her parents' place. Defendant-respondent, Smt. Angoori Devi however, came again to the plaintiff's house after the death of Narottam Gir, The name of the defendant-respondent was got mutated in village record for her consolation ev...
Gur Bachan Singh Vs. Dharam Samaj Society
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-12-1981
Reported in: AIR1981All208
V.K. Khanna, J.1. This is a defendant's second appeal arising out of suit for ejectment and also for recovery of arrears of rent.2. According to the plaintiff's case, the plaintiff is a registered society and Sri Bishan Swaroop Gupta is its secretary duly authorised to file the suit. The defendant, according to the plaintiff is a monthly tenant @ Rs. 20/- per month who had been served with a registered notice dated 28-12-1969 under Section 106 of the T.P. Act by which his tenancy has been duly terminated and despite service of the notice he is not delivering the possession of the property in suit and hence the suit.3. The aforesaid suit has been contested by the defendants on the ground that no valid notice has been served on him and further that the provisions of U.P. Act No. 3 of 1947 were applicable to the case and the defendant was not liable to eiectment, besides other pleas.4. The trial court, besides other issues, framed issue No. 2 to the effect:'Whether the plaintiff has serve...
Sher Singh Vs. Mohd. Ismail and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-09-1981
Reported in: AIR1981All114
Deoki Nandan, J.1. This is a defendant's second appeal in a suit for ejectment and damages in respect of a half portion of a shop.2. The plaintiff claimed to have taken the shop on a monthly rent of Rs. 14/- per month from one Begum Khurshed Khwaja and to have started a business therein in partnership with one Tori Mal under the name and style of Mohd. Ismail Tori Mal. The rent was paid by the Firm and it appears that the Firm came to be treated as a tenant of the shop. The plaintiff's share in that partnership was 3/4th and that of ToriMal 1/4th. However, in 1949 the business of that partnership appears to have come to a stop and Tori Mal is said to have taken possession of 3/2 of the shop on the eastern side and to have started separate business in partnership with Baboo Lal and the first defendant Sher Singh. A Suit No. 604 of 1951 was filed by the plaintiff against Tori Mal. It was held in that suit that the plaintiff's share in the partnership assets was 3/4th and that of Tori Mal...
Jangi Vs. the Board of Revenue, U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-09-1981
Reported in: AIR1981All191
ORDERK.P. Singh, J.1. By means of this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order of Sri P. C. Saxena, IAS, Member, Board of Revenue dated 26-4-1976 in Second Appeal No. 537 of 73-74 (District Jaunpur) Jangi v. Raia Ram.2. Brief facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that Pheral was the tenure-holder of the disputed land. He executed a sale deed in favour of the plaintiffs-opposite parties on 21-9-1964 and he executed a sale deed in favour of the defendant petitioner on 15-9-1964, but the sale deed was registered on 23-10-1964. The contention of the plaintiff-respondents was that the defendant-petitioner had illegally trespassed over the disputed land, hence they had prayed for declaration and possession under Sections 229-B/209 of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act.3. The claim of the plaintiff-respondent was contested by the defendant-petitioner on the ground that his possession was lawful and he was not liable to ejectment as claimed i...
Janardan Misra Vs. the State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-09-1981
Reported in: AIR1981All213
Deoki Nandan, J.1. This is a plaintiffs second appeal in a suit for declaration that the plaintiff's 'so-called' resignation dated 4th February, 1964 was null and void, inoperative and illegal and for recovery of Rs. 1,200/- as arrears of pay etc., and for a further declaration that the plaintiff continues in service as House Visitor in the Malaria Eradication Programme and is entitled to his arrears of pay and allowances etc., till such time as the plaintiff is allowed to join his service. The suit was filed on 27th February, 1965 by presenting an application for permission to sue in forma pauperis. It was registered as a suit on 20th December, 1965. The trial Court decreed the suit by saying that the plaintiff is declared to be in service entitled to the arrears claimed and pendente lite and future emoluments, and further that 'the impugned resignation and order accepting the same are declared to be illegal, null and void.' The lower appellate court allowed in part the appeal filed b...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »