Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: dehra dun act 1871 Court: privy council Page 4 of about 137 results (0.009 seconds)

Dr. Capt. Jatindra Mohan Mitra Vs. Mt. Dayal Devi

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1948All134

..... by the petitioner is not the last will of the testator. the latter was, as i have said, a hindu; the will relied upon by the caveator was made at dehra dun in the united provinces, and it is admitted that it is not such a will as falls within one of the classes specified in clauses (a) and (b) of section ..... this case two considerations must be borne in mind. first, it appears not to have been doubted that both wills were wills to which the provisions of section 213, succession act applied and that, therefore, it was necessary for a person claiming under either will to obtain probate thereof. secondly, the caveator desired to obtain probate of the later will, and ..... 57, succession act. it is not therefore obligatory under section 213 of that act for probate of the will to be obtained before an executor or, a legatee can establish his right under the will, see kanhaiya lal v .....

Hirdey NaraIn and anr. Vs. M.J. Powell and anr.

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : (1913)ILR35All9; 17Ind.Cas.672

..... order that he might ascertain the respective values of the interests of the appellants and mrs. powell in the land in question for which the superintendent of dehra dun has awarded under the land acquisition act a sum of rs. 7,768-8-0. the learned judge rightly, as we think, set himself to ascertain what were the respective rights of the appellants ..... it, that the interest of the appellant in the land was worth no more than rs. 1,060, and that the balance of the sum awarded by the superintendent of dehra dun, namely, rs. 6,708-8-0, should be given to mrs. powell. but in case this court did not agree with the view that mrs. powell was an abadi tenant .....

Hansraj Gupta Vs. N.P. Asthana

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1933)35BOMLR312

..... raghu mal (who will be referred to as the testator) was a shareholder in a company (herein called the company) named the dehra dun-mussoorie electric tramway company, limited, which was incorporated under the indian companies act, 1913, on august 23, 1921. he carried on business under the style of madharam-hardeo das at calcutta and under the style ..... paid to the testator out of the company's funds a sum of rs. 35,000, for which a receipt was given in the following terms;-received from the dehra dun-mussoorie electric tramway company, ltd., the sum of rs. 35,000 (rupees thirty-five thousand) only, being advances for orders placed with us as per their letter ..... suit in the high court of calcutta had been disposed of. this decision turned upon a question of construction of the allahabad high court rules under the indian companies act. the application was, however, also considered on the merits and dismissed, upon the ground that there existed a valid contract to take the shares to which the .....

In Re: East Bengal Sugar Mills Ltd. (In Liquidation)

Court : Kolkata

Reported in : AIR1941Cal143

..... the purpose of this section, whether the call was made before or after the winding up, provided the amount is unpaid.4. the case in hansraj gupta v. dehra dun and mussorie electric tramways co. ltd. is not in any way inconsistent with the judgment to which i have just referred. their lordships of the privy council were therein ..... dealing with a case under section 186 of the act, and lord russel of killowen on p. 390 specifically distinguished and excluded from his judgment questions arising out of the statutory liability created under section 156. the ..... that section alone, for this purpose, regulates their liability.3. the section to which he referred is as follows:in the event of a company formed under this act being wound up, every present and past member of such company shall be liable to contribute to the assets of the company to an amount sufficient for payment of .....

Hansraj Gupta and Others Vs. N.P. Asthana and Others

Court : Privy Council

..... lala raghu mal (who will be referred to as the testator) was a shareholder in a company (herein called the company) named the dehra- dun mussoorie electric tramway co., ltd., which was incorporated under the companies act 1913, on 23rd august 1921. he carried on business under the style of madharam-hardeo das at calcutta and under the style of madho ..... paid to the testator out of the company's funds a sum of rs.35,000, for which a receipt was given in the following terms: "received from the dehra dun-mussoorie electric tramway co. ltd., the sum of rupees 35,000 (rupees thirty-five thousand) only being advances for orders placed with us as per their letter no. ..... , they desire to state clearly that they do not assent to the view of the high court that the contract in question contravened the provisions of s.105, companies act. but even with this assumption made in their favour, the appellants cannot, in their lordships' view, succeed. whatever may have been the rights and liabilities of the .....

Ch. Rajender Singh Vs. Uma Prasad

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1935All117; 159Ind.Cas.193

..... as may be claimed.4. the question for consideration before us is whether the issuing of this notice amounted to a contempt of the subordinate judge of dehra dun. jurisdiction to punish for contempt of subordinate courts undoubtedly vests in this court, and has mot been challenged by learned counsel. apart from there being inherent ..... court. it is a novel proposition that even though the sending of the notice amounted to contempt, the counsel who sent it is protected because he was acting as counsel. a counsel's capacity is not inviolable, and his privileges cannot possibly extend to interference with the administration of justice. counsel are expected to ..... the defendant's guardian, but actually drafted the notice himself, which contained his own words, and sent the same under his own signature, although he was acting on behalf of the plaintiff. the threat having been made under the signature of a counsel and addressed to a layman was particularly serious. in these circumstances .....

H.K. Lodhi Vs. L. Shyam Lal

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1950All100

..... mathura, or the order of the sessions judge of agra. he has cited before us the case of sandal singh v. district magistrate and superintendent of police, dehra dun : air1934all148 . he has next urged that even if this court has jurisdiction to interfere with the orders of the courts below on its revisional side, it should ..... district magistrate had to determine whether the warrant could be executed according to law, he acted judicially and the high court had power to interfere with his order.22. in the case of sandal singh v. district magistrate and supdt. of police, dehra dun : air1934all148 , this court was called upon to revise an order of the district ..... the learned magistrate had a jurisdiction to order investigation into the case.4. while the application of the opposite party made under section 8a of the said act was pending before the district magistrate of mathura, the opposite party moved an application before the additional district magistrate, agra, on 20th january 1947 prying that .....

District Board Vs. CaptaIn H. Trotter

Court : Allahabad

Reported in : AIR1939All389

..... according to their circumstances and property. the argument of mr. banerji who appears for the defendant respondent, is that the area covered by the forest research institute at dehra dun, within which area the defendant resides, is not within the rural area and is therefore outside the jurisdiction of the district hoard. he refers to section 1(2 ..... that being so, the local government was entitled to enact the sections which authorize the imposition of taxes by the district boards. section 108, u.p. district boards act, runs as follows:with the previous sanction of the local government a board may, by notification, impose and may in like manner abolish or alter the rate of ..... to agree with the learned judge that such consideration can justify the dismissal of the suit. the provisions laid down in sections 128 and 131 of the act make it perfectly clear that the learned judge was not right in adverting to these considerations and in basing his judgment upon them. another reason given by the .....

Surisetti Rama Subbayya Vs. Palur Thimmiah and ors.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1941)2MLJ754

..... . there is nothing in article 182 which may call for that treatment, hansraj gupta v. official liquidators of dehra dun etc., company i.l.r.(1932) all. 1067. the reason given by the learned judges that the court may in certain cases treat a proceeding under section ..... learned judges called 'ordinary parlance'. since a suit is, according to the explanation in section 3, instituted when the plaint is presented to the proper court, the act clearly draws a line between the presentation of a plaint and making an application and it cannot be obliterated unless there was something repugnant in the subject or context ..... conclusions. the learned judges of the bombay court were not considering the case of a plaint at all but that of an application under the succession certificate act and had therefore no occasion to say anything about the plaint being treated as an application within the meaning of article 182. the second reason given by .....

The Official Liquidator Vs. N. Krishnaswami Iyengar and ors.

Court : Chennai

Reported in : (1947)1MLJ234

..... that a defence of limitation which would have been available in an action will be equally available in proceedings of that nature. recently in hansraj gupta v. official liquidators of dehra dun, etc., company (1932) 64 m.l.j. 403 : l.r. 60 indap 13 : i.l.r. 54 all. 1067 (p.c.), the privy council has laid down that ..... of two years from the date of the misapplication or misfeasance. it appears to us that there is good reason why directors, managers and officers of companies registered under act no. vi of 1882 should not be permitted to plead limitation so as to absolve them from making restitution of moneys misapplied or lost to the company through their ..... is now being prosecuted by the police under the indian penal code and that the question of taking action against him and the other directors under the indian companies act is still under consideration.4. in these circumstances it is clearly impossible to proceed with the hearing of this petition on the merits. but as the respondents 2 .....