Court : Allahabad
Decided on : May-24-1961
Reported in : AIR1962All43
Desai, C.J.1. I respectfully differ from the judgments of ray brothers Mukerji find Dwivedi and consider that the appeal should be allowed and the suit bought against the appellants by the respondents should be dismissed. The findings of fact which cannot be challenged in second appeal are that the respondents were the owners of the constructions made on the land possessed by the appellants as their riyayas, that is as licensees, that they never abandoned the village, their rights as licensees and the constructions but continued to be the owners of the constructions and the licensees of the site and that during their absence the appellants unlawfully took possession of the constructions and their site, demolished, the constructions and included the site in their own cattle-shed or constructed a cattle-shed over it.On these findings the suit of the respondent was decreed by the trial court and they were ordered to be restored to possession over the sits of the constructions. There could...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Dec-26-1961
Reported in : AIR1962All521
M. Lal, J.1. This Civil Revision by Messrs, Nand Ram Chottey Lal, decree-holders, has been filed against the orders passed by the Special Judge, first class, Ali-garh, reducing the debts of the applicants from Rs. 6,46,000/- to Rs. 1,84,571/- under Section 4 of the U. P, Zamindars debt Reduction Act, 1952 (hereinafter called the Act). 2. Briefly stated the facts are that the applicants advanced a sum of Rs. 5,11,000/- on the basis of a mortgage dated 20th June, 1924, and another sum of Rs. 1,35,000/- on the basis of another mortgage dated 23rd May, 1929 to Raja Datt Prasad Singh. The properties mortgaged in the first deed consisted of Zamindari properties of 56 villages and the right to receive Malikana in the sum of Rs. 23,802/- per annum from the Government treasuries at Mathura and Aligarh. In the second mortgage 35 other villages besides the 56 villages of the first mortgage; all in the districts of Mathura and Aligarh, constituted the mortgage property. 3. The original mortgagor R...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Dec-19-1961
Reported in : AIR1962All310
Jagdish Sahai, J.1. A decree in suit No. 181 of 1951, of the Court of 1st Additional Civil Judge, Kanpur, wasobtained against the father of the plaintiff-appellants by the respondents and in the execution of the same some houses were attached. The plaintiff-appellants filed the suit giving rise to this appeal and prayed for the following reliefs on the allegation that the father of the plaintiff-appellants was a man of deficient mind and inasmuch as no guardian ad-litem had been appointed to protect his interests in the suit, the decree passed in suit No. 181 of 1951 was a nullity:-'The plaintiffs, therefore, prayed for the following reliefs:- A. It be declared that the decree in suit No. 181 of 1951 of the Court of 1st Civil Judge, Kanpur, Motilal and Ors. v. Madan Behari Lal is not enforceable against house No. 22/2, Filkhana, Kanpur, 55/59, Kahoo Kothi, Kanpur, and premises No. 84/57, Jarib ki chauki, G. T. Road, Kanpur known as Indian Distillery and especially against the plaintiff...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Nov-27-1961
Reported in : AIR1962All187
N.U. Beg, J. 1.This is a special, appeal arising out of a petition preferred by Sri Durga Gita Vidyalaya Association, which is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act (Act No. XXI of 1860). Besides other educational institutions the appellant runs and maintains a school known as Sri Durga Gita Vidyalaya Higher Secondary School, Lucknow. Sri Ram Singh Kotwal is the Secretary and Manager of the said School. Dr. Shyam Lal Pandey was appointed as the Principal of the school under an agreement entered into between the Managing Committee of the school and the said Principal. This agreement is dated the 13th January 1952, and is Annexure 2 in this case. Under Clause 7 of the agreement the Manag-ing Committee had the power to dismiss the Principal in case the latter was found guilty of insubordination, deliberate neglect of duty or any other serious misconduct. Under Clause 10 of the agreement the Managing Committee had also the power to terminate the agreement with the appro...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Nov-21-1961
Reported in : AIR1962All590
A.P. Srivastava, J.1. This is a petitioner's special appeal against an order of a learned single Judge of this Court dismissing his petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. 2. Prior to the abolition of Zamindari in this State the appellant owned extensive zamindari interests in two tahsils of the Mirzapur district, viz., Tahsil Mirzapur and Tahsil Chunar. On the coming into force of the Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 with effect from the 1st July 1952 the State acquired all the proprietary interests of the appellant in his zamindari properties and under the provisions of the Act the appellant became entitled to compensation. The Sub-Divisional Officers of the Mirzapur and the Chunar tahsils who were functioning as compensation officers under the Act prepared draft compensation assessment rolls which were duly notified as required by the Act. The appellant filed objections to the draft rolls and contended that the amount of compensation payable to him should have ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Nov-06-1961
Reported in : AIR1962All174
R.A. Misra, J. 1. The question referred to this Bench for answer was; 'Whether a suit based on a contract is governed by Section 97 of the Town Improvement Act or it is governed by the general law of limitation,' After considering the circumstances of the case, and in agreement with the learned counsel for the parties, we have re-drafted the question and now it reads: 'Is a suit by a bidder at an auction held by the Lucknow Improvement Trust for selling land in connection with a scheme framed by it under the Town Improvement Trust Act, for refund of one-fourth price deposited by him on his bid being accepted, but which was subsequently forfeited by the Trust oh account of his failure to pay the. balance within the prescribed time, a suit in respect of an act purporting to be done by the Trust under the Act?' 2. The brief facts of the case in which the question has arisen are that on 5th December, 1947, the Lucknow Improvement Trust -held an auction sale of the lease-hold rights of plot...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Sep-29-1961
Reported in : AIR1963All18; 1963CriLJ28a
Uniyal, J. 1. This is an appeal by the State of Uttar Pradesh against an appellate order of acquittal dated 13-12-1960 passed fay the learned Sessions Judge of Muzalfarnagar, acquitting the respondent Jafar Ali of the offence under Section 3 read with Section 14 of the Foreigners Act.2. The admitted facts of the case are that the respondent was originally resident of village Monanawala, police station Purqazi, district Muzaffarnagar. Sometime in 1947 the respondent left India and went to Pakistan. He was at that time a minor aged about thirteen years. His parents, however, continued to remain in India, The respondent while, in Pakistan attained majority and tnereaner he came to India on the basis of a Pakistani passport dated 7-2-1955 and a visa dated 10-3-1955. The visa was for a period of one year. The respondent entered the Indian territory on the 11th of March 1955. He did notleave the country after the expiry of the period mentioned in the visa. According to the visa his stay in I...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Sep-22-1961
Reported in : AIR1963All55
ORDERA.P. Srivastava, J.1. This is an application under Section 235 of the Indian Companies Act of 1913.The Vijai Lakshmi Sugar Mills was a private limited company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1913 in the year 1946. It had an authorised capital of Rs. 15,00,000/- divided into 15,000 ordinary shares of Rs. 100/- each. The issued capital was, however, only Rs. 60,000/-divided into 600 shares of Rs. 100/- each. The company had only three share-holders, viz. Seth Mathura Prasad, Seth Ladli Prasad and Seth Radhey Lal. All these three share-holders were the directors of the company. The company had been incorporated for the purpose of taking over as a running concern a sugar mill which was at that time carrying on the business of sugar manufacture in the name of Vijai Sugar Corporation Ltd. at Doiwala in the district of Dehra Dun. After being incorporated the company purchased and took over all the assets of the Vijai Sugar Corporation Ltd. for a consideration of Rs. 11,15,00...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Aug-31-1961
Reported in : [1962]13STC923(All)
Brijlal Gupta, J.1. This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.2. The main point raised in this petition is a challenge to the validity of the U. P. Sales Tax (Validation) Act (XV of 1958) which validated the notification ST 905/X dated 31st March, 1956, issued under the authority of Section 3-A of the U. P. Sales Tax Act, by reason of which the petitioner was assessed to sales tax by the order impugned in this writ petition. The validity of the Act has been put beyond doubt by the decision of the Supreme Court in J.K. Jute Mills Co. Ltd. v. State of U. P. and Anr. [1961] 12 S.T.C. 429. In view of this decision the learned counsel is not in a position to press the main point.3. A subsidiary point taken by him is that as mentioned in grounds Nos. (vii), (xi) and (xii) of the grounds of the petition. This point has been urged by him somewhat as follows :-By reason of Sub-section (3) of Section 14 of the Indian Coinage Act, 1906, as amended by the Indian Coinage (Amendm...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Aug-26-1961
Reported in : AIR1965All298
ORDERD.S. Mathur, J. 1. This is a revision under Section 6-B of the Court-fees Act by me Chief Inspector of Stamps, U. P., against the order of the Additional District Judge of Saharanpur, holding that the Court-fee payable on E. E. Act Appeal No. 3 of 1958 (Ugger Sen v. Inamul Haq and others), was under Schedule II, Article 11 of the Court-fees Act and the Court-fee paid was sufficient. 2. The material facts of the case are that the judgment-debtors, ex-zamindars applied under Section 4 of the U. P. Zamindars' Debt Reduction Act, 1952 (to be referred hereinafter as the Debt Reduction Act) (U. P. Act No. XV of 1953) for the reduction of the amount of decree which the Special Judge II Grade had passed in favour of Ugger Sen. The Special Judge reduced the amount, but before he could transmit Information to the Collector under Section 19-A of the U. P. Encumbered Estates Act, 1934 (to be referred hereinafter as the E. E. Act), Ugger Sen challenged the order by way of appeal, but the appea...
Tag this Judgment!