Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: allahabad Year: 1955 Page 6 of about 70 results (0.011 seconds)

Oct 14 1955 (HC)

Radha Ballabh Vs. Jawahar Lal

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Oct-14-1955

Reported in : AIR1956All216

roy, j. 1. this is a defendant's second appeal prising out of a suit 'for profits under section 230, u. p. tenancy act, no. 17 of 1939. the suit had been instituted by jawahar lal, the plaintiff-respondent. during the pendency of the suit he became insane and his son was appointed his next friend. on. 27-7-1948, the suit was dismissed in default. an application for restoration of the suit was made on 25-8-1948, which was described as 'an application by prem chand, the pairokar of the plaintiff, through his vakil sri jamuna prasad'. in that application it was contended that the plaintiff had been ill on 27-7-1948, when the case was fixed for hearing. the application in restoration was allowed and the suit was restored to file on its original number of re-hearing by an order dated 4-11-1948. the defendant had made an application for the review of the order of restoration but that application was rejected. ultimately the suit was decreed by the learned assistant collector, first class, on 30-3-1950, in the sum of rs. 80/12/9 with proportionate costs and interest. prom that decision an appeal was taken before the civil judge of mathura, being revenue appeal no. 33 of 1950, and the appeal was dismissed on 29-7-1953. the defendant has, therefore, come up in second appeal. 2. the point which has been urged by learned counsel for the appellant is that the application in restoration was not made by or on behalf of the plaintiff and consequently the court wrongly assumed jurisdiction .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 25 1955 (HC)

State Vs. Sheo Shanker

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Aug-25-1955

Reported in : AIR1956All326; 1956CriLJ659

desai, j. 1. this is a reference by the sessions judge of ghazipur recommending that an order passed by a judicial officer be set aside and that the opposite party be awarded such sentence as this court may consider proper.2. there is no controversy about the facts which are that the opposite party sheo shankar lal misappropriated an amount of rs. 15/5/11 in his capacity as sajawal. he pleaded guilty to the charge under section 409, i. p. c., and also refunded the misappropriated amount. he has been convicted by the judicial officer under section 409, i. p. c., but on account of his being a young man of 18 years of age he has been released on probation under section 4, u. p. first offenders' probation act.the learned sessions judge, on being moved by the district magistrate, has referred the case to this court with the recommendation that the order passed by the learned magistrate under section 4, u. p. first offenders' probation act be set aside and that the opposite party be sentenced under section 409, i. p. c.3. section 4 (1), u. p. first offenders' probation act lays down that 'when a person is convicted of an offence not punishable with death or transportation for life', he may be released on probation of good conduct in certain circumstances. the learned magistrate interpreted the words 'punishable with death or transportation for life' to mean 'punishable with death or in the alternative with transportation for life'.according to this interpretation a person convicted .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 13 1955 (HC)

Gopal Das Sakseria and anr. Vs. the State

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Apr-13-1955

Reported in : AIR1955All511; 1955CriLJ1232; (1956)ILLJ11All

raghubar dayal, j.1. the chief inspector of factories, u.p., addressed a complaint to the court of city magistrate, agra, in august 1950, against gopal das saksaria and brij mohan jha for an offence under section 92, factories act, 1948. he sent the typed and signed complaint with a covering letter to the district magistrate, agra, requesting him to inform the court concerned for further action and informing him that a copy of the complaint had also been sent to the city magistrate, agra, direct.the district magistrate, agra, forwarded this complaint to the sub-divisional magistrate, firozabad, for trial on 1-9-1950. it is not known when this complaint reached the sub-divisional magistrate, firozabad, but he appeals to have ordered the registering of the case and the issue of summons to the accused on 6-9-1950.2. meanwhile an unsigned copy of the complaint was sent to the city magistrate, agra, direct by the chief inspector of factories. the city magistrate forwarded it to the factory magistrate for disposal on 28-8-1950. it is not known again when this reached the sub-divisional magistrate firozabad. it was on 6-9-1950, that a case was registered on this complaint and the accused were ordered to be summoned for 28-9-1950. the summons was actually issued on 9-9-1950. this date has been wrongly read by sri s. goswamiji, who was the sub-divisional magistrate, firozabad, as 1-9-1950,3. objection was taken on behalf of the accused that the trial was bad in law as it was in .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 30 1955 (HC)

Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. State Industrial Tribunal, U.P. and ...

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Mar-30-1955

Reported in : AIR1955All549

orderv. bhargava, j.1. the swadeshi cotton mills company, limited, kanpur, filed this petition under article 226 of the constitution, praying for the issue of a writ in the nature of 'prohibition' against opposite party 1, the state industrial tribunal, u. p., prohibiting it from proceeding further with the industrial dispute case no. 78 of 1953 pending before that tribunal, a writ in the nature of 'certiorari' quashing the proceedings in that industrial dispute case and a writ in the nature of 'mandamus' against the state of uttar pradesh opposite, party 5, directing it to withdraw its notification no. 2078 (lc)xviii-la-t-l7673(kr)/53 dated 25-6-1953, by which an industrial dispute between the petitioner company and opposite party 6, the suti mill mazdoor union, kanpur, was referred for adjudication by the state of uttar pradesh to the state industrial tribunal, u. p.2. the case as put forward by the petitioner company, as that, on 7-11-1951, an illegal strike was commenced in the mills operated by the petitioner company. thereupon the company warned the participants in the strike that it wasillegal and also informed them of the consequences that would follow this illegal strike. the strikers paid no heed to this warning nor to the advice given to them by the labour inspector and the labour conciliation officer and continued their strike up to 23-11-1951.during this strike, acts of violence and unruly behaviour were committed. 'work was resumed on the advice of the labour .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 04 1955 (HC)

Gaya Deen Vs. Mst. Amrauti

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Apr-04-1955

Reported in : AIR1955All630

agarwala, j. 1. this is a plaintiff's appeal arising out of a suit for possession of a property which was in possession of one mst. newasi while she was alive and which she had, during her life-time, transferred by means of a sale deed to the respondent. the facts briefly stated are as follows:there were three brothers, debi prasad, shiva prasad and mahabir, who formed a joint hindu family. shiva prasad died in 1906 leaving smt. sambodha as his widow; mahabir died in 1916 leaving smt. newasi as his widow; and debi prasad died in 1925 leaving smt. tulsa as his widow. as the brothers were all members of a joint hindu family, on the death of shiva prasad the estate passed to debi prasad and mahabir; and on the death of mahabir, debi prasad was the sole surviving coparcener of the property, and in law became the exclusive owner of the property, and the widows had only a claim for maintenance.the plaintiff-appellant is a collateral of debi prasad. on the deaths of shiva prasad and mahabir, however, the names of their widows were entered. smt. sambodha's name was entered over one-third of the property and so was the name of newasi entered over another one-third of the property. apparently the names of shiva prasad, mahabir and debi prasad were entered on the record as owners of the property in equal shares, though no village record has been filed in the case showing the nature of the entry.2. after the death of shiva prasad and mahabir, smt. sambodha, jointly with debi prasad, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 22 1955 (HC)

Lajja Ram Vs. the State

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Jul-22-1955

Reported in : AIR1955All671; 1955CriLJ1547

chowdhry, j. 1. lajjaram, aged 26, of village jagannathpur, p.s. ajitmal, district etawah, has been convicted and sentenced to death under section 302, i. p. c., for the murder of pragu of village kakraiya within the same police station by the learned additional sessions judge of etawah. lajjaram has appealed against his conviction and sentence. the record is also before us for confirmation of thedeath sentence. three men, ramdas, kanhai and lakhan, who were charged with the abetment of the offence, have been acquitted. 2. kakraiya is about a mile from jagannathpur, wad the offence is said to have been committed after, sunset on 8-3-1954. it is said that thedeceased was sitting in front of his door when the aforesaid three persons who have been acquitted came up from the east and engaged him in talkin a low tone. suddenly one of them addressed him in a loud tone. this is said to have served as a signal whereupon two other men, clad in khaki and armed with guns, came up from the east. one of them was the appellant and the other a person whose identity has remained untraced. from a distance of about 10 paces the latter flashed a torch at pragu and the former shot at him hitting him in the knee. as pragu rose to his feet, the appellant again shot at him, this time hitting him in the abdomen. pressing his hand against his wound in the abdomen, pragu ran inside his house followed by the appellant. pragu crossed an outer room and a courtyard and fell down in a thatched verandah .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 23 1955 (HC)

Banwari Lal and anr. Vs. State

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Dec-23-1955

Reported in : AIR1956All385; 1956CriLJ841

sahai, j.1. the two appellants, banwari lal and mahendra nath who are brothers, have been convicted by the additional sessions judge of agra for an offence under section 420 i.p.c. and have been sentenced to three years' r.i. and a fine of rs. 25,000/- each; in default of payment of fine they have been directed to undergo further r.i. for one year. out of the fine, if realised, rs. 48,000/- are to be paid to the complainant firm makhanlal radheylal. the appellants were further charged for an offence under section 487 i.p.c. tout were acquitted of the same.2. the facts of the case are that banwari lal appellant had a ghee-grading station at khurja working under the style of ghamandilal banwarilal. the licence was suspended on 2-4-1946 under suspicion, because the accused showed having graded a quantity of ghee which appeared to the authorities to be impossible during the short period in which it was alleged to have been graded.3. thereafter, the accused shifted their business from khurja to agra and rented mustajab building in raja ki mandi which they not only used for their office and godown but also for their residence. the business in agra was started in two names, namely, mahendranath & co. (for dealing with bharat bank ltd.), and ghamandilal /banwarilal (for dealing with firm makhanlal radheylal). firm makhanlal radheylal is a firm of money-lenders.4. the two appellants on 16-5-46 entered into an agreement with the aforesaid firm makhanlal radheylal, the agreement was .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 14 1955 (HC)

Agarwal and Co. Vs. the Income-tax Officer and Another.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Oct-14-1955

Reported in : [1956]29ITR342(All)

chaturvedi, j. - this is a petition under article 226 of the constitution.the petitioner is a firm carrying on the business of managing agency. the petitioners firm was constituted in 1934 and a deed of partnership was drawn up on the 24th of january, 1936. the partnership consisted of 18 members. it was provided in the deed of partnership that upon the death of any partner, the other partners shall take the heirs or legal representatives of the deceased partner into partnership, in place of the deceased. four of the partners subsequently died and their heirs were taken in. one fresh partnership deed was executed on the 17th of november, 1938, the second on the 24th of july, 1942, the third on the 21st of january, 1949, and the fourth deed was executed on the 7th of july, 1950; and all these deeds contained substantially the same terms on which the firm was registered in the year 1936 and the registration was renewed every year till the financial year 1951-52. for the year 1952-53 an application was made as unusual for the renewal of the registration under section 26a of the income-tax act. the income-tax officer, special circle, kanpur, appears to have taken up this matter at the time of assessment of the firm to income-tax for the year 1952-53. he took up the matter on the 23rd october, 1954, and he first dealt with the matter of the registration of the firm. in his opinion the firm had been wrongly registered previously and he cancelled the registration for the years 1950- .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 18 1955 (HC)

Mt. Mithan and anr. Vs. Municipal Board of Orai and State of U.P.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Nov-18-1955

Reported in : AIR1956All351; 1956CriLJ1383

desai, j.1. this is an application in revision against an order of a sub-divisional magistrate, confirmed by the sessions judge, orai, directing the applicants under section 247(1), u. p. municipalities act to stop using their houses for habitual prostitution. the revision application has been filed under sections435 and 439, criminal p. c.when it was put up for disposal before our brother james, a preliminary objection was raised on behalf of the municipal board that it was not maintainable. the contention of the board was that an order passed by a sub-divisional magistrate under section 247(1) of the municipalities act cannot be revised by the high court under section 439, criminal p. c.2. the high court is authorised by section 435 (1) of the code to 'call for and examine the record of any proceeding before any inferior criminal court.' section 439 lays down that in the case of any proceeding the record of which has been called for by itself or which has been reported for orders, the high court may exercise any of the powers conferred on a court of appeal by sections423 etc.section 247(1), u. p. municipalities act is to the effect that 'when a magistrate of the first class receives information' that a house in the vicinity of a place of workshop etc. is used as a brothel or for the purpose of habitual prostitution, 'he may summon the owner, tenant ...... to appear before him either in person or by agent; and if satisfied that the house is used as described' above may order .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 17 1955 (HC)

Mt. Mithan and anr. Vs. the Municipal Board of Orai and anr.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Aug-17-1955

Reported in : AIR1956All719; 1956CriLJ671

orderjames, j.1. this revision touches a fundamental question, namely, the foundation of the revisional powers of the high court under the code of criminal procedure.the facts of the case are simple. the two applicants are alleged to be prostitutes or dancing girls of the town of oral. the municipal board of orai made a complaint to a first class magistrate alleging that their house was being used for the purpose of habitual prostitution to the annoyance of respectable inhabitants of the locality, and requesting for action against them under section 247 (1), u. p. municipal act (act 2 of 1916).the learned magistrate summoned the applicants, took the evidence of the witnesses for the parties on oath, found the board's complaint justi-fied and passed an order under section 247 (1) forbidding the applicants from using their house for habitual prostitution. they went up in revision to the sessions judge, but having failed there have now come up to this court seeking a reversal of the magistrate's order.3. a preliminary objection raised on behalf of the municipal board is that no revision lies.4. the revisional powers of the high court are defined in section 439, criminal p. c. this provision of the law empowers the high court to pass such orders as it may deem fit in the case of a proceeding the record of which it has called for under section 435, or which has been reported to it under section 438 after an examination under section 435.a reference to section 435, criminal p. c. .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //