Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: allahabad Year: 1955 Page 7 of about 70 results (0.023 seconds)

Sep 07 1955 (HC)

Mahendra Singh Vs. State of U.P. and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Sep-07-1955

Reported in : AIR1956All96; 1956CriLJ174; (1955)IILLJ750All

agarwala, j.1. this special appeal arises out of a writ petition under article 226 of the constitution. the applicant sri mahendra singh was posted as a head constable at police outpost, george town, police station colonelganj, allahabad, in august 1952. shortly thereafter the petitioner was suspended by an order of the senior superintendent of police on a report that he was exorting money from persons who grazed their cattle on road patris.an enquiry was made by the deputy superintendent of police who submitted his report on 3-1-1953 to the senior superintendent of police with a recommendation that the petitioner be dismissed from service. on 8-1-1953, the senior superintendent of police issued a notice to the appellant to show cause why he should not be dismissed from service.the appellant submitted his explanation on 16-1-1953. the senior superintendent of police did not accept his explanation, but instead of dismissing him, he reduced him to the post of a constable for a period of three years by his order dated 3-2-1953. the appellant appealed to the deputy inspector-general of police who was of opinion that the charge against the appellant had been fully established but that the punishment awarded to him was inadequate, and he therefore, called upon the appellant to show cause why he should not be dismissed.after considering his representation and hearing the appellant in person, the deputy inspector general of police-on 6-7-1953, passed an order dismissing the appellant .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 22 1955 (HC)

Sm. Bhagwati Kuer and ors. Vs. Lal Bahadur and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Feb-22-1955

Reported in : AIR1955All422

mukerji, j. 1. this is a petition under article 226 of the constitution. the petition originally contained three prayers to which it is, however, unnecessary for us to refer as on 17-2-1955 the petitioner was given leave to amend his petition by adding thereto a fourth prayer, and learned counsel has confined his argument to the relief sought in that prayer. the fourth prayer is:'that the opposite party no. 3 be directed by a writ of mandamus to decide the appeal pending before him according to the provisions of the u. p. act 17 of 1939 and he commanded by a writ of prohibition not to apply the provisions of section 20 of v. p. act 1 of 1951.'2. the facts on which this petition was made, briefly stated, were these. on 8-11-1952 petitioner 1 obtained a decree, in a suit under section 180, u. p. tenancy act, 1939, for the ejectment of respondents 1 and 2 from certain plots of land. from that decree these respondents appealed to the additional commissioner, allahabad and jhansi divisions, who is the third respondent, and that appeal is still pending.3. respondents 1 and 2 claim to have acquired the rights of an 'adhivasi' under section 20, u. p. zamindari abolition and land reforms act, and that they cannot therefore be ejected from the plots. the petitioners do not challenge the validity of section 20, but it is argued on their behalf that although the provisions of that section do not (it is said) apply to the facts of this case, they apprehend that the additional commissioner .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 15 1955 (HC)

In Re: Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Sep-15-1955

Reported in : AIR1956All25

agarwala, j.1. this is a reference by the board of revenue under section 57, stamp act. it is in respect of the stamp duty to be paid on a document dated 27-11-1947, executed on behalf of a company called the dhampur sugar mills, ltd., district bareilly. the dhampur sugar mills, ltd., entered into an agreement with one kunwar murli manohar, whereby it appointed the latter as its managing agent upon certain terms.the agreement was stamped with a duty of rs. 225/- and was presented before the collector of bareilly on 2-12-1947, with a request that the deed may be examined and the proper stamp duty chargeable thereon may be determined. the collector referred the case for orders to the board of revenue. the board of revenue has expressed its tentative opinion that the document is chargeable with an aggregate duty of rs. 12,184/6/-, but as they were doubtful about their views, they have referred the matter to this court for its opinion.2. the document recites that the two parties to the agreement are the dhampur sugar mills, ltd., a joint stock company, and kunwar murli manohar, the managing agent. the agreement mentions a resolution passed at the extraordinary meeting of the share-holders of the company, whereby kunwar murli manohar was appointed the managing agent of the company for a period of 20 years from 24-9- 1947, at the remuneration and upon the other terms, provisions and conditions set out in the draft agreement, appendix b. the document then recites that the agreement .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 22 1955 (HC)

Lala Ram Niwas Vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow and anr.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Sep-22-1955

Reported in : AIR1956All137

agarwala, j. 1. this is a special appeal against the judgment of a learned single judge dismissing a writ petition. 2. the appellant was elected as the president of the kashipur municipal board in the elections held in october, 1953. he continued to act as such till he was suspended from that office by an order of the government served on him, on 1-10-1954. on 21-9-1954, two orders appear to have been passed by the government, one was g. o. no. 289f(i)/xi-a-616/1954. this g. o. was from shri h. l. bhargava, under secretary to government, uttar pradesh, to the district magistrate, naini tal. it required the? district magistrate to call upon the appellant to show cause, within two weeks of the receipt of the order, why he should not be removed from the office of the president of the board under section 48(2) u. p. municipalities act on account of the charges-set forth in an enclosed list. the enclosed list contained 11 charges. the explanation when received was to be forwarded to government along with the district magistrate's comments and definite recommendations^ and if no explanation was received by the due date the fact was to be reported to government. the other g. o. of the same date was no. 289f. (ii)/xi-a-616/54. this was also from sri h. l. bhargava, under secretary to government, uttar pradesh to the district magistrate of naini tal. it. ran as follows : 'in continuation of g. o. no. 289f(i)/xi-a-616/54, dated 21-9-1954, i am directed to say that in exercise of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 10 1955 (HC)

Sm. Balika Devi and anr. Vs. Kedar Nath Puri

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Nov-10-1955

Reported in : AIR1956All377

h.s. chaturvedi, j. 1. this is a revision by srimati balika devi and her son ramesh chandra arising out of proceedings instituted by kedar nath puri under section 8, arbitration act. 2. learned counsel for the opposite party has raised a preliminary objection that no revision lies under the provisions of section 115, civil p. c. his contention is that the arbitration act makes provision for appeals only under section 39 of the act, and there being no provision for a revision, it should be inferred that the legislature intended to exclude the operation of section 115 to orders passed under the arbitration act. we think that this contention is concluded i against the opposite party by decisions of this court which are binding on us: 'mt. mariam v. mt. amina : air1937all65 ; 'charan das v. gur saran das kapur : air1945all146 . 3. the facts which culminated in the filingof this revision may now be briefly stated: -- 4. one badri nath kochar was carrying on contract business in kanpur. it is no longer disputed that in 1943 badri nath kochar and kedar nath puri, a resident of lucknow, became partners in the contract business in kanpur, both of them executed a partnership deed on 18-7-1943 (vide ex. 1). initially, this partnership was confined to the business of the supply of bricks to a firm known as messrs. shapurji palanji & co., but it was provided in clause 6 of the partnership deed that if any other work was undertaken in partnership, the same terms wouldcontinue to bind the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 11 1955 (HC)

Shaukat Ali Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and anr.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Apr-11-1955

Reported in : AIR1955All518

agarwala, j.1. this is a petition under article 226 of the constitution praying that an order, direction or writ in the nature of 'mandamus' be issued to the government of uttar pradesh and to the collector of rampur restraining them from giving effect to a notification no. 3136/1-a.559/1951 issued by respondent 1 on 28-6-1954, and directing them not to take possession of the properties held by the petitioner or to interfere with the rights of the petitioner over such properties.2. the main point that arises for consideration in this case is whether the rampur thekedari and pattidari abolition act (u. p. act 10 of 1954), which abolishes thekedari and pattedari in rampur is 'ultra vires' the state legislature or not. the facts briefly stated are as follows:the petitioner is a pattedar of a certain village of the district of rampur. rampur was a princely state before 1947 and was ruled by his highness the nawab of rampur. in 1947, india obtained independence and became a dominion by virtue of the indian independence act of 1947. the suzerainty of the british crown over the indian states lapsed at the same time because of section 7 of the said act, and the state of rampur along with the other states in india in the eye of law became independent.it was, however, expected that such states would not remain independent but would accede to one or the other of the dominions into which india had been divided. the state of rampur acceded to the dominion of india by executing an .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 11 1955 (HC)

Ziaullah Khan and anr. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and anr.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Apr-11-1955

Reported in : AIR1955All554

agarwala, j.1. this is a petition under article 228 of the constitution by two jagirdars of certain villages in the territories formerly forming part of the state of rampur and now part of the state of uttar pradesh. the jagirdars had to pay no land revenue to the state and paid only a cess called the chau-kidara tax. they were proprietors of the land comprised within their respective jagirs.2. the state of uttar pradesh passed an act, called the u. p. zamindari abolition and land reforms act, 1950 (act i of 1951) which came into force on 26-1-1951. the act did not apply in the first instance to the territories formerly forming part of the state of rampur, now the district of rampur, but section 2 of the act empowered the state government to extend the act to the district of rampur 'subject to such exceptions or modifications, not affecting the substance' as the state government may, by notification, specify in this behalf. the proviso to section 2 lays down:'provided that, when this act or its provisions are so extended to such areas or estates, with or without exceptions or modifications, so much of any act or regulation in force therein as is consistent with this act or the provisions so extended or with any modifications made therein, shall be deemed to have been repealed.'in exercise of the powers thus conferred upon the state government by section 2 of the act, the state government issued two notifications: (1) no. 3168, dated 30-6-1954, whereby the u. p. zamindari .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 21 1955 (HC)

Nagoo and anr. Vs. Pt. Shiv Dularey Dixit and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Jul-21-1955

Reported in : AIR1955All665

agarwala, j.1. this is a defendants' appeal arising out of a suit for sale on a mortgage. the mortgage in question was executed by one kalika for himself and as guardian of his two sons, thakur and kedar and also by his two other sons, nagu and bhola who were then major. nagu and bhola mortgagors filed a suit under section 33, u. p. agriculturists' relief act, for a declaration of the amount due to the mortgagee under the mortgage.this was in 1942. the plaintiffs claimed that they were agriculturists and entitled to sue for accounts. the parties came to terms and entered into a compromise which may be quoted here in full:'(a) the total balance due under the mortgage deed, the basis of the suit, has been settled at rs. 700/- regarding mortgage deed and rs. 25/-lawyer's fee of the defendant, total rs. 725/-, (b) the full amount settled viz. rs. 725/-mentioned above between the plaintiffs and the defendants 2 and 3 will be paid to defendant no. 1 through his counsel by hand in 2 monthly instalments before court and the first instalment will become due on the 19th of september 1942 and the second instalment on 19th october, 1942. (c) in case of default of payment of the instalments mentioned above the plaintiffs' suit shall be deemed to be dismissed. (d) parties will bear their own costs. 2. parties therefore pray that the suit may be decided in terms of the compromise mentioned above. dated 19th august, 1942.' therefore a decree in terms of the compromise was passed.2. the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 26 1955 (HC)

Risal and anr. Vs. the Government of the U.P., Lucknow and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Sep-26-1955

Reported in : AIR1956All704

agarwala, j.1. this is a special appeal against the judgment, of a learned single judge of this court dismissing a writ petition.2. the respondents 3 and 4, mamraj and balwant, filed four suits under section 49, u. p. tenancy act against the appellants, risal and balwant (this balwant is not to be confused for respondent) for partition of their half share in the holdings in dispute. the appellants' case was that the aforesaid respondents had only a one-third share and not a half share in the holdings.all the four suits were tried together and evidence was recorded only in one of them. they were disposed of by a common judgment, the assistant collector holding that respondents 3 and 4 had only a one-third share. these respondents preferred four appeals in the court of the add-tional commissioner who allowed the appeals upon the finding that respondents 3 and 4 had a half share in the holdings. then the appellants went up in second appeal co the board of revenue. during the pendency of these, appeals one khazan singh who was a landholder and party in one of the suits only died on 6-8-1952; the landholders in the other suits being still alive.an application for bringing the heirs ofkhazan singh was made beyond time on 24-3-1953,the board of revenue dismissed this belatedpetition, and thereafter dismissed not only thesuit in which khazan singh was a party but alsothe remaining three suits as well. the appellantsapplied for a review of the judgment but the boarddismissed the .....

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 //