Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: allahabad Year: 1956 Page 1 of about 67 results (0.012 seconds)

May 08 1956 (HC)

Newspaper Ltd. Vs. State Industrial Tribunal and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : May-08-1956

Reported in : AIR1956All597; (1957)ILLJ32All

..... the terms of employment or with the conditions of labour, of any person.' it authorises the central or the, state government to appoint conciliation officers charged with the duty of mediating in and promoting the settlement of industrial disuptes and also for the constitution of boards of conciliation for promoting the settlement of industrial disputes and courts of inquiry and industrial .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 16 1956 (HC)

State Vs. Raghunath Prasad

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Oct-16-1956

Reported in : AIR1957All273

..... obtained possession of that set.raghunath prasad was prosecuted on the allegation that, though he had mortgaged the radio set with nathu lal agarwal, he had continued to be in 'mediate possession of the set'. the learned magistrate held that raghunath prasad was not in possession of it and, consequently, acquitted' raghunath prasad.3. we have heard learned deputy government advocate .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 05 1956 (HC)

Mst. Sudehaiya Kumar and anr. Vs. Ram Dass Pandey and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Dec-05-1956

Reported in : AIR1957All270

desai, j.1. this is an appeal by the defendants from a judgment of a civil judge allowing an appeal and decreeing the suit of ram dass plaintiff.2. the property in dispute admittedly belonged to the last male owner jangi who died on 10-6-1901, leaving his widow mst. deobarta, his sister mst. sudami and his mother mst. bageshra. on his death, mst. deotoarta and mst. bageshra obtained mutation in their favour in respect of the property left by jangi. mst. bageshra died in 1911, and on her death, the name of mst. sudami was added. in 1912 a suit-was brought by the sons of matadin for possession and, in the alternative, for a declaration that they were entitled to the property after the deaths of mst. deobarta and mst. sudami. matadin was jangi's grand-father's brother. his sons, who filed the suit, were dudh nath proforma defendant respondent, sripat and banwari.it was decreed only for the alternative relief. subsequently mst. sudami died and on 6-5-1932 mst. deobarta made a gift of a substantial portion of the property in favour of her husband ram sewak defendant-appellant no. 2. thereupon suit no. 155 of 1933 was instituted by dudh nath against mst. deobarta and ram sewak. ram das plaintiff-respondent first cousin of dudh nath was at that time a minor living jointly with, and under the guardianship of, dudh nath. dudh nath sought the relief of cancellation of the gift deed on behalf of himself and ram das. the suit was contested by mst. deobarta and ram sewak on various .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 05 1956 (HC)

Mohd. MohsIn and anr. Vs. Kausar Raza and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Jan-05-1956

Reported in : AIR1956All422

kidwai, j.1. the following pedigree will elucidate the facts of the case: khairat husain _______________________|_________________________ | | tahir-un-nissa tayyab-un-nissa | | _______|_____________________________ | | | | |firasat nifasat mohd. zair | husain hussain | | ___________________________________________________|_______________ | | | | jawad taeed rashid saeed husain husain husain husain2. khairat husain, a shia muslim, died leaving two daughters as his heirs. his immovable property consisted of 3 villages, garhi rakhmau, murligang and rasoolabad. after the death of tayyab-un-nissa, her eldest son, jawad husain, laid claim to the whole property and got mutation effected in his favour alone. it is no longer in dispute that as a matter of fact tahir-un-nissa, and after her, her sons, were entitled to and the latter got, an eight annas share and each of the four sons of tayyab-un-nissa was entitled to and eventually got a two annas share.3. on 7-12-1883, tahirunnissa executed a deed under which jawad husain was allowed possession of her eight annas share in the property and jawad husain undertook to pay her an allowance of rs. 500/- per annum. on 16-2-1886 speed executed a deed agreeing to take rs. 125/- per annum in lieu of his share which would have been 2 annas. the other two brothers of jawad executed no deed but he continued in possession of their shares also.4. on 21-12-1895, jawad mortgaged the whole property to raja tasadduq rasul khan of jahan girabad to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 17 1956 (HC)

Jaipal Vs. Board of Revenue and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Oct-17-1956

Reported in : AIR1957All205

mootham, c.j. 1. this is a petition under article 226 of the constitution challenging the validity of an order of the board of revenue dated the 17th-18th july 1956. 2. the facts are these. on the 3rd of january 1955 the second respondent made an application under section 34 of the united provinces land revenue act to the tahsildar of koil, in the district of aligarh, that her name be entered in the annual register maintained under that act as being in possession of a particular holding as the successor of one smt. dewalia deceased. the application was opposed by the petitioner who claimed to be the true owner, but an order was made by the tahsildar directing that mutation of names be effected as asked for by the second respondent. that order was however set aside by the commissioner on appeal by the petitioner. the second respondent then filed an application in revision before the board of revenue; and the board by the order which is now being challenged allowed the application, set aside the order of the additional commissioner and restored that of the tahsildar. 3. the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the board of revenue in passing this order exceeded its jurisdiction, it has however been the consistent practice of this court not to interfere with orders made by the board of revenue in cases in which the only question at issue is whether the name of the petitioner should be entered in the record of rights. that record is primarily maintained for .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 08 1956 (HC)

State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Ram Bahadur Singh

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Oct-08-1956

Reported in : AIR1957All278; 1957CriLJ495

orderraghubar dayal, j.1. this is an application under section 526, criminal p. c., by the state of uttar pradesh for the transfer of a sessions trial against ram bahadur singh under sections 302, 363 and 366, read with section 120-b of the indian penal code from the court of sri v. n. prasad, district and sessions judge, kanpur, to some other court outside the district of kanpur on the allegations that the attitude adopted by the learned sessions judge as disclosed in the accompanying affidavit led to the apprehension that the evidence adduced by the prosecution subsequent to the commencement of the trial on the 9th of july, 1956, would not be adjudged fairlyand that the atmosphere of kanpur was surcharged for the trial of the case at kanpur. 2. the affidavit accompanying this application was sworn by sri ram narain kankan, public prosecutor, c. i. d... i. b., u. p., kanpur. ii may also be mentioned here that the investigation of this case was done by the criminal investigation department of the state. 3. in view of the statement of the learned deputy government advocate withdrawing the application after a discussion of certain considerations affecting such an application and without any discussion of the matter on merits to the effect that he was authorised to withdraw this application, it is not necessary to detail the allegations made in the affidavit accompanying the application, the reply given to them by the learned sessions judge of kanpur and the further narration of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 14 1956 (HC)

Ram Rakhpal Vs. Amrit Dhara Pharmacy and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Dec-14-1956

Reported in : AIR1957All683

desai, j.1. this is a suit for the removal of an entry of the trade mark amritdhara from the register of trade marks, for adding a note of disclaimer of any exclusive right to the word amritdhara to the entry relating to the trade mark in the register and for imposing such limitation or condition on the registration of the trade mark amritdhara as this court may deem just and proper. it is an admitted fact that on 21-8-1942 pandit thakur dutt sharma, defendant no. 2, managing proprietor of the amritdhara pharmacy ltd., dehra dun, defendant no. 1, made an application no. 3813 before the registrar of trade marks, bombay, defendant no. 3, for registration of trade mark amritdhara in class 5 of pharmaceutical substances.the trade mark was advertised in the trade marks journal as required under section 15(1) of the trade marks act (act no. v of 1940), but nobody objected to the registration of the trade mark. consequently the registrar registered the trademark on 16-2-3946 with effect from 21-8-1946. the registration was initially for three years; it was subsequently renewed for 15 years with effect from 21-8-1949. the plaintiff is admittedly the proprietor of the dardnashik dawakhana, a pharmacy situated in moradabad. he is manufacturing in. the pharmacy a drug known as amrit sukh-jiwan dhara.2. the case of the plaintiff is as follows : the plaintiff has been manufacturing amrit-sukhjiwan dhara, under that very name, for more than 50 years and has been advertising it extensively .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 12 1956 (HC)

Madan Mohan Lal Vs. Om Prakash and anr.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Nov-12-1956

Reported in : AIR1957All384

ordermehrotra, j. 1. the present petition has been filed under article 226 of the constitution by a member of the municipal board, chandausi, for a writ of quo-warranto against the opposite party sri om prakash to show the authority by which he is holding the office of the member of the municipal board. 2. the municipal board chandausi consists of 25 members including the president who is the ex-officio member of the board. the general elections took place on the 26th of october 1953 to elect the president and the members of the board and the petitioner and the opposite party om prakash were elected members and one sri bhagwati prasad was elected president of the board. formerly the opposite party om prakash was an insurance employee and on the commencement of the life insurance corporation act xxxi of 1956, i.e., on the 1st of september 1956, he became an employee of the central government through the life insurance corporation of india. since the 1st of september 1958 he is working as an insurance inspector and drawing salary from the branch office of the life insurance corporation of india, moradabad. the president made an enquiry about him from the branch manager, life insurance corporation of india, moradabad. the petitioner and the president thereafter both objected to his working as a member of the board on the ground that he was disqualified for being a member of the board under section 13-d (f) of the u. p. municipalities act. the president wrote to the state .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 05 1956 (HC)

Jaipal Singh and anr. Vs. Board of Revenue U.P. Allahabad and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Apr-05-1956

Reported in : AIR1956All698

mootham, c.j.1. this petition, which has been referred to a bench by mr. justice chaturvedi raises a question or law of some difficulty. the relevant facts can be stated very shortly.2. the petitioners filed a suit against respondents 2 to 16 under section 59, u. p. tenancy act, 1939. the suit was dismissed by the trial court and the decree of that court was affirmed by the additional commissioner, agra division, on appeal. the petitioners then filed a second appeal before the first respondent, the board of revenue. the board allowed the appeal, the judgment of sri s.s. hasan, before whom the appeal was argued, being dated 1-8-1952, and a second judicial member, sri r.n. singh, concurring therein on 4-8-1952.3. the respondents then filed an application before the board under section 273, u. p. tenancy act, for review. the review application was decided by the two judicial members who had earlier decided the appeal and was allowed, the judgment of sri s.s. hasan, which was dated 16-10-1952, receiving the concurrence of sri r.n. singh on 28th october following. thereafter the appeal was again heard on its merits and was dismissed by sri s.s. hasan on 6-2-1953.4. the petitioners thereupon filed this petition, their contention being that under section 273, u. p. tenancy act, the review application ought to have been decided by all the members of the board. they pray for the issue of a writ of 'certiorari' quashing the order of the board dated 16/18-10-1952 16/18-10-1952 , and the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 31 1956 (HC)

ibadat HusaIn Vs. State of U.P. and anr.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Jan-31-1956

Reported in : AIR1956All448

mootham, c.j. 1. this is an appeal from a judgment of chaturvedi j., dated 4-8-1955, dismissing a petition under article 226 of the constitution. the facts are these: 2. by a notification dated 23-2-1953, made tinder section 14 of the criminal p. c. 1898, the governor conferred upon the regional transport magistrate, allahabad the power to try at allahabad all cases under the motor vehicles act, 1939 arising within the districts of allahabad, mirazpur, pratapgarh, sultanpur and fyzabad. in january, 1955, an enforcement squad officer of the state transport department reported that the petitioner had contravened the provisions of the motor vehicles act by carrying more goods and passengers than he was authorised to do, and proceedings against him were sub-sequently commenced in the court of the regional transport magistrate at allahabad. the appellant thereupon filed the petition out of which this appeal arises in which he sought the issue of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the aforesaid notification on the ground that the governor had no power to fix the place at which a case shall be tried by a special magistrate. 3. it is not now contended that the governor lacked the power under section 14 of the criminal p. c. to confer on the regional transport magistrate the power to try cases under the motor vehicles act arising within one or more districts of the uttar pradesh; the only question is whether the governor could prescribe the place at which such magistrate .....

Tag this Judgment!


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