SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1956 Supreme(All) 164

MUKERJI, CHOWDHRY
AJODHYA PRASAD – Appellant
Versus
CHIRANJILAL – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
B.C.SAXENA, Jagdish Sahay

MUKERJI, J.

( 1 ) THESE are two connected revisions arising out of the same conviction. Revision No. 1535 of 1953 is by the applicant Chiranji Lal who was convicted under Section 420 of the Indian Penal code and sentenced to four months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to a further rigorous imprisonment for two months; and the other connected revision, namely, Revision No. 2001 of 1953, is by Ajodhya Prasad, who was the complainant in the case in which Chiranji Lal was convicted.

( 2 ) THE facts of the case briefly stated were these:

( 3 ) CHIRANJI Lal, the applicant, was a business man who did some business at Mahoo in the district of Jaipur (Rajasthan ). It appears that he had a brother named Moti Lal who was known to a firm called Hiralal Ajodhya Prasad a firm of Commission Agents having an Arhat shop at shahjahanpur. Ajodhya Prasad and Bam Saroop (P. W. 7) were partners of this firm. It appears further that Moti Lal had some time done some business with firm Hira Lal Ajodhya Prasad. On the 31st of January, 1952, Chiranji Lal came to the shop of Ajodhya Prasad, i. e. , firm Hiralal ajodhya Prasad, at Shahjahanpur with a letter from Moti

















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top