Allahabad Court February 1974 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Nadir Ali and Company
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-14-1974
Reported in: [1977]106ITR151(All)
Gulati, J. 1. This is a reference under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. In respect of the assessment year 1964-65, the assessee filed a return showing an income of Rs. 1,19,091 on the basis of accounts maintained by it. The Income-tax Officer was of the opinion that, having regard to the defective nature of book-keeping, the proviso to Section 145(1) was applicable and, consequently, he computed income by applying a rate of 11 per cent, on the sales disclosed by the assessee. In other words, the sales were accepted but the profits disclosed were not accepted. As the income returned was less than 80 per cent, of the assessed income, the Income-tax Officer started penalty proceedings against the assessee. These proceedings were transferred to the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax under Section 274(2) of the Act and he ultimately imposed a penalty of Rs. 18,000. The penalty was imposed because in the opinion of the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ram Nand Ram Kishan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-14-1974
Reported in: [1975]101ITR98(All)
R.L. Gulati, J.1. This is a reference under Section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. The assessee is a firm carrying on business in sugar and money-lending. During the proceedings for the assessment year 1957-58, it claimed to deduct from its income two sums of Rs. 1,02,356 and Rs. 69,537 due from M/s. Jagannath Mahadeo Prasad and M/s. Sri Ram Mahadeo Prasad, the debtors. It was alleged that a large sum of money was due from them for over a number of years. The case of the assessee was that in the relevant previous year, the assessee was able to realise Rs. 1,25,000 from these debtors through arbitration proceedings and the balance left in their accounts was written off as bad debt. The claim of the assessee was rejected by the Income-tax Officer. The Income-tax Officer did not accept that the assessee had realised Rs. 1,25,000 during the previous year through arbitration and he held that the debts were old and had become time barred long before the commencement of the previou...
Janardan Singh Vs. Tej Bahadur Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-13-1974
Reported in: AIR1974All460
K.N. Srivastava, J. 1. This is an appeal against the judgment and decree passed by the Civil Judge, Ballia, against the judgment and decree passed by the Munsif, Ballia. The Munsif had decreed the suit for redemption of the mortgage on payment of Rs. 2,000. The lower appellate court came to the conclusion that plaintiffs were entitled to certain amount by way of damages and, therefore, they were entitled to redeem the mortgage on payment of Rs. 377 only. It is against this judgment and decree that the defendant has filed this appeal. 2. The facts giving rise to this appeal are as follows: On 30-1-1923 a mortgage was executed by Prahlad Hajjam in favour of Baldeo Singh and Ram Govind. On 8-6-1954 the mortgagors sold the property to the plaintiffs, On 4-10-1962 the vendees brought a suit that the mortgagees had dug pits in the disputed land making the Land unfit for agriculture and, therefore, they were liable to pay Rs. 1,500 as damages. They also alleged that they had paid Rs. 80 as re...
Dr. Baldeo Sharma and anr. Vs. Amritdhara Pharmacy (P.) Ltd. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-13-1974
Reported in: [1975]45CompCas268(All)
Satish Chandra, J.1. This special appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned company judge dismissing a petition under Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act.2. The petition related to the Amritdhara Pharmacy Private Ltd. This company is essentially a family concern, nine out of 12 shareholders (holding 2,988 out of 3,000 shares) being members of the same family, while the other three (holding only 12 shares) are friends to whom a few shares were allotted as a special favour. Vimaldeo Sharma, the respondent No. 2, holds 1,360 shares. He also commands the support of his wife, Shrimati Kusum Sharma (125 shares), and his mother, Shrimati Subhadra Rani Sharma (100 shares). Thus he is in a position to exercise control over the affairs of the company. He was the managing director of the company. The appellant, Dr. Baldeo Sharma, holds 25 shares. He was, under the articles of association of the company, permanent chairman of the board of directors. He is the first appellant bef...
The Indian Institute of Technology Vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-12-1974
Reported in: [1976]38STC428(All)
N.D. Ojha, J.1. The Indian institute of Technology, Kalyanpur, Kanpur, the petitioner, is a body corporate incorporated under the Institutes of Technology Act, 1961 (Act 59 of 1961). The powers and duties of an institution incorporated under the said Act, as contained in Section 6, which are relevant for the purposes of the present writ petition, are :(a) to provide for instruction and research in such branches of engineering and technology, sciences and arts, as the Institute may think fit, and for the advancement of learning and dissemination of knowledge in such branches ;....(d) to fix, demand and receive fees and other charges ;(e) to establish, maintain and manage halls and hostels for the residence of students ;(f) to supervise and control the residence and regulate the discipline of students of the Institute and to make arrangements for promoting their health, general welfare and cultural and corporate life ;....(n) to do all such things as may be necessary, incidental or condu...
Bhadur Singh Vs. the District Judge, Rampur and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-11-1974
Reported in: AIR1975All12
ORDER1. This petition has been filed against the order passed by the trial court dismissing the plaintiff's suit as not maintainable and against the order dismissing the plaintiff's appeal against that order.2. Petitioner had filed the suit purporting to be under Sections 13 and 14 of the Arbitration Act with a prayer that the defendants be ordered to file the award in court and the award be thereafter set aside on the basis of the objections taken by him in the plaint. The award had been given by the Registrar under the U. P. Co-operative Societies Act (hereinafter called the Act). Both the courts below held that the suit was not maintainable and rejected the plaint.3. From the relief claimed by the plaintiff, as mentioned in the judgment of the appellate court, it appears that the plaintiff had prayed for a declaration thatthe award was not valid and binding. He had thus claimed the determination of the effect and validity of the award. Such a relief would ordinarily be claimable by ...
Shrimati Daya Wati and anr. Vs. Collector, Saharanpur and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-07-1974
Reported in: AIR1975All202
ORDERK.N. Singh, J.1. These are two writ petitions challenging the land acquisition proceedings taken by the Collector, Saharanpur, for acquiring land for purposes of extension and development of Har Ki Pairi at Hardwar and for widening the road in front of Har Ki Pairi, Hardwar. Two notifications, one dated 18th July, 1973, and the other dated 5th July, 1973, issued by the Collector of Saharanpur, were published in the Gazette dated 4th August, 1973, under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act. The proceedingsinitiated under these two notifications have been impugned in these two writ petitions.2. In Writ Petition No. 6843 of 1073, there are 24 petitioners including Smt. Kamal Rani whose property which includes land and building, is sought to be acquired by the Collector for the purposes of extension and development of Har Ki Pairi. Smt. Dayawati and Smt. Krishnawati are two petitioners in Writ Petition No. 7423 of 1973. Their land and building standing thereon is sought to be acqu...
Smt. Krishnawati Devi and anr. Vs. Lala Harjas Mal Misra and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-07-1974
Reported in: AIR1974All209
T.S. Misra, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 4th August, 1973, passed by the 1st Additional District Judge, Varanasi, on an application moved by Smt. Lilawati on 30th August, 1971, under Section 41 of the Arbitration Act, for appointment of a receiver of the firm Tilak Raj Krishan Kumar with powers to take over the entire assets of the partnership, including its books of account and to take charge of the place of business of the dissolved firm and also to realise the assets and dues of the firm and discharge its pressing liabilities with the permission of the Court. That application was registered as Misc. Case No. 34 of 1971. It was contested by the present appellants. After hearing the parties and considering the circumstances placed before him, the learned 1st Additional District Judge allowed the application and appointed Sri Amar Singh Advocate, receiver of the dissolved firm Tilak Raj Krishna Kumar. He also issued certain directions as contained in the impugn...
Om Prakash and ors. Vs. Bhagwan and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-07-1974
Reported in: AIR1974All389
Asthana, J.1. This is an appeal by the defendants from the judgment and decree of the learned Civil Judge of Agra decreeing the plaintiff-respondents' suit for partition of their half share in a shop situate in Kumari Bazar, Agra, fully described at the foot of the plaint.2. A reference to the following pedigree would be convenient for understanding the controversy between the parties:-- MANGAL SEN | ----------------------------------------------------------------------- | | Debi Das Angan Lal | Reoti Devi alias Rewa=Ganeshi Lal -------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | Babul=Smt. Pragdevi. Deft. 5 Harnarain | Shri Bhagwan, Plff. 1 Ram Swarup =Smt. Atar Devi Mahavir Prasad Plff. 2 Deft. 4 | -------------------------------------------------------------------- | | | Om Prakash Prahlad Lalla Deft. 1 Deft. 2 Deft. 3 3. The plaintiffs, Shri Bhagwan and Mahabir Prasad, who are the son andgrandson, respectively, of Babu Lal come to the court with the alleg...
Lakhpati Singh Vs. Raghunath Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-07-1974
Reported in: AIR1974All479
ORDER1. This petition has been filed for quashing the proceedings under Section 144, C.P.C. on the ground that a notification under Section 4 of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act has been issued in respect of the village in which the land in dispute lies.2. Learned counsel has contended that after the trial court's decree it was put into execution and possession was obtained by the petitioner. Thereafter an appeal had been filed by the judgment-debtor. During the pendency of the appeal consolidation proceedings commenced. The appeal and the suit accordingly abated under Section 5 of the Consolidation of Holdings Act. The judgment-debtors thereupon applied under Section 144, C.P.C. for restitution. The court below has directed the restitution. The petitioner has now challenged that order through this petition.3. Once the suit has abated under law, the effect will be that everything done by the Court in that suit will have to be reversed and the parties will have to be put back to ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »