Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1976All244
G.C. Mathur, J. 1. On September 8, 1973, the U. P. Public Service Commission published an advertisement inviting applications for two posts of Professor of Medicine in the State Medical Colleges, The date for filing applications, as extended later, was March 30, 1974. The age qualification mentioned in the advertisement was 'not above 45 years'. The other requisite qualifications were also set out in the advertisement.2. The three writ petitioners were at this time officiating as Professors of Medicine on an ad hoc basis, of them Dr. Arun Kumar Gupta was officiating in the B. R. D. Medical College, Gorakhpur, Dr. Brij Kishore in the S. N. Medical College, Agra, and Dr. Sheo Narain Agarwal in the G. S. V. M. Medical College, Kanpur. All three of them applied for the two posts of Professor of Medicine which were advertised. Respondents Nos. 3 and 4 in the writ petition, Dr. Ravindra Nath Tandon and Dr. Mahesh Chandra Gupta, also applied for these posts. Dr. Tandori was at this time worki...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [1976]38STC257(All)
R.L. Gulati, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.2. The petitioner is a dealer in coal. In order to import coal from outside Uttar Pradesh form No. 31 prescribed under the U. P. Sales Tax Rules is to be furnished. The petitioner made a demand of 300 such forms. The Sales Tax Officer thought that this demand was highly excessive and unreasonable. He accordingly directed the petitioner to appear before him and to place material for ascertaining his genuine demand for the forms and also to produce accounts showing that the forms issued to him previously had been properly utilised. The Sales Tax Officer after examining the materials produced before him came to the conclusion that the petitioner was entitled to only 10 forms. He also found that the forms previously issued to the petitioner had not been properly accounted for. The petitioner is aggrieved and has approached this court under Article 226 of the Constitution praying for a writ of mandamus directing the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 1976CriLJ357
ORDERHari Swarup, J.1. This revision has been filed against the order of the learned Sessions Judge allowing the revision in proceedings under Section 145/146 of the Criminal P.C. A preliminary order was passed under Section 145, Cr.P.C. by learned Magistrate as there was an apprehension of breach of peace in respect of certain property. The two parties were served with the notice and they appeared in Court. Learned Magistrate was unable to decide as to which of them was in possession. He accordingly forwarded the record of the proceedings to the Civil Court under Section 146(1) of the Criminal P.C. While the matter was pending in the Court of the learned Munsiff an application was moved by one Ganga Singh praying that as he was in possession he impleaaed as a party. Learned Munsif opining that he had no jurisdiction to implead him as a party forwarded the whole matter to the learned Magistrate. He allowed the application, and after impleading Ganga Singh sent back the case to the lear...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (1976)5CTR(All)78
Gulati J. - This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.2. The petitioner is a dealer in coal. In order to import coal from outside Uttar Pradesh. Form No. 31 prescribed under the U.P. Sales tax Rules is to be furnished. The petitioner made a demand of 300 such forms. The Sales-tax Officer thought that this demand was highly excessive and unreasonable. He accordingly directed the petitioner to appear before him and to place material for ascertaining his genuine demand and also to produce accounts showing that the forms issued to him previously had been properly utilised. The Sales-tax Officer after examining the material produced before him came to the conclusion that the petitioner was entitled to only 10 forms. He also found that the forms previously issued to the petitioner had not been properly accounted for. The petitioner is aggrieved and has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution praying for a writ of mandamus directing the Sales-tax Officer to ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (1976)5CTR(All)11
C. S. P. Singh, J. - The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad has under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act referred the following question for our opinion :-'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the claim of interest of Rs. 33,576/- charged under section 220(2) of the Income-tax Act. 1961 is not an allowable deduction in view of the section 40(a)(ii), under section 28(i) and section 37 of the Act.2. The assessee a public limited Company has financial year as its accounting year. In the assessment year 1964-65, a deduction of Rs. 33,576/- was claimed being interest paid to Income-tax department under section 220(2) of the Act. The interest that was paid was for the assessment year 1960-61, 1961-62 and 1962-63. This amount was not allowed on the view that it was not permissible deduction under section 40(a)(ii) of the Act. An appeal filed before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner failed. The assessee then preferred an appeal before the Tribu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [1977]110ITR378(All)
R.L. Gulati, J.1. This is a reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ' the Act').2. The assessee is a firm. It came into existence on 1st April, 1963. It had two partners, Krishna Gopal and Om Prakash, who are brothers. In the assessment year 1964-65, the assessee-firm filed its returns and applied for registration in Form No. 11 as prescribed by the Income-tax Rules. The Income-tax Officer granted the registration under Section 185(1)(a) of the Act and completed the assessment in the status of a registered firm. In the course of the assessment proceedings the Income-tax Officer discovered a cash credit in the name of Jawar Singh. During the course of the assessment proceedings the assessee conceded thatthe deposit of Rs. 3,100 did not represent a genuine loan from Jawar Singh but actually it was the firm's income credited in a fictitious account. An offer was made that the amount in question may be included in the total income of the firm ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1976All229
Chandra Prakash, J.1. This is a second appeal against the order dated 30-7-1966 passed by II Additional District Judge Varanasi, dismissing the appellant's appeal after confirming the order of the executing court.2. The facts leading to this appeal may be narrated as follows:--The respondent decree-holder obtained a decree against the judgment-debtor appellant for the recovery of Rs. 1,200/- on the basis of a mortgage executed by the judgment-debtor appellant in favour of the respondent in respect of two plots in dispute detailed in the plaint. In the original suit the appellant took plea that the plots in dispute were not saleable and could not be mortgaged. This plea was overruled and a decree under Order 34, Rule 4, Civil Procedure Code was passed. Eventually a decree under Order 34 Rule 5 was also passed. The respondent decree-holder put the decree in execution and sought an auction sale of the two disputed plots.3. The judgment debtor appellant took an objection under Section 47, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1976All232
ORDERG.C. Mathur, J. 1. The important question, which arises for consideration in this case, is as to which of the courts at Fatehpur has jurisdiction to entertain the suit. 2. The suit was filed on April 25, 1972, in the court of Munsif at Fatehpur. It was a suit for eviction from certain buildings and for recovery of arrears of rent and compensation for use and occupation. At that time, it was not a suit cognizable by a Court of Small Causes and there is no dispute that the Munsif had jurisdiction to entertain it. While the suit was pending, the U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (Act XIII of 1972) came into force. Subsequently, the U. P. Civil Laws Amendment Act, 1972 (U. P. Act No. 37 of 1972) came into force from September 20, 1972. This Act amended certain provisions of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887, the Bengal, Agra and Assam Civil Courts Act 1857, the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 and the U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1976All1
ORDERM.P. Saxena, J.1. This is a revision application under Section 115, Civil Procedure Code against the order dated 10-9-1974 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Gyanpur, Varanasi.2. Briefly stated the facts givingrise to this application are that firmJagarnath Prasad Thekedar, oppositeparty had filed a suit (No. 18 of 1961) forthe recovery of money. In that suit attachment before judgment of certain property including a house with Ahata andParti land bounded as below and situatein Qasba Bhadoi, District Varanasi, wasmade:North:-- House and Ahara of Sukhnandan Lal South:-- House of Pyagram Gupta. East:-- Pucca Road which goes from Bhadoi to Gyanpur. West:-- Ahata of Sukhnandan Lal in possession of Elaka Prasad Baijnath Prasad. In execution of the decree the said house was put to auction on 15-1-1969 and was purchased by the decree-holder. The sale was confirmed on 17-8-1972 and the sale certificate was issued on 7-9-1972. On the same day the decree-holders auction purch...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1976All188
ORDERP.N. Bakshi, J. 1. Mahendra Bal Vidyalaya Society is a registered body and Mahendra Bal Vidyalaya is a recognised institution having about 500 students on its rolls. It began functioning in July 1966 and is now reputed as the Junior High School of the locality. Respondent No. 7 is the Varshini Maha Vidyalaya, Respondent No. 5 is the Varshini College Society which runs the above Vidyalaya. Respondent No. 6 namely Dina Nath is the Secretary of this Society.2. Bereft of unnecessary details, the relevant facts are that on 5-5-1966 respondent No. 5 at the instance of respondent No. 6 passed a resolution that steps be taken for acquisition of plots Nos. 2128 to 2133, 2150, 2151, 2152, 2154 and 2155 vide Annex. 'E' to the writ petition. Respdt. No. 7 deposited a sum of Rupees 66,436/- on 10-8-1966 vide treasury challan No. 9 of that date purporting to be a deposit for the acquisition of plots proposed for the purpose of acquisition. On 3-9-1966, the Collector Aligarh respondent No. 3 pub...
Tag this Judgment!