Allahabad Court September 1976 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.
Abhinandan Lal Vs. the Iind Additional Dist. Judge, Etah and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-15-1976
Reported in: AIR1977All182
ORDERAmitav Banerji, J. 1. The petitioner is a tenant of a shop situated in Etah. The respondent No. 3 is the landlady of the said shop. She filed en application for the release of the building in the tenancy of the petitioner under Section 21 of the U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulations ofLetting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972, hereinafter referred to as the Act. This application was allowed by the Prescribed Authority and his order has been affirmed by the Second Additional District Judge, Etah by his order dated 29th January, 1976. The landlady's need has been found to be genuine and bona fide and also comparatively greater than that of the tenant. The petitioner tenant has filed this writ petition on the ground that there is an error of law apparent on the face of the record in the order passed by the aforesaid authorities and that the order releasing the accommodation in favour of the landlady deserves to be quashed.2. The principal contention on behalf of the petitioner is that there...
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Ramji Prasad Agarwal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-10-1976
Reported in: [1977]40STC85(All)
N.D. Ojha, J.1. M/s. Bhawani Prasad Girdhar Lal were doing some business. For the assessment year 1952-53, they deposited sales tax along with returns which was subject to a final order of assessment being passed. An order of assessment was passed by the Sales Tax Officer on 28th July, 1955. Against that order an appeal was filed by the assessee. This order was set aside by the Judge (Appeals), Sales Tax, by his order dated 29th September, 1955 and the case was remanded to the Sales Tax Officer for making a fresh assessment. In pursuance of that order the Sales Tax Officer passed a fresh assessment order on 29th December, 1955. This order was again challenged in appeal and was set aside on 5th January, 1957, with a direction for passing a de novo assessment order. In between the order passed by the Sales Tax Officer dated 29th December, 1955 and the appellate order dated 5th January, 1957, one of the partners of the firm, viz., Madan Mohan, died on 7th August, 1956, so that the firm st...
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Ramji Prasad Agarwal.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-10-1976
Reported in: (1977)6CTR(All)0007A
N. D. Ojha, J. - M/s. Bhawani Prasad Girdhar Lal were doing some business. For the assessment year 1952-53 they deposited sales tax alongwith returns which was subject to a final order of assessment being passed. An order of assessment was passed by The Sales Tax Officer on 28th of July, 1955. Against that order an appeal was filed by the assessee. This order was set aside by the Judge (Appeals), Sales Tax, by his order dated 29th September, 1955, and the case was remanded to the Sales Tax Officer for making a fresh assessment. In pursuance of that order the Sales Tax Officer passed a fresh assessment order on 29th December, 1955. This order, was again challenged in appeal and was set aside on 5th on January, 1957, with a direction for passing a de novo assessment order. In between the order passes by the Sales Tax Officer dated 29th December, 1955, and the appellate order dated 5th 1957 one of the partners of the firm, viz., Madan Mohan died on 7th of August, 1956 so that the firm sto...
Mohd. Yaqoob Khan and anr. Vs. the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-09-1976
Reported in: AIR1977All93
R.B. Misra, J. 1. These two references under Section 57 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (Act No. II of 1899) have been made by the Board of Revenue, U. P. as the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority. The questions referred in the two references are common and, therefore, both of them are being disposed of by a common judgment.2. It appears that the Municipal Board, Bisalpur, District Pilibhit, held auctions for letting out the right of collection of Tah Bazari for the year 1965-66. The auction was held in the presence of the three members of the Municipal Board. In Stamp Act Reference No. 412 of 1971, Yaqoob Khan offered the highest bid of Rs. 16,500/- and in Stamp Act Reference No. 414 of 1971, Iqrar Khan offered the highest bid of Rs. 15,000/-. Both the bids were for a sum above Rs. 250/-. A bid sheet was prepared, which among others, was signed by Yaqoob Khan and Iqrar Khan. The auctions were closed in their names and they were required to deposit the Zar-i-Chahrum. This was again sign...
Smt. Santosh Kumari Vs. Om Prakash Chopra
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-08-1976
Reported in: AIR1977All97
ORDERHari Swarup, J.1. This revision is directed against an order passed in appeal under Order 43, Rule 1, Civil P. C2. A husband filed a petition for judicial separation in the Court of theCivil Judge, Dehradun. An objection was taken by the wife to the effect that the Dehradun Court had no jurisdiction as the marriage was performed in Delhi and the parties had also last resided in Delhi.3. The trial Court on a consideration of the evidence led by the parties held in favour of the defendant and directed the return of the plaint for presentation to the Court in Delhi. Against this order an appeal was filed and the appellate Court reversing the finding of the trial Court held that the parties had last resided together in Dehradun and not in Delhi. On this finding it held that the Dehradun Court had jurisdiction and directed the case to proceed in that Court. The defendant has filed this revision against that order.4. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended that the finding of th...
Raj Singh Vs. Ram Nivas and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-08-1976
Reported in: AIR1977All104
ORDERHari Swarup, J.1. This revision has been filed against an order of the trial court refusing to strike out the name of the defendant No. 7 from the array of parties.2. The suit has been filed by the plaintiff for specific performance of a contract of sale of an agricultural land. The contract was, according to the plaintiff, between him and Smt. Onkari. Smt. Onkari had agreed to transfer her one-third share in the agricultural land and had taken an earnest money also in respect of the same. Defendant Mo. 7 obtained a decree against Smt. Onkari and in execution of that decree, during the pendency of the present suit, purchased her share in this very property at an auction-sale. As the defendant No. 7 acquired title in, respect of this property, the plaintiff applied for impleading him as a defendant and he was impleaded as defendant No. 7. Defendant No. 7 then applied for striking out his name.3. The court below has held that in view of Section 19 of the Specific Relief Act, the dec...
Ramsey Pharma Private Ltd. Vs. Superintendent, Central Excise and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-08-1976
Reported in: 1983(12)ELT78(All)
D.M. Chandrashekhar, J.1. The petitioner is a company engaged in manufacturing pharmaceuticals. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, it has prayed for quashing the order of the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, levying excise duty on certain medicinal preparations, the appellate order of the Appellate Collector Excise, affirming the order of the Asstt. Collector and the order of the Central Government dismissing the revision petition.2. The petitioner cleared certain medicinal preparations without payment of excise duty. Subsequently the Superintendent, Central Excise, issued to it a notice dated 9-6-1972 asking it to show cause why it should not be required to pay excise duty of Rs. 6,508.19 on certain medicinal preparations as set out in appendices 'A' and 'B' to that notice. The petitioner sent a reply to that notice contending that those medicinal preparations were not liable to excise duty and that the demand of excise duty under that notice was time barred u...
M/S. Ramsey Pharma Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Superintendent, Central Excise (S.R.P ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-08-1976
Reported in: (1977)6CTR(All)0031A
D. M. Chandrashekhar, J. - The petitioner is a company engaged in manufacturing pharmaceuticals. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, it has prayed for quashing the order of the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, levying excise duty on certain medicinal preparations, the appellate order of the Appellate Collector Excise, affirming the order of the Assistant Collector and the order of the Central Government dismissing the revision petition.2. The petitioner cleared certain medicinal preparations without payment of excise duty. Subsequently the Superintendent, Central Excise, issued to it a notice dated 9.6.1972 asking it to show cause why it should not be required to pay excise duty of Rs. 6,508.19 on certain medicinal preparations as set out in appendices A and B to that notice. The petitioner sent a reply to that notice contending that those medicinal preparations were not liable to excise duty and that the demand of excise duty under that notice was time-barred u...
Mufti Mohammad Ashfaq Vs. Smt. Rashkey Jahan and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-06-1976
Reported in: AIR1977All135
M.P. Mehrotra, J.1. These are two connected appeals against the judgment of the lower appellate Court which also decided the two appeals pending before it by a common judgment. Suit No. 433 of 1963 was filed by the 'plaintiff Mufti Mohammad Ashfaq for the ejectment of the defendants after the removal of their Malwa from the land in suit. The plaintiff also claimed mesne profits. His case was that the father of defendants 1 to 4 took the land in suit from the plaintiff's father on the monthly rent of Rs. 4/-through a lease deed of 1933. The father of the plaintiff and the father of defendants 1 to 4 subsequently died and hence the defendants Nos. 1 to 4 came to be in possession as tenants on the same terms. It was contended that under the terms of the lease, the tenants were liable to be ejected whenever the plaintiff himself required the land. Therefore, a notice was served on the defendants Nos. 1 to 4 calling upon them to vacate the same as the land was needed by the plaintiff. Despi...
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Bakhtawar Singh Bhawar Singh.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-02-1976
Reported in: (1977)6CTR(All)72
R. M. Sahai, J. - The following question has been referred by the Additional Judge (Revision), Sales Tax, Agra, for the opinion of this Court :-'Whether under the circumstances of the case first assessment can also be made under S. 21 when whole of the turnover has escaped assessment as the dealer has neither filed return nor paid any sales tax for the year in dispute ?'Briefly stated, the relevant facts of the case are these. The assessee did not file any return. The Sales Tax Officer was of the view that since the assessee had filed any return, the entire turnover had escaped assessment. An ex-parte order of assessment was made on 19-4-1963. The assessee filed an appeal and the appellate court was of the opinion that the assessment order made after four years from the date of the assessment year, was barred by time and was invalid.2. Under the U.P. Sales Tax Act, the period of limitation for an assessment under S. 7 and that for an assessment of escaped turnover S. 12, are the same w...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »