Allahabad Court August 1977 Judgments
Dr. Ashok Ranjan Saxena Vs. Smt. Vishwa Bharti
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-30-1977
Reported in: AIR1978All18
ORDERYashoda Nandan, J.1. This is a revision by the husband and arises out of a petition filed by his wife (opposite party) under Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 hereinafter referred to as the Act for a decree for judicial separation, payment of permanent alimony and maintenance at the rate of Rs. 500/- per month and return of ornaments, clothes, certificates acid degrees detailed at the foot of the petition. The claim for judicial separation was found on allegations of mental and physical cruelty.2. Undisputably the applicant and the opposite party were Hindus within the meaning of Section 2 of the Act and were married according to the Hindu rites and customs at Allahabad on the 25th June, 1974, After their marriage they lived as husband and wife at Allahabad till December 1974 and during this period, it is alleged by the wife that various forms of physical and mental cruelty, were practised on her by the applicant and the members of his family. Ultimately on the 6th Dec. 1...
Tag this Judgment!S.B. Industries, Freegunj and anr. Vs. United Bank of India and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-30-1977
Reported in: AIR1978All189
K.C. Agarwal, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the learned Second Additional Civil Judge, Agra, dated February 2, 1976, allowing an application filed by the plaintiff respondent for appointment of receiver over the properties mentioned in Schedules 'C' and 'E' of the plaint.2. Briefly stated the facts are these: Suit No. 64 of 1972 was filed by the United Bank of India, a banking concern against the defendants for recovery of Rs. 14,72,473.42 P. along with future interest against the appellants and others (hereinafter referred to as the defendants). The said defendants were the part-ners of M/s Hindustan Metal Works which was impleaded as defendant No. 1 in the suit. The defendants 2 to 4 opened an account in the name of defendant No. 1 with the Belanganj Branch, Agra which was of the nature known as the 'Current Account'. The facilities offered by the said current account were not adequate for the trade purposes of the defendants 1 to 4. They, therefore, ...
Tag this Judgment!izhar Ahmad Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-30-1977
Reported in: 1978CriLJ58
ORDERV.N. Varma, J.1. These are two bail applications, one filed by Mohammad Farooq and the other filed by Izhar Ahmad alias Izhar Ali, which I propose to dispose o together as they are inter-connected and involve the same questions of law and fact.2. Both the applicants (Mohammad Farooq and Izhar Ahmad alias Izhar Ali) are wanted in a case Under Section 302 I.P.C. for the murder of one Brij Bhushan Dubey. At the relevant time, Brij Bhushan Dubey was Deputy Jailpr in Sampurnanand Open Air Jail, Gurua. On 30-4-77, at about 6 A. M., Brij Bhushan Dubey was taking his tea at the tea-stall of one Kenhaiya when six persons came there in a Jeep bearing No. D.L.L 7173. Those six persons alighted from the jeep. They were armed with guns and pistola They threatened to kill Brij Bhushan Dubey saying that he had maltreated one of their relations while the was in Sampurnanand Open Jail. Brij Bhushan Dubey felt panicky, threw down his cup of tea and started running to gave his life. Those, persons g...
Tag this Judgment!Bharon Prasad Vs. Regional Transport Authority and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-26-1977
Reported in: AIR1978All229
Yashoda Nandan, J.1. This special appeal is directed against the judgment of a learned single Judge dismissing the appellants petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.2. The material facts giving rise to the writ petition and this special appeal are that the appellant is the owner of a stage carriage No. U. P. C. 6547. He was granted a permit under Section 48 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) by the Regional Transport Authority to ply the vehicle on the Allahabad Derwa route. The permit was valid up to 16th May, 1975. The appellant fell in arrears of passenger tax leviable and payable to the State Government under the provisions of U. P. Motor Gadi (Yatri Kar) Adhiniyam, 1962 hereinafter called the Adhiniyam. A notice dated 26th June, 1973 was issued to the appellant by the Regional Transport Authority, Allahabad, intimating to him that a sum of Rs. 11,144.00 was due against him as passenger tax and that the same was in disregard of the conditio...
Tag this Judgment!Babu Ram Vs. Arjun Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-26-1977
Reported in: AIR1978All243
ORDERD.N. Jha, J.1. Babu Ram has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution praying for quashing of the order dated 16-3-71 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation.2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at some length and perused the material brought on the record. The dispute between the petitioner and opp. parties 1 to 3, Arjun Lal, Balgovind and Bisheshwar, related to Khata No. 3 which in the basic year was recorded in the name of the petitioner. These opp. parties filed objections before the Asstt. Consolidation Officer claiming to be sole occupants and that they should be recorded as tenure-holders and that the name of the petitioner be expunged. The matter was referred to the Consolidation Officer, who accepted the petitioner's claim vide his order dated 14-12-1969, which is Annexure I to the writ petition. Arjun Lal alone filed appeal arraying Balgovind and Bisheshwar as respondents and the Settlement Officer (Consolidation) allowed the appeal afte...
Tag this Judgment!Chandra Bhan Hukum Chand Vs. Sales Tax Officer and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-26-1977
Reported in: [1978]41STC284(All)
D.M. Chandrashekhar, C.J.1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is directed against the order of the Additional Judge (Revisions), Sales Tax, Meerut Range, in Revisions Nos. 2049 and 2050 of 1973.2. The petitioner was carrying on business of manufacturing and selling bricks. For the assessment years 1966-67 and 1967-68, the assessing authority under the Sales Tax Act rejected his books of account and made best Judgment assessments. The petitioner appealed against those assessment orders and ultimately preferred revision petitions to the Additional Judge (Revisions).3. The Additional Judge (Revisions) upheld the rejection of the petitioner's books of account by the assessing authority and the appellate authority for those two assessment years and also the best Judgment assessments for those two years, but reduced the turnovers estimated for those two years. Correspondingly the amounts of tax assessed for those two years were also reduced.4. In this petition Shri V.K. Bur...
Tag this Judgment!Bhan Hukum Chand Vs. Sales Tax Officer and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-26-1977
Reported in: (1978)7CTR(All)16
D. M. Chandrashekhar, C.J. - This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, is directed against the order of the Additional Judge (Revisions) Sales Tax, Meerut Range in Revisions Nos. 2049 and 2050 of 1973.2. The petitioner was carrying on business of manufacturing and selling bricks. For the assessment years 1966-67 and 1967-68 the Assessing Authority under the Sales Tax Act rejected his books of accounts and made best judgment assessment. The petitioner appealed against those assessment orders and ultimately preferred revision petitions to the Additional Judge (Revisions).3. The Additional Judge (Revisions) upheld the petitioners books of accounts by the Assessing Authority and the appellate authority for those two assessment years and also the best judgment assessments for those two years, but reduced the turnovers estimated for those two years. Correspondingly the amounts of tax assessed for those two years were also reduced.4. In this petition Sri. V. K. Burman, learned coun...
Tag this Judgment!Radhey Shiam Vs. Gur Prasad Serma and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-25-1977
Reported in: AIR1978All86
T.S. Misra, J. 1. Gur Prasad Saxenaand another filed suit No. 595 of 1964 against Radhey Shyam and 5 others for permanent injunction restraining the defendant No. 1 from installing and running flour mill in the premises occupied by the defendant No. 1 on 7-Ashok Marg, Lucknow. The plaintiffs alleged that a portion of the first floor of the said premises was occupied by plaintiff No. 1 as ,a tenant. Just below that portion lay the shop of the defendant No. 1 on the ground floor. The plaintiff No. 2 occupied a shop adjoining the shop of defendant No. 1 on the ground floor of the premises. The de-fendant No. 1 operated upon an oil expeller machine in his shop for about six months and thereafter he planned to instal a flour mill therein. It was alleged that prior thereto the defendant No. 1carried a Kirana business in the shop. The installation of flour mill was opposed by the owners of the said building as also by the plaintiff No. 1. The plaintiff's alleged that they would lose their pea...
Tag this Judgment!Brij Kishore Rai Vs. Lakhan Tewari
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-25-1977
Reported in: AIR1978All314
M.P. Mehrotra, J.1. This second appeal arises out of a suit whereby the plaintiff claimed a money decree against the defendant on the ground that the latter had borrowed certain amounts from the former. The plaintiff claimed the principal sum of Rs. 2000 with interest at the rate of 18% per annum. The defence was that there was, in reality, no borrowing and that the document, on which the plaintiff placed reliance, (which has been described as a Sarkhat) was executed by the defendant but with some different purpose and not as evidencing the alleged borrowings set up by the plaintiff. It was also contended that thedocument in question relied on by the plaintiff really amounted to a pronote in law and was inadmissible in evidence on account of deficiency of stamp,2. The trial court framed the necessary issues, tried the suit and decreed the same. An appeal filed in the lower appellate court failed and now the defendant has come up in the instant second appeal and in support thereof Sri V...
Tag this Judgment!Mehrotra Enterprises Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-25-1977
Reported in: (1978)IILLJ65All
P.N. Bakshi, J.1. Messrs. Indian Explosives Ltd., Fertilizer Division deals in the manufacture and sale of the Chemical Fertilizer popularly known as urea. Its factory is situate at Panki, about 13 Kms. from Kanpur. Urea is manufactured in the factory and is packed in polythenelined gunny bags in the factory premises by mechanised operations. Thereafter these bags of urea, each weighing 50kgs. are diverted by mechanised conveyor belts to the railway siding. The company aforesaid engages a permanent labour force for loading these packed urea bags from conveyor belt to the railway wagons. According to the case of the company, this permanent labour force known as 'loaders' are engaged in specialised operation of unloading these urea bags from the conveyor belts to the wagons. Each loader handles one bag at a time. The conveyor belt being at a height of 5'. the bag is taken on the shoulder by the loader and it is stock piled in the wagon. A group of four loaders work continuously at a time...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »