Allahabad Court November 1981 Judgments
Ram Sewak Vs. Ram Charan (Deceased by L. Rs.) and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-27-1981
Reported in: AIR1982All177
Deoki Nandan, J.1. This is a plaintiff's second appeal in a suit for accounts and for recovery of the amount found due to the plaintiff on the taking of accounts. The trial Court decreed the suit for recovery of Rs. 17,695.78 from defendants Nos, 1 and 3, but the lower appellate Court has dismissed the same. Ram Charan aud Damordar Das. defendants Nos. 3 and 4, are father and son and members of a Hindu joint family. They carry on Kerana business. Ram Sewak, the plaintiff and Madan Lal, the first defendant were their servants and looked after the business. In Nov., 1953 Ram Charau decided to close the business. On the request of Ram Sewak and Madan Lal, Ram Charan handed over the business to them with the stock worth Rupees 40,125/- which was treated as a loan repayable with interest by them to Ram Charan. Ram Sewak and Madan Lal carried on the business as equal partners. It was decided that out of the profits one Anna in a rupee would be given for charity in favour of a temple of Rashi...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Anisa and anr. Vs. Banne Khan
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-27-1981
Reported in: 1982CriLJ1270
ORDERM. Wahajuddin, J.1. This is an application Under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying that the entire proceedings in Criminal Case No. 499 of 1979(Banne Khan v. Shahjahan and Anr.) pending in the court of Special Judicial Magistrate, Etawah, be quashed.2. It would appear that one Banne Khan filed a complaint against applicant Smt. Anisa and one Shahjahan Under Sections 362, 364, 498 & 417, 420, IPC claiming that Rubina is his wife and on 15-12-1979 while he was on duty as an employee at New Hind Talkies, and only Rubina and the mother of the complainant were at the house, the aforesaid accused persons misrepresented that they had obtained permission from the complainant for the Ruksat of Rubina and complainant told that she may go and so they desired to take her and believing upon the false representations made by the accused persons Rubina's Rukhsat was secured and she accompanied the accused persons along with ornaments mentioned in the complaint. It was stated that thereafter any trace ...
Tag this Judgment!Mahabir Rice and Dal Mills Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-26-1981
Reported in: (1982)1ITD788(All.)
1. The assessee is a firm. The original assessment in this case was made on 17-12-1977. There are six partners in this firm, some of whom are in their individual capacities, while others are representing their respective HUFs. While completing the assessment, the ITO had disallowed, in the aggregate, interest of Rs. 30,556 under Section 40(b) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ("the Act").2. Subsequently, the audit pointed out to the ITO that the disallowable interest under Section 40(b) amounted to a higher figure by Rs. 83,780.In this connection, the audit pointed out to the ITO that although he had added back the sum of Rs. 30,557 paid to the partners in their individual capacity, the additional amount of Rs. 83,780 paid to them as kartas of their respective HUFs was not added. The audit also observed that the prohibition contained in Section 40(b) was absolute and made no distinction between payments by way of interest or salary to a partner as a partner and such payments made to him in ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Mohd. Ayub and Sons
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-25-1981
Reported in: [1982]50STC187(All)
R.M. Sahai, J.1. On the facts found, the following question of law has been raised by the Commissioner of Sales Tax :Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned additional revising authority was legally justified to hold that glass sheets were taxable as unclassified item when a Division Bench of this very Honourable Court has held that the same were taxable as glassware ?2. Before coming to the findings of facts recorded by the revising authority, it may be pointed out that the word 'glassware' used in the notification under which the department is attempting to tax glass sheets came up for interpretation before the Honourable Supreme Court in Indo International Industries v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, U. P. 1981 UPTC 481 (SC). The Honourable Court held that 'it is true that the dictionary meaning of the expression 'glassware' is 'articles made of glass' (see Webster's New World Dictionary). However, in commercial sense glassware could never comprise articl...
Tag this Judgment!Jai Pal Singh Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-24-1981
Reported in: 1982CriLJ430
H.N. Seth, J.1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, petitioner Jai Pal Singh questions the validity of his detention under the provisions of Prevention of Black Marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act. authorities, (authorised?) by District Magistrate, Moradabad vide his order dated 15th of July, 1981.2. The grounds for his detention which were served upon the petitioner on the same day on which he was directed to be detained, recited that he was on 7th of July, 1981 employed as a salesman at the fair price Levy Sugar Distribution Shop belonging to Sadhan Sahkari Samiti Moothapande located at Darabara Khas. On 7th of July, 198l Sri Laik Ahmad, District Supply Officer, inspected the said shop in the presence of Other officials and witnesses Abdul Waris, Masood Ahmad and Ihtjar Husain with a view to check the distribution of Levy Sugar. The inspection carried out by Sri Laiq Ahmad led to recovery of 2 quintals and 18 kg. sugar of the said sh...
Tag this Judgment!Aijaz Ahmad Lalri Vs. Smt. Shajehan Begum and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-24-1981
Reported in: 1982CriLJ1022
ORDERM. Wahajuddin, J.1. This is an application for quashing the orders dt. 9-8-1979 and 14-8-1980 of the Magistrate and the Additional Sessions Judge in revision respectively in a proceeding Under Section 125, Cr.P.C. (Annexures '2' and '1' respectively).2. It would appear that the opposite party No. 1, who is the wife of the applicant, moved an application seeking maintenance for herself as well as for the daughter, born to applicant and opposite party No. 1. A maintenance of Rs. 50/- per month was allowed to opposite party No. 1 while a maintenance of Rs. 30/- per month was allowed for opposite party No. 2.3. It is urged that in the application it was not alleged by the opposite party No, 1 that she is unable to maintain herself and that was fatal and the application could not have been entertained. I may at the very outset observe that this ground would apply only to opposite party No. 1 and not at all to opposite party No. 2.4. The provisions Under Section 125, Cr.P.C. are based o...
Tag this Judgment!Narendra Nath Misra and ors. Vs. High School and Intermediate Educatio ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-20-1981
Reported in: AIR1982All123
S.J. Hyder, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by four examinees who appeared at the High School Examination held in the year 1980 from the Intermediate College, Shukulpur in the district of Allahabad, Their result was initially withheld by the Board of High School and Intermediate Education and subsequently by an Order dated January 31, 1981 the Board cancelled their examination on the ground that they had used unfair means while answering the first paper in the discipline of physics.2. The writ petition, in the first instance, was argued before us on behalf of the petitioners on Oct., 13, 1981. The petition was again taken up as a part heard case on Oct. 14, 1981 and on the second date of hearing two supplementary affidavits were filed on behalf of the petitioners in support of their writ petition.3. In the writ petition the order passed by the Board of High School and Intermediate Education referred to above was impugned only on the ground that it was based on no evidence, By me...
Tag this Judgment!H.A. Nek Mohd. and Sons Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-20-1981
Reported in: (1982)28CTR(All)329; [1982]135ITR501(All); [1982]10TAXMAN298(All)
Rastogi, J. 1. As directed by this court the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad, has referred the following question to us: 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Section 40A(3) of the Act is applicable to the facts of the present case ?' 2. The brief facts are these. M/s. H.A. Nek Mohd. & Sons, a registered firm, was engaged in the business of purchase and sale of Banarasi sarees.During its assessment for the assessment year 1970-71, the ITO found that the assessee had made the following payments exceeding Rs. 2,500 at a time to 12 parties for purchase of resham, etc.: Rs.20-10-1969Mr.Gopal Das Lalta Pd.7,150-1220-10-1969SriGulam Nabi3,522-1920-10-1969M/s. BurmaSilk Centre2,807-5020-10-1969Sri BabuNandan4,388-2214-1-1970Sri TaraSao6,060-358-2-1970SriParmanand3,841-008-2-1970M/s.Gopal Das Lalta Pd.5,394-6323-3-1970Sri TaraSao6,634-9223-3-1970SriJagarnath2,862-0023-3-1970Sri Bismillah3,335-7023-3-1970M/s.Gopal Das Lalta Pd.4,880-0031-3-1970M/...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Mulkh Raj and Sons
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-19-1981
Reported in: (1982)27CTR(All)327; [1982]135ITR89(All); [1982]10TAXMAN300(All)
C.S.P. Singh, J. 1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench C, has referred the following question of law for our opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that the interest income of Rs. 1,000 and share income of Rs. 8,204 from the firm of M/s. Sohna Mal Hakim Chand & Co. should be excluded from the assessment of the assessee-Hindu undivided family 2. It appears that Mulkh Raj had deposited Rs. 20,000 in his individual account with the firm, M/s. Sohna Mal Hakim Chand & Co. Mulkh Raj sought to impress this money with the character of HUF property with effect from March 19, 1972. He claimed to have become a partner of the firm in his capacity as the karta of an HUF in the aforesaid firm, as from September 4, 1972. An amount of Rs. 1,000 was earned as interest on this deposit for the period April 1, 1972, to September 3, 1974, and share income to the extent of Rs. 8,204 for the period from September 4, 1972, to March...
Tag this Judgment!Asghar Ali and ors. Vs. Chidda
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-19-1981
Reported in: AIR1982All186
S.J. Hyder, J. 1. The plaintiffs are the appellants before this Court. They are aggrieved because a suit for specific performance was dismissed by the court of appeal who reversed the decree passed by the primary court. 2. According to the plaintiffs-appellants, who shall hereinafter be referred to as 'the plaintiffs' only, Said Moham-mad, who was one of the defendants in the suit, was the Bhumidhar of certain plots of land. He agreed to convey the said land to the plaintiffs for a sum of Rs. 4,000/- and received a sum of Rupees 2,000/- as earnest money. The balance of the sale consideration was payable at the time of the execution of the sale deed which was to be completed by May, 1958, An agreement embodying the said conditions was executed by Said Mohammad on the same date. It is futher disclosed in the plaint that in contravention of the said agreement, Said Mohammad transferred the land in dispute to Chidda Khan, defendant respondent No. 1 for a sale consideration of Rs. 5000/- on...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »