Allahabad Court July 1981 Judgments
Smt. Kaushalya Devi Vs. Housing and Development Board and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-14-1981
Reported in: [1983]53CompCas676(All)
1. This F.A.F.O., arises out of a claim petition decided by the Motor Vehicles Claims Tribunal, Agra, dismissing the claim petition filed by Smt. Kaushalya Devi, mother of the deceased, who is now appellant before us.2. The appellant had filed the claim petition before the Claims Tribunal, Agra, claiming compensation in the sum of Rs. 2.50 lakh on account of the death of her son, Sri Krishna Kumar Bhartari, in an accident which took place on 11th May, 1971, near the crossing of Mal Road and the Cariappa Road, Agra, involving truck No. RRL 2621 belonging to respondent No. 2 and a mini-bus bearing No. UPH 3092 owned by respondent No. 1. In this accident, apart from the driver of the mini-bus, claimant's son, K. K. Bhartari, also lost his life. The deceased was aged 34 years and was unmarried. At the time of the accident he was serving as an Assistant Engineer with the U.P. Housing and Development Board and was posted, at the relevant time, at Agra. He was then drawing a salary of Rs. 800...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Prakash Trading Co.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-14-1981
Reported in: [1982]51STC342(All)
R.M. Sahai, J.1. Dissatisfied with the setting aside of penalty orders passed under Section 15-A(l)(g) of the U. P. Sales Tax Act for carrying on business without registration under Section 8-A in the assessment year 1973-74 to 1976-77 by the revising authority and the appellate authority, the Commissioner of Sales Tax has filed these revisions and raised an issue of wider impact of competency and jurisdiction of honour of penalty orders.2. To hammer the point Sri V.D. Singh, the learned standing counsel, has compared Sub-clause (g) with various Sub-clauses and has highlighted the legislative intention of excluding mens rea from this clause thereby rendering an act of mere non-registration punishable per se. In order to appreciate this submission of the learned standing counsel material portions of Section 15-A are re-extracted below:15-A. (1) If the assessing authority is satisfied that any dealer or other person-(a) has, without reasonable cause, failed to furnish the return of his t...
Tag this Judgment!Diwan Singh Vs. Inderjeet
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-13-1981
Reported in: AIR1981All342
Deoki Nandan, J.1. This is a plaintiffs second appeal in a suit for mandatory injunction directing the defendant to dose the windows opened by him in the rooms on the first floor of his house facing the plaintiff's property, and a prohibitory injunction restraining the defendant from discharging dirty water in the 5' wide lane between houses of the parties.2. The parties are displaced persons having settled down at Dehradun after partition. Their respective houses are divided by a 5' wide lane. The suit was filed when the defendant sought to raisethe construction on the first floor of his house. The plaintiff's house is to the south of the land while the defendant's house is to the north thereof. The plaintiff did not claim that the land was his private property, but he claimed that it was not a public street and only the owners and residents of the houses to the south of that lane had a right to use it. The closure of the two windows, opened by the defendant in the two rooms on the fi...
Tag this Judgment!Narendra Bahadur Singh Vs. Baijnath Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-09-1981
Reported in: AIR1981All410
K.N. Seth, J.1. This appeal by the defendant arises out of a suit filed by the plaintiff-respondents for specific performance of a contract of sale directing the defendant to execute a sale deed in the name of plaintiff No. 2 on receipt of a sum of Rs. 20,000/-, the balance amount of sale consideration, from plaintiff No. 1 in respect of the properties detailed in the schedule at-tached at the foot of the plaint. The case set up by the plaintiffs was that the defendant was the owner and bhumidhar of the property in suit which included a big kothi, abadi land, kitchen garden and a grove in village Namaksair, Pergana and Tahsil Sadar, district Pratapgarh, He decided to stay permanently at Lucknow and started disposing of his property lying in district Pratapgarh, He transferred several items of property to plaintiff No, 1, his brother Avadesh Singh and Harkesh Bahadur Singh and to other persons also. The defendant used to settle the sale transaction and the terms thereof orally at Luckno...
Tag this Judgment!Prag Datt Vs. Smt. Saraswati Devi and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-08-1981
Reported in: AIR1982All37
S.J. Hyder, J. 1. Har Vallabh plaintiff-respondent No. 2, was the Bhumidhar of plot No. 417 measuring 1-20 acres. The said plot is situated in village Kandeshi Pachar, District Etawah. On July 29, 1964, Har Vallabh executed a sale deed of the said plot in favour of the defendant-appellant for a sale consideration of Rs. 800/-. On the same date, it is alleged by the plaintiff, the defendant-appellant executed an agreement to transfer the property in favour of Smt. Saraswati Devi, plaintiff-respondent No. 1, and Har Vallabh or any one of them. The plaintiffs-respondents served a notice on the defendant-appellant on Oct. 26, 1965, requiring him to execute a sale deed of the said plot in favour of Smt. Saraswati Devi alone as Har Vallabh was not possessed of sufficient means. The defendant-appellant replied to the said notice stating that he had only agreed to transfer the land in favour of Har Vallabh and he was under no legal obligation to do the same in favour of Smt. Saraswati Devi, On...
Tag this Judgment!Maheshwar Dayal Vs. Neel Kantheshwar Dayal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-08-1981
Reported in: AIR1982All117
T.S. Misra, J.1. This appeal arises in the following circumstances. Sheo Dularay filed an application under Section 14(2) of the Arbitration Act before the Court below alleging that he was appointed Arbitrator by the present appellant and the respondents Nos. 1 and 2 to effect partition of immovable properties situate at village Korar and Sair as also at Lucknow. He made his Award on 9-10-1973 and filed the same in the Court below on 6-11-1973. The respondents Nos. 1 and 2 filed theirseparate objections praying that the Award be set aside, on a variety of grounds stated in their objections. One of the common grounds taken in the objections was that the Award having not been made on stamp-paper of requisite value was inadmissible in evidence and cannot be acted upon and that the Award which was compulsorily registrable had not been registered under the provisions of the Indian Registration Act; hence it was invalid. The present appellant Maheshwar Dayal disputed this assertion. A number...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Romills Garrage
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-06-1981
Reported in: [1982]49STC226(All)
R.M. Sahai, J.1. By way of this revision the Commissioner of Sales Tax seeks setting aside of the revising authority's order by which he set aside the penalty order passed under Sub-section (qq) of Section 15-A of the Sales Tax Act which runs as under:If the assessing authority is satisfied that any dealer or other person realises any amount as sales tax or purchase tax, where no sales tax or purchase tax is legally payable or in excess of the amount of tax legally payable under this Act.2. Penalty was levied as the assessee had realised additional tax under Section 3-F although its turnover did not exceed Rs. 2,00,000. It is not disputed that in the earlier year the assessee's turnover exceeded the prescribed limit and it realised and deposited additional tax on it. It is further not disputed that in the assessment year in dispute, that is, 1974-75, the assessee deposited additional tax realised by it along with quarterly returns. But the proceedings were initiated as the total turnov...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Roorkee Drawing Emporium
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-06-1981
Reported in: [1982]49STC153(All)
R.M. Sahai, J.1.Agrieved against the reduction of turnover of 1974-75 for the goods which were sold in 1973-74 but returned in 1974-75 the Commissioner of Sales Tax has come to this Court and has raised the following question of law:Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned additional revising authority was legally justified to hold that exemption on account of return of goods can be allowed in the assessment year in which the goods have been returned notwithstanding the fact that it was not a part of the gross turnover of that year, but of the previous year ?2. Admittedly, the assessee carrying on business of manufacture and sale of survey and drawing instruments sold goods worth Rs. 10,000 to the Executive Engineer, Irrigation Survey Department, Bilaspur, in the assessment year 1973-74. The tax was levied on it and was paid by the assessee. It appears that the goods were not approved by the Government. Consequently the bill was not honoured and the goods...
Tag this Judgment!Vashistha NaraIn Karvaria Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-06-1981
Reported in: 1981CriLJ1526
Yashoda Nandan, J.1. The petitioner who is incarcerated in the Central Prison at Naini, by means of this petition challenges the legality of the order dated 9th February, 1981 passed under Section 3 of the National Security Act, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) (Act No. 65 of 1980) by Sri Vidya Prakash designating himself as the District Magistrate, Allahabad. Though a number of points have been urged in support of this writ petition, it can be disposed of on the simple ground that on the date when the order of detention was passed by Sri Vidya Prakash, he was not the District Magistrate of Allahabad.2. During the course of the hearing before us the learned Counsel for the State produced a radiogram message issued by the Chief Secretary to the Government of Uttar Pradesh to Sri S. A. T. Rizvi, District Magistrate, Allahabad, Sri J. N. Pradhan, Commissioner, Allahabad Division, Allahabad. and Sri Madhukar Gupta. Officiating Commissioner, Moradabad Division, as follows:Sri S. A....
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›