Allahabad Court August 1981 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.
Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Vinod Prakash Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-18-1981
Reported in: AIR1982All68; [1981(43)FLR318]
B.N. Sapru, J.1. 66 Down Janta Express collided with M-5 Up Goods Train at Katghar near Moradabad on the night intervening 20/21-2-1974. In that accident one Smt. Rama Devi, wife of Sheetla Bux Singh and mother of Vinod Prakash Singh, major and Awadhesh Kumar Singh, minor died. An application under Section 82-C of the Railways Act was filed by Vinod Prakash Singh and Awadhesh Kumar Singh, under the guardianship of his brother Vinod Prakash Singh, for compensation for the death of their mother.2. The case of the two claimants was that Smt. Rama Devi was travelling with her husband Sheetla Bux Singh on the ill-fated day in the train and Smt. Rama Devi died as a result of the accident. It was asserted that Smt. Rama Devi was doing dairy business at the time of the accident and that the claimants were the sole surviving heirs of the deceased Smt. Rama Devi and they were entitled to claim the compensation for the death of their mother.3. The claim petition was resisted on behalf of the Unio...
Rajendra Swarup Sharma Vs. Delhi Transport Undertaking
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-18-1981
Reported in: [1983]54CompCas636(All)
1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Meerut, dated March 19, 1975, dismissing the appellant's claim petition filed under Section 110A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939. 2. Rajendra Swarup Sharma, appellant, received multiple injuries in the accident that took place on October 12, 1969, at 7.20 A.M. on G. T. Road near PWD Inspection Bungalow atGhaziabad. According to the allegations contained in the claim petition, the appellant was proceeding on foot to M/s. Mohan Meakins Breweries, Mohan Nagar, where he was employed. A stage carriage No. DLP 1327, belonging to the Delhi Transport Undertaking, was proceeding from Ghaziabad to Delhi, it was driven in rash and negligent manner as a result of which it hit the appellant hard which resulted in serious multiple injuries to him. The appellant was taken to Irwin Hospital, New Delhi. Later on he was shifted to ESI Dispensary, Ghaziabad. The claimant lodged first information report with the Statio...
NizamuddIn Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-18-1981
Reported in: AIR1981All444
A.N. Varma, J. 1. This is a plaintiff's second appeal which arises out of a suit for recovery of Rs. 6,607/-. The trial court decreed the suit. On appeal, the lower appellate court has dismissed the same. Hence, this second appeal.2. Shortly stated, the plaint case was that the plaintiff had booked a consignment of 186 bags of Biri leaves on 10-8-1969 at Duddhinagar Railway Station on the Eastern Railway for being carried, and delivered to the consignee at Varanasi on the Northern Railway. Due to negligence, misconduct and wrongful withholding and detention and other acts of the defendant Railways, the consignment did not arrive at Varanasi within the normal expected period of 10 days. The plaintiff presented the Railway receipt at the destination station from time to time, but was informed that the goods had not reached. It was on 8-6-70 that the plaintiff was informed that the goods had arrived at Varanasi on 26-3-1970. When the plaintiff went to take delivery of the goods, he found ...
Hakim Singh Vs. District Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-18-1981
Reported in: AIR1982All108
ORDERM.P. Mehrotra, J.1. This petition arises out ofproceedings under U. P. Imposition ofCeiling on Land Holdings Act, Thefacts, in brief, as these :--The petitioner was issued the notice under Section 10 (2) of the Act. It seems that an ex parte order had been passed on 15-10-1975 but the same was set aside on the application of the petitioner. Thereafter an order was passed on 6-1-1976 wherein the notice under Section 10 (2) of Act was confirmed. A true copy of the order dated 6-1-1976 is Annexure 2 to the petition. In the order it is recited that no objections had been filed. However, the petitioner has annexed a true copy of his written statement dated 31-10-1975, An application wassubsequently moved on 13-12-1976 for setting aside the said ex parte order dated 6-1-1976. A true copy of the said application is Annexure 3 to the petition. The application was rejected by the prescribed authority by his order dated 22-2-1977, a true copy whereof is Annexure 5 to the petition. It seems ...
Ekadashi Vs. Ganga and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-1981
Reported in: AIR1981All373
Deoki Nandan, J.1. This is a defendant's second appeal from the decree of the Court of the IInd Additional District Judge, Varanasi in Civil Appeal No. 300 of 1969 arising from the decree of the Court of the 1st Additional Munsif Varanasi in Suit No. 79 of 1967. The matter relates to a house No. C--27/130 of Mohalla Jagatganj, Varanasi. The relief claimed in the suit was a decree for possession over the house by ejectment of defendants Nos. 1 to 4 with the declaration that the plaintiffs are the owners of the entire house, and for recovery of Rs. 360/- as mesne profits for three years before the institution of the suit and pen-dente lite and future at the rate of Rs. 10/-per month. The suit was instituted on 30th January, 1967. There are four plaintiffs namely, plaintiff No. 1 Smt. Chameli Devi, Plaintiff No. 2 Smt. Dharem Sheela, Plaintiff No. 3 Smt. Hiramani and plaintiff No. 4 Ganga and there are five defendants, namely defendant No. 1 Ekadashi, defendant No. 2 Ganesh, defendant No....
Smt. Sumeria Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-1981
Reported in: [1981]48STC516(All)
ORDERSatish Chandra, C.J.1. The petitioner claims to be the owner of house No. 118-A, Rasoolabad, in the city of Allahabad. This house appears to have been attached in proceedings for recovery of sales tax dues from the firm M/s. Kisan Oil Mills, Rasoolabad, Allahabad. It appears that there were five partners in this firm-Brij Mohan was one of them. The respondents attached this house under the impression that Brij Mohan was its owner. The petitioner claimed that she was the owner and Brij Mohan had no interest in it. She filed an objection before the authority conducting the recovery proceedings but that objection was dismissed on the ground that there was no law under which he could take any action. The sale of the property was being conducted under the orders of the District Magistrate and so the objection was dismissed. Aggrieved, the petitioner has come to this Court.2. In Ram Narain v. Collector 1970 U.P.T.C. 143, a Division Bench of this Court has held that realisation of money ...
Karsandas and Brothers Vs. the State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-1981
Reported in: [1982]50STC82(All)
C.S.P. Singh, J.1. The petitioner was assessed to sales tax for the assessment year 1974-75 under the U. P. Sales Tax Act on 3rd October, 1978, and an amount of Rs. 88,116.52 was determined as tax payable by the Sales Tax Officer (5), Kanpur, by order dated 3rd October, 1978. Subsequent thereto the Sales Tax Officer took proceedings for imposition of interest under Section 8(1) of the Act. He found that an amount of Rs. 7,063.66 was deposited by the assessee on 18th September, 1978, and an amount of Rs. 17,254.92 was deposited on 23rd November, 1978. According to the Sales Tax Officer the last date for payment of the tax for the assessment year in question was 30th May, 1975, and as such the assessee was liable to pay interest as from 1st June, 1975, up to 30th September, 1978, at the rate of 3 per cent on the amount of Rs. 7,063.66 and at the same rate on Rs. 17,254.92 from 1st June, 1975, to 30th November, 1978. The total amount of interest payable by the assessee was worked out at R...
Geep Flashlight Industries Ltd. Vs. Nagar Mahapalika
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-13-1981
Reported in: [1983]140ITR82(All)
Rastogi, J. 1. Geep Flashlight Industries Ltd., Allahabad, which has now been changed to Geep Industrial Syndicate Ltd., is a public limited company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1913. It is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of torches and dry cell batteries. Its factory and administrative offices are situated in the premises No. 28, South Road, Allahabad. The lease of this property expired on 31st of December, 1967. For the quinquennium 1960-65 the Nagar Mahapalika, Allahabad, had estimated the annual value of this property at Rs. 23,531. For the next quinquennium 3965-70 it was determined at Rs. 28,500, which was later raised to Rs. 28,550, on account of some further additions to the buildings. For the next quinquennium 1970-75 the Nagar Mahapalika proposed to determine the annual value of the disputed property at Rs. 95,989 and a notice was issued to the petitioner-company in this behalf. The petitioner-company filed objections to the proposal under Sect...
Bijli Cotton Mills (Pvt.) Ltd. Vs. Chhaganmal Bastimal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-12-1981
Reported in: AIR1982All183
K.N. Singh, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order of the Additional Civil Judge, Aligarh dismissing toe appellant's application under Order IX, Rul e9 of the Civil P. C.2. M/s. Bijli Cotton Mills (Private) Ltd. carrying on business at Hathras in district Aligarh, filed a suit No. 55 of 1967 against M/s. Chhaganmal Bastimal, a partnership firm, carrying on business at Mewar Bazar, Beawar, District Ajmer (Rajasthan), Along with the defendant firm Sri Mishri Lal and Sri Gheesu Lal, the partners of the firm, were also arrayed as defendants. The plaintiff claimed relief for a decree of Rupees 4,85,000/- against the defendants.2-A. The defendants appeared, filed written statement and contested the suit denying the liability.3. On 8-7-1970 issues were framed, but the suit could not proceed for one reason or the other. On 6-2-1971 counsel for both the parties made a joint statement before the Court that hearing of the suit be stayed till the final decision of the suit No. 47 of 1966, ...
Nauneet Food Industries Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-12-1981
Reported in: [1982]50STC380(All)
R.M. Sahai, J.1. Taxability of apple juice which was manufactured by the assessee in the assessment year 1975-76 and supplied only to M/s. Mohan Meakin Breweries Ltd., Mohan Nagar, Ghaziabad, is in dispute. It is admitted that the assessee started supply from September, 1965. It extracted apple juice and sold to M/s. Mohan Meakin Breweries Ltd. It claimed before the assessing authority that the sale made by it was not taxable as the item could be held taxable only if it was sold in tin or tin container. This contention was not accepted. In appeal also the same contention was reiterated but was rejected. Before the revising authority the assessee claimed that the apple juice supplied by it was cold drink and therefore it was not liable to pay any tax as tax on cold drink was single point at the point of sale to consumer. The revising authority did not see any merit in it as admittedly the assessee supplied raw apple juice which was not marketable unless it was tested chemically. Accordi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »