Allahabad Court September 1981 Judgments
RamnaraIn and Badri Prasad Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-29-1981
Reported in: [1983]144ITR521(All)
Rastogi, J.1. By these writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioners seek the, quashing of certain assessment orders made under the I.T. Act, 1961, and the W.T. Act, 1957, as also some penaltyorders made under these two Acts and for refund of the entire amountof income-tax, wealth-tax, penalties and interest hitherto realised, fromthe petitioner as also for release of seized goods. 2. In view of the facts of these two writ petitions, as contemplated by the second proviso to Rule 2(1) of Chap. 12 of the Rules of the court, we propose to decide the petition at this very stage on merits. 3. The petitioners in the two petitions are Ram Narain and Badri Prasad respectively. Both of them were partners of a registered firm, M/s. Ram Charan Lal Ram Narain, Etawah. In April, 1969, as a result of the raid and seizure made by the authorities of the Central Excise Dept., 79 bags of silver ornaments, 8 boxes of gold ornaments and some primary gold were seized. An order under ...
Tag this Judgment!Jugmandar Dass Vs. Ram Phal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-28-1981
Reported in: AIR1982All102
ORDERSatish Chandra, C.J.1. This revision is directed against an order dismissing an application moved by the plaintiff-landlord for striking off the defence of the lessees.2. It appears that a suit was filed, inter alia, on the ground of illegal Sub-leting by the lessee-defendants. The alleged Sub-lessees were also impleaded as parties. According to the learned counsel for the plaintiff-applicant, deposits of money were made by the subtenants in the court in this suit. The deposits were admittedly made to the credit of the plaintiff-applicant. They were made in order to carry out the obligation imposed upon the defendants by Order XV. Rule 5 C. P. C. to keep on depositing the rent as and when it falls due. It is not disputed that the amount due was duly deposited. The submission on behalf of the plaintiff-applicant is that the amount was in fact deposited by some of the alleged Sub-lessees and not by the lessees themselves and, therefore, the lessees will be deemed to have violated th...
Tag this Judgment!Oriental Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Krishna Devi and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-24-1981
Reported in: [1983]54CompCas798(All)
K.N. Singh, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the order of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Agra, dated August 12, 1975, awarding a sum of Rs. 27,000 as compensation to be paid by the appellant insurance company and M/s. New Verma Transport Co., the owner of the vehicle.2. On May 23, 1969, at about 4.30 p.m. the deceased, Manohar Lal, was coming on cycle from Etmandaula side to Balanganj and, while he was, passing the old Jamuna Bridge at Agra, the truck No. UFA 8526 owned by M/s. New Verma Transport Co; dashed against Sri Manohar Lal as a result of which he died in the hospital at about 8 p.m. the same day. The Vehile was insured with the Oriental Fire & General Insurance Co., appellant No. 1. Smt. Krishna Devi, widow of the deceased, Manohar Lal, and three minor sons of the deceased filed a claim petition under Section 110A of the M.V. Act, 1939, claiming a sum of Rs. 40,000 as compensation from the insurance company and the owner of the vehicle for the loss of the life of Ma...
Tag this Judgment!S.C. Shukla and Bros. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-23-1981
Reported in: [1983]54CompCas547(All)
K.N. Singh, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 39 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, against the order of the Additional Civil Judge, Allahabad, dated May 20, 1975, dismissing the appellant's application made under Section 20 of the Indian Arbitration Act. 2. The plaintiff-appellant is a railway contractor. He entered into an agreement with the Divisional Superintendent, Northern Railway, for handling coal in Loco Shed, Kanpur & G.M.C. Depot, as well as Phaphund, Pura, Karbigawan and Fatehpur stations for the period April 1, 1960, to March 31, 1961. At the close of the period of the agreement railway administration invited tenders for carrying the work of coal handling for the year 1961-62. The appellant made his offer for that year also. According to the appellant, his offer was accepted by the railway administration and the Divisional Superintendent, Northern Railway, entered into an agreement with the appellant on April 1, 1961, permitting the appellant to handle coal at the railway st...
Tag this Judgment!Vishwanath Gupta Vs. Smt. Parbati Devi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-22-1981
Reported in: AIR1982All106
V.K. Mehrotra, J.1. This second appeal has been filed by a defendant who has lost in both the courts below.2. The case with which the plaintiff respondents approached the court was that they were co-sharers of a Gola (granary) known as Gola Babu Lalji situate in the city of Gorakhpur. The defendant had only half share in that Gola, in spite whereof he constructed a tin-shed on a portion of the Gola denoted by letters A B C D in the sketch plan at the foot of the plaint. The plaintiffs asked him to remove the construction but with no result. Hence, they had to bring the suit, inter alia, for the recovery of joint possession over the portion of Gola covered by the tin-shed as well as for removal of tin-shed by its demolition.3. The defendants contested the suit and claimed to be the exclusive owner of the property over which he had constructed the Gola. His case was that the portion of the Gola over which he had made the construction fell to his share in a partition between the various c...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner, Sales Tax Vs. Rita Ice Cream
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-22-1981
Reported in: [1982]49STC297(All)
C.S.P. Singh, J.1. These cases have come up on a reference to us made by the Honourable single Judge in view of a conflict of decisions between single Judges in respect of the matter involved in the present revisions. STR Nos. 400, 401 and 402 of 1980 raise the question as to whether ice-cream is entitled to exemption from tax being a milk product, on the strength of notifications issued under Section 4 of the Act, in spite of the notifications issued under Section 3-A from time to time making ice-cream taxable under those notifications. STR No. 848 of 1980 raises the question as to whether lassi is entitled to exemption on the same score.2. Before we refer to the conflicting decisions of this Court on the two items involved in the revisions, we may refer to the relevant notifications under Sections 4 and 3-A. We propose first to refer to the notifications under Section 4 exempting milk products from tax. The first notification on the subject is Notification No. ST-911/X dated 31st Mar...
Tag this Judgment!Pati Ram Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-22-1981
Reported in: 1982CriLJ387
P.N. Goel, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 24-11-1977 passed by V Additional Sessions Judge, Azamgarh convicting and sentencing the appellant Under Section 16 read with Section 7 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 to undergo R. I. for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000.2. According to the prosecution Narendra Nath Singh (P.W. 1) Food Inspector took sample of she-buffalo milk from the appellant on 21-11-1975 at about 7 A. M. in mohalla Dalalghat in the town of Azamgarh, and that the public analyst found the sample adulterated. The appellant did not admit that sample of his milk was taken and that the sample was adulterated.3. The prosecution examined Narendra Nath Singh and Gulab Hakkami, an employee in the Sanitary Department of the Nagar Palika. The appellant did not examine any witness in defence. The Ad- ditional Sessions Judge believed the testimony of the prosecution witnesses as well as the report of the Public Analyst and convicted the app...
Tag this Judgment!Ghanshyam and ors. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-22-1981
Reported in: 1982CriLJ138
M. Wahajuddin, J.1. This appeal is directed against the iudgment and order of Sri D. N. Sharma. the then III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Saharanpur, convicting the appellants Ghanshyam, Dhir Singh and Kehar Singh, Under Section 302/34. I. P. C, as well as Under Section 323/34, IPC and awarding them life imprisonment on the former count and six months' R. I. on the latter count, both the sentences running concurrently. One Mr. Hukum Singh also figured as an accused in the case, but he was given benefit of doubt and has been acquitted.2. The case set up by the prosecution is that a dispute existed between Dhoom Singh (deceased) and the accused persons concerning land and Dhoom Singh had filed a suit, which was pending on the date of occurrencet and several reports were also lodged by Dhoom Singh against some of the accused persons. According to the prosecution. Dhoom Singh also preferred an application (Ext. Ka-1) on 166-1975 to the Superintendent of Police, Saharanpur, that ...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Gopal Vs. Prabhu
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-17-1981
Reported in: AIR1982All309
ORDERT.S. Misra, J.1. This revision is directed against an order passed by the court below rejecting the application for amendment of the plaint. Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that the amendment of the plaint was asked for keeping in view the amendment made in the provisions of Sections 134 to 136, U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act. He says that subsequent events by way of change in law can always be taken note of by the court to do real justice in the case and in support of his contention he has placed reliance on M. Laxmi & Co. v. Dr. Anant R. Deshpande (AIR 1973 SC 171), P. Ven-kateswarlu v. Motor & General Traders (AIR 1975 SC 1409) and Ayesha Khatoon v. Durga Sahaya (AIR 1977 Cal 108). The court below has, however, rejected the application on the ground that by the amendment sought for the plaintiffwants to substitute a relief for prohibitory injunction instead of mandatory injunction. The learned counsel submitted that the plaintiff-applicant had not ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Straw Board Manufacturing Company
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-17-1981
Reported in: [1982]50STC285(All)
R.M. Sahai, J.1. Aggrieved by the levy of penalty below the minimum limit provided under Section 15-A(1)(i) of the Act, the Commissioner of Sales Tax has filed this revision. Before deciding this question it is necessary to notice the facts and findings recorded by the revising authority. The assessee is a manufacturer of straw board and sand paper. In the assessment year 1974-75 on the sales effected by it, it realised tax at the rate of 3 1/2 per cent and deposited the same along with its quarterly return. When the assessment proceedings were finalised it was found that the correct rate of tax on straw board and sand paper was 7 per cent. Consequently the assessee was directed to pay the additional demand thus created. The assessee complied with it and paid the penal interest also at the rate of 2 per cent. On 19th December, 1977, the assessing authority imposed penalty for non-deposit of tax due under Section 15-A(1)(a) of the Act. The claim of the assessee that the payment at the r...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »