Allahabad Court March 1982 Judgments
Brooke Bond India Limited Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-31-1982
Reported in: [1982]51STC357(All)
R.R. Rastogi, J.1. The petitioner is a company with its head office at Calcutta. It has two branches in U. P. one at Allahabad and the other at Bareilly. The Allahabad office is declared as the main office for the purposes of sales tax. The monthly return for the month of April, 1976, should have been filed and sales tax thereon paid by 31st May, 1976. The demand draft for sales tax in respect of the said month which amounted to Rs. 8,29,129 was despatched from the petitioner's head office at Calcutta on 25th May, 1976, by registered post. It was received by the petitioner's office at Allahabad on 2nd June, 1976 and was deposited in the sales tax office on the same day. For April, 1977, the return of sales tax should have been filed and the tax due should have been deposited by 31st May, 1977. It was however deposited on 4th June, 1977, because the draft was despatched by the petitioner's head office at Calcutta on 24th May, 1977. According to the petitioner the delay was caused on acc...
Tag this Judgment!Shyam NaraIn Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-31-1982
Reported in: 1982CriLJ1413
M. Wahajuddin, J.1. Petitioner Shyam Narain by this Habeas Corpus petition has challenged his detention, seeking his release. It is prayed that the order of the District Magistrate, Ghazipur, as well as the order dated 24-11-1981 of the State Government may be set aside. The grounds taken are as enumerated below:(1) Ram Narain Dube and Vindhya Chal Dube are on inimical terms and the petitioner worked with the latter. Sri K. N. Tripathi, earlier posted as Superintendent of police Azamgarh, and later transferred to as Superintendent of Police, Ghazipur, is a relation of Ram Narain Dube and has a bias against the petitioner.(2) The State Government did not extend the period for exercise of powers by the District Magistrate, Ghazipur, under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act (hereinafter mentioned as Act). Hence, the District Magistrate, Ghazipur, had no authority to detain the petitioner under the Act.(3) The two incidents, which were cited in the grounds of detention, both were of...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Katori Devi and ors. Vs. the Collector, Aligarh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-30-1982
Reported in: AIR1982All394
Satish Chandra, C.J.1. This appeal is directed against an order dismissing an application filed under Order IX, Rule 9 C. P. C. for setting aside of an order whereby the proceedings on a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act were dismissed.2. It appears that aggrieved against the Award given by the Land Acquisition Officer for acquisition of the appellants' lands the appellants got the matter referred to the District Judge under Section 18 of the L. A. Act. On the case fixed for hearing of the reference, the claimant -- appellants did not appear nor did they lead any evidence to substantiate their claim. In this view, the learned Additional District Judge rejected the reference. Soon after, the claimants made an application for setting aside of the order. This application was dismissed on the ground that the provisions of Order IX C. P. C. were not applicable to proceedings on a reference under Section 18 of the Act3. The question is, whether the provisions of the Civi...
Tag this Judgment!Shabbu and anr. Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-30-1982
Reported in: 1982CriLJ1757
M.M. Husain, J.1. The two petitioners, namely, Shabbu and Ranga alias Israil, are detained in the District Jail of Bahraich for serving out concurrent sentences of six months' R.L. under Section 325/149 I.P.C. and three months' R. I. under Section 147 I.P.C. awarded to them in Sessions Trial No. 89 of 1979 of the Sessions Division of Bahraich. Their contention in this petition moved under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is that after crediting the period, during which they have remained in jail as under-trial in connection with other crimes, they have already served out the sentences awarded to them in the aforesaid Sessions Trial. Their prayer, therefore, is that a writ in the nature of habeas corpus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction be issued to the opposite parties to set them at liberty forthwith as their detention in jail is now illegal.2. One Jitendra Singh lodged a first information report against the two petitioners at P.S. Kotwali Bahraich on 27-8-1978...
Tag this Judgment!Jagdish Rai and ors. Vs. Abdul Wahab
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-25-1982
Reported in: AIR1982All301
Deoki Nandan, J. 1. This is a plaintiff's Second Appeal. The suit was for a permanent injunction restraining the defendant from making any constructions on the land in dispute or from, in any other manner, interfering with the plaintiff's right thereon. The relief for possession was also claimed in the alternative in case the court found that the plaintiffs had been dispossessed of any part of the land in suit. 2. The land in suit is a triangular plot of land bearing No. 23/20 of Maua Qila Kohna, Pargana Sikandarpur East, District Ballia. The plaintiffs are nine in number. Eight of them had appealed and the 9th was a pro forma respondent in this Court. The plaintiffs are admittedly some of the zamindars of the Mahal and co-sharers in the proprietary rights in the land in suit. The land is part of Abadi of the Muza and is a Brham Asthan with a Bargad tree and Chabutra in the center. It is triangular in shape with public roads on two of its sides and a public drain on the third side. The...
Tag this Judgment!Raghavendra NaraIn Shah Vs. Moti Lal Gupta and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-25-1982
Reported in: AIR1982All304
Deoki Nandan, J. 1. This is an appeal by the first defendant from a decree of injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the use and possession of the land in suit by the plaintiff as a permanent lessee thereof. The two plots of land Nos. 3 and 4 were granted on Parjawat tenure to Bankim Chandra Ghosh and Nagendra Nath Paul under two separate registered deeds dated the 19th July, 1934 and 17th August, 1934 respectively, by one Krishna Mohan Shah. The plaintiff claims to be a transferee of the Parjawat rights in the two plots of land from the heirs of Bankim Chandra Ghosh and Narendra Nath Paul under two separate deeds of sale dated the 14th July, 1958. The plaintiff has described the instruments dated the 19th July, 1934 and 17th August, 1934 executed by Krishna Mohan Shah in favour of Bankim, Chandra Ghosh and Narendra Nath Paul as permanent leases, and the status acquired by them thereunder to be that of a permanent lessee. The defendants Nos. 1and 3 were brothers an...
Tag this Judgment!U.P. State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Smt. Janki Devi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-23-1982
Reported in: AIR1982All296
K.N. Seth, J.1. The following question has been referred to this Bench for decision.'Whether a cross-objection as contemplated by Order XLI, Rule 22 of the C.P.C. is maintainable before the High Court at the instance of respondent to an appeal filed under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 ?2. A bus owned by the U. P. State Road Transport Corporation met with an accident at Malviya Bridge on 13-12-1973. As a result of the incident Paras Nath Gupta an employee of the State Bank of India, Varanasi, received injuries which proved fatal. The heirs of the deceased made an application before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act claiming Rs. 2,50,000/- as compensation. The Claims Tribunal by its order dated 21-1-1976 awarded a sum of Rs. 95,942/- as compensation to the claimants. Aggrieved by the award of the Claims Tribunal the U. P. State Road Transport Corporation preferred the above noted appeal to this Court. The claimants did not a...
Tag this Judgment!Mittra Nand Kaushik and anr. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-23-1982
Reported in: AIR1982All451
K.C. Agrawal, J.1. In this bunch of writ petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, common question as to the validity of the notification dated 10th Jan. 1931, issued under Section 43-A of U. P. Motor Vehicles Act, as amended by the U. P. Legislature, has been raised. The aforesaid Notification reads as under :--'Whereas the Government of Uttar Pradesh is of opinion that it is in the public interest to grant stage carriage permits (except in respect of routes or areas for which schemes have been published under Section 68-C of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939), to all eligible applicants. Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers under Section 43-A (the Government of) Uttar Pradesh is pleased to direct that the stage carriage permits (except in respect of routes or areas for which schemes have been published under Section 68-C of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939), shall be granted according to the provisions of the said Act to eligible applicants and there shall be no upper limit ...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Chandra Singh (Deceased by L. Rs.) Vs. Basdeo Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-23-1982
Reported in: AIR1982All437
R.M. Sahai, J.1. Misfortune on appellant, since deceased did not come alone when his young and only son died in 1960 leaving a widow and a daughter. In order to assuage the feeling of his daughter-in-law and convenience in cultivation he permitted Rajpal Singh and Kayam Singh the two brothers of daughter-in-law to live with him but they appeared to have lost their patience soon and started ill-treating the appellant and even beating him which forced him to abandon his own house and live with Basudeo Singh his nephew and Kunwar Pal his grandnephew son of another brother. But his misfortune did not leave him. While he was residing with his nephews he executed a sale deed on 11th Sept. 1967 of his entire agricultural land. Probably he was in haste here also as soon after he came back he filed the present suit on 28th May 1970 for cancellation of the sale deed alleging that at time of execution of sale deed he lacked power of rational judgment and the sale deed executed by him was a fictit...
Tag this Judgment!British India General Insurance Co. Vs. Smt. Sona Devi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-23-1982
Reported in: [1985]58CompCas104(All)
Mithal, J.1. The appellant insurance company has filed this F.A.F.O. being aggrieved by the decision of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal awarding compensation of Rs. 10,000 against the driver and the owner of the vehicle as also the insurance company. The amount so awarded has been made payable by the insurance company in spite of the fact that the insurance company had contended that the vehicle in question was not insured with it on the relevant date.2. According to the claimant, the deceased was going to Muradnagar on October 7, 1967, at about 8.30-p.m in a buggi when it was struck by truck No, UPS 7441 which was coming from the opposite direction. As a result of the accident, Ram Chander died instantaneously. A claim petition under Section 110A was, therefore, moved before the Claims Tribunal asking for a sum of Rs. 25,000 by way of compensation. In the claim petition, Mahboob Singh, owner of the truck, and Arjun Singh, its driver at the relevant time, were also impleaded as res...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »