Allahabad Court May 1982 Judgments
Kendriya Nagrik Samiti, Kanpur and ors. Vs. Jal Sansthan, Kanpur and o ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-28-1982
Reported in: AIR1982All406
K.N. Seth, J.1. By these petitions the petitioners have prayed for a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorori quashing Notification No. 1935/IX 2-122-79 dated March, 11. 1981, issued by the State Government levying water tax and sewerage tax at 12$ per cent and 3 per cent respectively and the bills issued to the petitioners on the aforesaid basis. The petitioners have also prayed for a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus restraining respondent No. 1 from realising the taxes at the aforesaid rates. They have also prayed for a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Nagar Mahapalika to reduce the general tax to the extent to make the total taxes i. e. general tax, water tax and sewerage tax to 25 per cent of the annual letting value and respondent No. 1 to reduce the rate of excess water supply.2. For the sake of convenience writ petition No. 817 of 1981 is treated as the leading case. In this petition petitioner No. 1 is a registered ...
Tag this Judgment!Ramesh Chandra Gupta Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-28-1982
Reported in: 1983CriLJ184
K.S. Verma, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 13-4-1982 passed by District Magistrate, Kheri under Section 3 of the National Security Act by which the petitioner has been detained in the district jail, Kheri. The order was passed on the satisfaction of the District Magistrate to the effect that in order to prevent the petitioner from acting in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies and services essential to the community, the detention of the petitioner was necessary.2. The order and grounds of detention were served on the petitioner in the district jail, Kheri. A perusal of the grounds of detention would show that there were four grounds which were the basis of the order of detention. These may be summarised as below:(a) On 19-3-1982 at 11.20 A.M. a written report was lodged at Police Station Mitauli, district Kheri by one Sri B. P. Shukla, Junior Engineer, State Electricity Distribution Division (ii). Lakhimpur Kheri in which it was stated that ...
Tag this Judgment!Central Railway Vs. Raghubir Saran
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-28-1982
Reported in: (1983)IILLJ26All
R.M. Sahai, J.1. In this defendant's second appeal directed against concurrent decree of two Courts below granting declaration that order dated 15th October, 1967 removing respondent from service was illegal and inoperative, consequently the respondent continued in service since 1962 and was entitled to all benefits and emoluments including his salary, the decisive controversy is whether the finding that enquiry against respondent was violative of principle of natural justice and contrary to fundamental procedure of law is well founded.2. Appointed as coal boy in 1957 respondent was chargesheeted in 1962, for absence of duty from 30th August 1962 to date in an unauthorised manner, while working as ladderman in Central Loco Shed, Bina. No evidence oral or documentary was mentioned in charge sheet although respondent was called upon to show cause why he should not be punished with penalty specified in item 6 of the list below that is removal from service. Consequent to above charge sheet...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Bazpur Co-operative Sugar Factory Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-27-1982
Reported in: (1982)30CTR(All)266; [1983]142ITR1(All); [1982]10TAXMAN246(All)
Seth, J. 1. At the instance of the Revenue, the following question has been referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'E', Delhi, for the opinion of this court: ' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the expenditure of Rs, 13,254 on account of unsuccessful tube-well expenses was a capital or revenue expenditure ?' 2. The assessee is a co-operative society carrying on the business of manufacture and sale of crystal sugar. For the assessment year 1968-69, the assessee claimed a sum of Rs. 13,254 as expenses for boring a tube-well which, however, proved to be unsuccessful. The ITO disallowed the claim on the reasoning that these expenses cannot be said to have been laid out wholly and exclusively for the purpose of the business. The AAC rejected the claim of the assessee on the ground that the expenditure was of a capital nature. On appeal, the Tribunal held that the expenditure was incurred to facilitate the carrying on of the assessee's business b...
Tag this Judgment!Ramesh Kumar Awasthi Vs. the Collector, Saharanpur and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-26-1982
Reported in: AIR1982All425
K.N. Singh, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sharanpur, dated 10-2-1978, dismissing the appellant's claim petition filed under Section 110-A of the M. V. Act.2. Ramesh Kumar Awasthi appellant was travelling by a bus bearing No. USK 9724 on 14-9-1975 from Meerut to Rishikesh. When the bus reached a place between Police Station Manglaur and Muzaffarnagar another bus bearing No. UST 9091, coming from the opposite direction and proceeding to Meerut, grazed against the body of the bus in which the appellant was sitting. By the impact of the grazing of the bus the window glass was smashed and the appellant's right hand was cut and slit from above the right elbow joint. He was removed to the Military Hospital, Roorkee for treatment. Both the vehicles belonged to the U. P. State Road Transport Corporation. The appellant filed a claim petition under Section 110-A of the M. V. Act claiming a sum of Rs. 1,30,037.50 paise as compensationand...
Tag this Judgment!Babu Ram Vs. Basdeo and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-26-1982
Reported in: AIR1982All414
V.K. Mehrotra, J.1. Within the municipal limits of Etawah city is a small piece of land situate in Mohalla Naurangabad. It forms part of bigger land occupied by buildings towards its south.2. Krishna Behari and Basdeo were both sons of one Shiv Sahai. Krishna Behari had no issues. He is said to have adopted one of the sons of Basdeo, namely, Babu Ram on Feb. 8, 1935. The other son of Basdeo is Om Prakash. Krishna Behari is said to have executed an agreement to transfer the aforesaid piece of land to Suresh Chandra Chaturvedi for a consideration of Rs. 3,900/-. This was on July 2, 1956 through a document marked Ext. 61. A sum of Rs. 1,000/-was initially paid at the time of agreement but by the year 1958 the remaining amount was also paid to Krishna Behari who is said to have put Suresh Chandra Chaturvedi in possession of the property. Krishna Behari was murdered on Aug. 27, 1960.3. Dispute arose about the land which is 84' towards north and 75' towards south while both towards east and ...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. S.B. Bhargava Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-26-1982
Reported in: (1982)30CTR(All)260; [1982]136ITR559(All); [1982]11TAXMAN28(All)
Rastogi, J. 1. This is areference under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961, hereafter 'the Act'. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'C', Delhi, hereafter 'the Tribunal', has referred the following question for the opinion of this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the assessment framed by the Income-tax Officer is barred by limitation as prescribed under Section 153 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. The assessment year involved is 1971-72, the accounting period ended March 31, 1971. Dr. S. B. Bhargava, the assessee, is a qualified eye specialist and has been in practice since long. For the assessment year 1971-72, the assessee shouldhave filed his return under Section 139(1) of the Act by June 30, 1971. No notice was issued to him under Section 139(2) of the Act. He filed a return on December 21, 1971, which would be a return under Section 139(4) of the Act. Thereafter, he filed a revised return on March 23, 1974. The assessment was complet...
Tag this Judgment!Rajendra Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-26-1982
Reported in: 1982CriLJ1987
ORDER1. On a difference of opinion between the two learned Judges of the Division Bench, who heard this Habeas Corpus writ petition, the following question has been referred for the opinion of a third Judge. This is how this case has come up before me.2. The question, referred is:Do the grounds of detenion of the petitioner relate to 'public order or to law and order'? 3. The petitioner is detained under an order of the District Magistrate, Kanpur (Dehat) dated 31-12-1981 passed under Section 3(2) National Security Act, 1980 (briefly the Act), with a view 'o preventing him from acting in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order.4. The detention of the petitioner is based on the following three grounds No. 1, On 25th December 1981 at about 6-30p.rn, the petitioner and his associate Onkar Singh held up Chandra Sekhar and Pati Ram residents of Mooda Khera, police station Sikandra District Kanpur Dehat, at pistol point on the public way known as Mughal Road near village Pree...
Tag this Judgment!Shervani Sugar Syndicate Ltd., Allahabad Vs. Municipal Board, Ujhani
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-25-1982
Reported in: AIR1982All402
K.N. Seth, J.1. The petitioner M/s. Shervani Sugar Syndicate Limited manufactures crystal sugar at its sugar factory situate at Neoli, district Etah. It has challenged the legality of the imposition and realisation of toll tax (Vahan Kar) by the Municipal Boards of Ujhanai and Budaun on trucks and other vehicles carrying sugarcane transported from sugarcane purchasing centres to the petitioner's factory at Neoli, district Etah. The prayer made in these writ petitions is for a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent Municipal Boards to refrain and forbear from realising any toll tax on trucks or any other vehicles carrying sugarcane from sugarcane purchasing centres to the petitioner's factory while passing through the limits of the Municipal Boards.2. The case set up by the petitioner is that all sugarcane purchasing centres as well as the sugar factory are situate outside the limits of the Municipal Boards. The vehicles carrying sugarcane from the ...
Tag this Judgment!Het Singh and ors. Vs. Anar Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-25-1982
Reported in: AIR1982All468
Deoki Nandan, J.1. This is a defendants' Second Appeal in a suit for injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiff's alleged right to irrigate their fields from the well situate in the defendants' land. The right was claimed by way of a prescriptive right of easement acquired by more than twenty years uninterrupted user.2. The trial Court found that the plaintiffs had such right in respect of plot No. 221, but not in respect of plot No. 222. The lower appellate Court has found that the plaintiffs had that right in respect of both the plots Nos. 221 and 222. The well was situate in plot No. 223. There is no dispute that the land and the well belonged to the defendants. The finding is that the plaintiffs have been irrigating their fields by taking water from the well in dispute for more than twenty years.3. Without going into the merits of that finding and accepting it as a fact that the plaintiffs had been irrigating their fields by taking water from the well...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »