Allahabad Court March 1983 Judgments
B.C. Saxena Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-31-1983
Reported in: 1983CriLJ1432
Jayachandra Reddy, J.1. Criminal Misc. Petitions Nos. 25, 33, 35 of 1983 and 2947 of 1982.In all these petitions, the petitioners are the employees of Andhra Steel Corporation, and the respondent is the State represented by the Inspector, Railway Protection Force, R.P.F. Post, Marripalem, Visakhapatnam.2. The common questions of law that arise in all these cases for consideration are:(1) When does a person against whom an enquiry is started for offences punishable under the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act, become an accused within the meaning of Article 20(3) of the Constitution of India ?(2) What is the scope of enquiry under Section 9 of the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act, and at what stage can a person take shelter under Article 20(3) during such an enquiry ?The necessary facts which give rise to this question are as follows :-In all these cases, the respondent, viz., the Inspector, Railway protection Force, R.P.F. Post, Marripalem Visakhapatnam, is the compla...
Tag this Judgment!income-tax Officer Vs. Gauri Shankar Dalal
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-25-1983
Reported in: (1983)5ITD340(All.)
1. In this appeal, the revenue is challenging the action of the AAC allowing the assessee's application to adjust a loss of Rs. 11,896 against his other income.2. The assessee is an individual. The assessment year is 1977-78 and the relevant previous year ended on 31-3-1977.3. Prior to 24-6-1972, the assessee was a partner in three firms, namely : Sidh Gopal Amar Nath, Shree Sidh Co. and Onkar Bros., in his individual capacity. On 8-7-1971, the assessee made a declaration that with effect from 24-6-1972 his share of income and capital in the said three firms would belong to the family consisting of himself, his wife, two major sons and two major daughters. This fact was accepted by the ITO and in the assessment year 1973-74 as the ITO included half share of the HUF in the said three firms in the total income of the assessee by invoking the provisions of Section 64(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act')- Similarly, in respect of the assessment years 1974-75 and 1975-76, the ITO inc...
Tag this Judgment!Mohd. Alim Vs. the Superintendent, District Jail and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-23-1983
Reported in: 1983CriLJ1429
R.A. Misra, J.1. The subject matter of challenge in this petition is the order of detention dated 6th Oct., 82 passed by Sri B. B. Sinha, District Magistrate, Moradabad whereby Sri Mohd. Alim has been detained in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3(2) of National Security Act. The object of detention as set out in the order is to prevent the detenu from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. The impugned order rests on two grounds based on two incidents. The first incident is of 2nd Oct., 82 when the detenu Mohd. Alim or Alam along with six others at about 5 P. M. near Jama Masjid is alleged to have conferred and decided to retaliate and kill one Hindu every day in Chhattagali where there would be no witnesses other than Muslims and to bury the corpse in Ram Ganga sand and continue this activity until the revenge is complete by ten-fold reprisal. This decision was by way of retaliation on the basis of a townwide rumour that a Muslim boy had been ...
Tag this Judgment!Sasa Enterprises Vs. Pramod Kumar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-23-1983
Reported in: 1(1984)ACC455
N.N. Mittal, J.1. This is an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay in filing the First Appeal from Order directed against an order, dated 4-7-1981, passed by the Commissioner under the Workmen's Compensation Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. The appeal was filed on 4-2-1982 and the office reported that there was a delay of 155 days. The applicant subsequently filed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay in filing the appeal and further prayed for time to file certificate of payment as required under the provisions of Section 30 of the Act.3. The relevant facts are that the opposite party, who was an employee in the appellant's concern, met with an accident on 13-12-1980 and was injured. After serving requisite notice on 17-2-1981 a claim was filed for compensation before the Commissioner under the Act on 24-2-1981. It is alleged that the applicant had no notice of that and the opposite party obtained ...
Tag this Judgment!Singhai Ayodhya Prasad Lakhpat Rai Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-16-1983
Reported in: (1983)37CTR(All)42; [1984]145ITR547(All); [1983]15TAXMAN354(All)
R.M. Sahai, J. 16-3-19831. This is an application under Section 256(2) of I.T. Act for calling a question of law arising out of the order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal. Although three questions were raised, yet the learned counsel for the assessee has mainly argued for question No. 2, which runs thus :'Whether, on the facts and circumstances, the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the property purchased in the name of Sri Ayodhya Prasad, individual, on November 16, 1971, was actually purchased by the HUF with the view that the burden lies on the applicant to prove otherwise ?'2. Normally in application under Section 256, no reasons are required to be recorded but as my brother does not share my view that a question of law does arise and is inclined to record independent reasons and dismissthe application, I am left with no option except to notice in brief why I think that the application should be allowed.3. The assessee is an HUF. In respect of the assessment y...
Tag this Judgment!D.P. Kanudia Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-15-1983
Reported in: (1983)5ITD31(All.)
1. Since the above appeals relate to the same assessee and also involve a common contention, they are disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience.2. The assessee is an individual. He is member of HUF called Sadiram Gangaprasad. He entered into an agreement with the said HUF on 2-4-1974. The HUF owned a property situated at 51/50, Naya Ganj, Kanpur. This was tenanted property. The tenants were got vacated and the structure was demolished leaving the plot measuring 353 sq. yds. In the aforesaid agreement, it was stated that the assessee would be floating a company with the object of carrying on the business of hoteling and catering, etc., for which the assessee would be developing the land and constructing a building on the aforesaid plot. The first party of the agreement was the HUF of Sadiram Gangaprasad and second party to the agreement was the assessee. The following clauses of this agreement are relevant for our purpose : And whereas the second party proposes...
Tag this Judgment!Wealth-tax Officer Vs. Raja Tej Kumar Bhargava
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-15-1983
Reported in: (1983)5ITD513(All.)
1. As a common point is involved in all these appeals, they are disposed of together for the sake of convenience.2. The assessee is a HUF. The assessment years are 1968-69 to 1978-79 and the relevant valuation dates are 30-9-1967, 1968, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1974, 1975, 1976 and 1977 respectively.3. The common point in dispute is whether the damages awarded by the Civil Judge for injuries affected to the property not acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and the solatium granted by the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad under Section 23(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, could form part of the net wealth of the assessee. (a) The assessees, Smt. Kamla Bhargava and Raja Ram Kumar Bhargava, own a free-hold property Nos. 61 and 62 on the Butler Road, Lucknow, Raja Ram Kumar Bhargava had 50 per cent interest in the said property, while the assessee and Smt. Kamla Bhargava have two-thirds and one-third share, respectively, in the other 50 per cent. (b) The total area of th...
Tag this Judgment!State of U.P. Vs. Radhey Shyam Tripathi and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-07-1983
Reported in: 1983CriLJ1153
K.N. Seth, J. 1. The present proceeding against Radhey Shyam, Tripathi. Superintendent, and Surya Mani Chaube, Assistant Jailor Central Jail, Naini, for contempt of this Court was taken suo motu on the statement made by Bhola Dutt Joshi when he appeared before the Court on 20-10-1982 in connection with the hearing of the habeas corpus petition filed by him The circumstances in which the proceeding was initiated are as follows :Bhola Dutt Joshi in Sessions Trial No. A 448 of 1974. was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life on being found guilty of having committed the murder of his minor daughter said to seven years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 307, I.P.C. for the attempt-fed murder of his wife. While he was lodged in the Central Jail. Bareilly, serious disturbance occurred which led to firing resulting in the death of some prisoners and injuries to some others. Joshi along with some others was transferred to the Central Jail, Naini, on 20-1-1982. On July 8. 1982. a ha...
Tag this Judgment!Kundan Bala Vora and anr. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-07-1983
Reported in: II(1984)ACC312
O.P. Sexena, J.1. This is an appeal against the order dated 13-1-1977 passed by the learned, Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Aligarh dismissing a claim petition with costs on parties.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal are that on 30-10-1970 at about 3.30 p.m. between furlongs 6 and 7 of miles 803-804 of the Khurja-Aligarh had an accident took place in which Jawahar Vora was killed. Jawahar Vora, his wife Kundan Bala Vora and some others were on their way from Rajkot to Bukaro and were travelling in an Ambassador car No. BRV 1666. They were coming from the side of Khurja and were going to Aligarh. The car was being driven by one Govind. U.P. Roadways bus No. UPB 4455 was on its way from Aligarh to Khurja. It was being driven by Vijai Pratap Singh. As a result of the accident, the car was thrown away in a pit on the left side of the road. By the time people could come to the rescue of the victims of the accident and Jawahar Vora could be taken out, he was dead. He was 32 years old....
Tag this Judgment!Gulu Thadani Vs. Inspecting Assistant
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-03-1983
Reported in: (1983)6ITD77(All.)
1. These two appeals involving common points of dispute, are disposed of together for the sake of convenience.2. The assessee is an individual. The assessment years are 1977-78 and 1978-79 and the relevant previous years ended on 30-6-1976 and 30-6-1977, respectively.3. The first common point pertains to inclusion of Rs. 18,000 being the income from property. The material facts are : (a) Under a deed of partial partition dated 10-6-1953 the assessee's father, Moti G.Thadani, received Basant Cinema building situated at Hazratganj, Lucknow. (b) On 1-9-1959, Shri Moti G. Thadani sold one-fourth share in the said building to his sister Smt. Padma Thadani. (c) On 2-6-1961, Shri Moti G. Thadani and Smt. Padma Thadani entered into partnership to carry on business of exhibiting films in Basant Cinema. Their profit-sharing ratio was 75 per cent to Moti G. Thadani and 25 per cent to Smt. Padma Thadani. By Clause (3) of the said deed, the building, machinery, furniture, fittings, air-cooling pla...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »