Allahabad Court November 1984 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.
Om Prakash Agarwal Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-30-1984
Reported in: AIR1985All172
A.S. Srivastava, J.1. By this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Om Prakash Agarwal (hereinafter referred to as the detenu) questions the validity of his continued detention by an order dated 2-8-1984 of the District Magistrate, Agra, passed under Section 3(1) of the Prevention of Black Marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).2. The detenu, a resident of 4/108, Kutchery Ghat, Agra and a retail dealer in non-levy cement, is carrying on his business in premises No. 37/105, Nagla Padi, Saran Nagar,' Agra, under a licence granted to him under the U. P. Cement Control Order, 1973 for carrying on this business at 86/6, New Agra. It was discovered in an inspection of the said two premises made by raiding party consisting of the Additional District Magistrate (Civil Supplies), District Supply Officer, Senior Marketing Inspector and two public witnesses. During the inspection it was also found that the ...
L.N. Mathur Vs. the Chancellor, Lucknow University, Lucknow and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-30-1984
Reported in: AIR1986All273
D.N. Jha, J.1. This reference has been made by a learned single Judge in view of the conflict of judicial opinion between two Division Bench decisions expressed in Dr. (Mrs.) Prabha Gupta v. Lucknow University, 1981 Lawyers' Law Times (Services) 51 and Dr. U.N. Roy v. His Excellency, Sri G.D. Tapase (the Ex-Governor, State of Uttar Pradesh). Chancellor, Allahabad University 1981 UPLBEC 309. In the former decision a Division Bench expressed a view that the decision of the Chancellor in regard to appointment of a teacher made under Section 31(8)(a) of the U.P. State Universities Act, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as the Act) is not of a quasi-judicial nature. In the case of Dr. U.N. Roy (supra) the Division Bench held that while exercising powers under Section 31(8)(a) of the Act the Chancellor exercised quasi-judicial power. The learned single Judge, therefore, has made a reference to the larger Bench to decide as to whether powers exercisable by the Chancellor under Section 31(8)(a)...
Shital Prasad Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-29-1984
Reported in: (1986)53CTR(All)247; [1986]161ITR259(All)
S.C. Mathur, J.1. By our short order dated November 29, 1984, we had allowed this petition and quashed the orders dated February 13, 1979, and February 19, 1981, annexures 3 and 10, respectively, passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Lucknow, in proceedings under Section 273A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, Act No. 43 of 1961, in short 'Act'.2. By the impugned order dated February 13, 1979, the petitioner's application under Section 273A of the Act for waiver of penalty and penal interest arising from late filing of income-tax returns for the assessment years 1971-72, 1972-73 and 1973-74 was rejected by Sri S.K. Lall, the then Commissioner of Income-tax, Lucknow, and by order dated February 19, 1981, his successor, Sri Dharni Dhar, has refused to reconsider the order of his predecessor in the light of subsequent developments. Left with no remedy, the petitioner has approached this court for redress of his grievance under Article 226 of the Constitution. A few facts material for the di...
Dr. Arun Kumar Vashishth Vs. Principal, Lala Lajpat Rai Memorial Medic ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-29-1984
Reported in: AIR1985All188
J.N. Dubey, J.1. In these writ petitions validity of certain admissions made in Degree and Diploma courses in Orthopaedics in Lala Lajpat Rai Memorial Medical College, Meerut (hereinafter referred to as the College) has been challenged.20. On 20-12-1983applications were invited for admission in M.S. and Diploma course in Orthopaedics in the college. The petitioners who have passed M.B.B.S., examination from the college also applied for admission to both the courses. The Selection Committee after considering the applications of all the candidates prepared two separate merit lists for admission in M.S. and Diploma Courses in Orthopaedics as under :M.S. (Orthopaedic)1. Dr. Hardesh Kumar 2. ' Dinesh Kumar Verma 3. ' Narendra Kumar 4. ' Birendra Singh Kashyap 5. ' Rakesh Kumar Gaur. 6. ' Arun Kumar Vashishth. DIPLOMA IN ORTHOPAEDIC 1. Dr. Hardesh Kumar 2. ' Mukesh Kumar Maheshwari 3. ' Dinesh Kumar Verma 4. ' Narendra Kumar 5. ' Subodh Kumar 6. ' Dinesh Kumar Agarwal 7. ' Birendra...
Gopal Cold Storage and Ice Factory Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-27-1984
Reported in: 1986(9)ECC305; 1985(21)ELT692(All)
R.M. Sahai, J.1. This petition seeks quashing of order dated 28-11-1978 passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Allahabad. Facts are not in a dispute. It has been found that petitioner installed pipes arranged them in such manner that it resulted in cooling. According to Collector as the cooling coils and condensors serve the purpose of cooling, they were nothing but refrigerating and air-conditioning appliances, therefore, they fell under Tariff Item No. 29-A(3) of Central Excise Tariff. Similar controversy came up. for consideration before this court in Mother India Refrigerator P. Ltd. v. Superintendent of Central Excise and Ors., 1980 Excise Law Times Page 600. It was held Item No. 29-A applied only to those parts of refrigerating and air-conditioning appliances which were ordinarily sold or offered for sale as ready assembled units. As admittedly the appliances which has been subjected to duty are not ordinarily sold or offered for sale as ready assembled units, the petition wa...
Raj Govind Rai Vs. Thakuri
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-27-1984
Reported in: 1(1985)ACC454
A. Banerjee, J. 1. One Sri Ram Nagina Rai received serious injuries of his head and person while sitting by the side of a road on being hit by a Mini Bus on 28-6-197-i at about 2.30 p.m. He died some thirty hours later. His widow Smt. Thakuri Devi and a minor daughter Km. Satwati filed a claim petition before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ballia on 30-7-1974. They claimed Rs. 60,000/- as compensation on account of the death having taken place due to rash and negligent act in driving Mini Bus. The claim petition was contested by the owner of the vehicle Sri Raj Govind Rai. He denied that the vehicle was at all involved in the accident for it was detained in a police station on the very day of the accident between 10.30 a.m. to (SIC) p.m. The further plea was that the driver of the Mini Bus was not Bachcha Rai, son of the owner of the vehicle. In any event rash and negligent act o(SIC) the driver was denied and the claim was said to be excessive. The Insurance Company( Respondent ...
U.P. State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Raj Kumar and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-27-1984
Reported in: 1(1985)ACC430
O.P. Sexena, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act against the order dated 11-2-78 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (I Additional District Judge) Bareilly awarding a compensation of Rs. 80,000/- to the claimants with interest at 6 per cent annum from the date of award till the date of payment. A cross objection has been filed by claimants-respondents.2. On 17th February 1976, at 9 A.M., on Bareilly-Pilibhit Road, near Hafizganj, P.S. Hafizganj, District Bereilly, one Din Dayal Saxena, aged 42 years, met with an accident. He was travelling in Bus No. U.S.B. 6257 on his way from Bareilly to Pilibhit. The bus belongs to U.P. State Road Transport Corporation. It was going from Bareilly to Tanakpur. The bus was involved in an accident when it struck against a tree. Din Dayal Saxena received multiple grievous injuries to which he succumbed.3. The claimants gave an application for Rs. 2 lacs as compensation. Claimant No. 1 Smt. Raj Kumari is the wido...
P.H. Tripathi Vs. Central Bank of India and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-23-1984
Reported in: (1985)IILLJ500All
S.K. Dhaon, J.1. By means of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, an employee desires that this Court should thwart the departmental proceeding commenced against him by his employer.2. The petitioner was posted as a Manager of the Central Bank of India in its branch at Ganhasand, Sahjanwa, district Gorakhpur during the year 1972-73. For the sake of brevity the Central Bank of India shall hereinafter be referred to as the Bank. The petitioner along with Sarvashri Shankar Dayal Tripathi, Daya Shanker Tripathi and Ram Nain Rai, was prosecuted for having committed offences under Sections 120B, 419, 420, 468, 471 of the Penal Code and Section 5(2) read with Section 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act Shanker Dayal Tripathi and Daya Shankar Tripathi are real brothers. The prosecution case was that the petitioner entered into a criminal conspiracy with the other aforementioned accused persons with the object to obtain pecuniary advantages by corrupt and illegal means a...
Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Ram Pyari and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-23-1984
Reported in: 1(1985)ACC377
A Banerjee, J.1. This appeal is directed against an Award made by the Motor Vehicles Claims Tribunal, Meerut dated 30-3-1977 decreeing the Claim petition for a sum of Rs. 20,000/- with interest from the date of the claim till the date of payment at 7/- per annum. The appeal have been filed by the Union of India, the owner of the Military truck No. UD 40511, driven by appellant No. 2 They have prayed for setting aside of the Award on the ground that there was no rash and negligent act in driving of the truck and the amount awarded as compensation of Rs. 20,000/- was erroneous and in any event excessive. A cross-objection was filed on behalf of the respondent-claimants which was valued as Rs. 60,000/-. They had claimed for enchancement of the compensation. However, the cross-objection was dismissed by an order dated 24-8-1978 as non-maintainable. Consequently only the appeal by the appellants is to be considered now.2. Before I consider the case on merits, it will be necessary to state t...
Gaurhari Singhania Vs. Wealth-tax Officer and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-20-1984
Reported in: (1987)60CTR(All)84; [1986]159ITR785(All); [1986]26TAXMAN454(All)
N.D. Ojha, J. 1. Writ Petition No. 543 of 1984 relates to the proceedings for assessment of wealth-tax against Padampat Singhania (individual) in respect of the year 1974-75. Writ Petition No. 551 of 1984 relates to the assessment of wealth-tax in respect of the assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75 of Dr. Gaurhari Singhania (Hindu undivided family), whereas Writ Petition No. 552 of 1984 relates to the assessment of wealth-tax in respect of the assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75 of Govind Hari Singhania (Hindu undivided family). All the three assessees mentioned above are admittedly partners of JK Bankers, a partnership firm. The admitted facts are that the proceedings for assessment of wealth-tax for the assessment years 1967-68 to 1972-73 were pending against Padampat Singhania (Hindu undivided family) and one of the questions which arose in those proceedings was in regard to the value of the assets of Padampat Singhania (Hindu undivided family) vis-a-vis his share in the partnershi...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »