Allahabad Court April 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.
State of U.P. Through Secretary Transport Deptt Vs. Vinod Kumar Bhatna ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-12-1984
Reported in: I(1984)ACC23
U.C. Srivastava, J.1. These appeals are directed against the judgment and decree of the additional Civil Judge, Mirzapur dated March 23, 1967.2. On June 16, 1962 the plaintiffs Vinod Kumar and Har Prasad were passengers on Bus U.P.C. 5246 belonging to the State Government under the Transport Department and had boarded the same at Varanasi for Churk. The Bus left Varanasi at 7.30 A.M. one hour behind the schedule on its way to Churk via Mirzapur. It passed by Chunar situate nearly 28 miles from Varanasi and reached the culvert situate about two miles west of Chunar. Truck No. USM 1004 held on hire purchase agreement by Mela Ram defendant came to the culvert from the opposite direction carrying lime on its way to Varanasi from Mirzapur. It was around 8.30/8.45 A.M. Vinod Kumar had his seat in the upper class by the side of the window towards the right. Hari Har Prasad the other plaintiff was seated behind him in the lower class with the window immediately lo his right. Both the Bus and t...
V.C. JaIn Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-11-1984
Reported in: 1984(17)ELT10(All)
M. Wahajuddin, J.1. The applicant on being convicted under Section 9(i)(a), (b) (bb) of the Central Excises and Salt Act was released by the trial court under Section 4 of First Offenders Act on a personal bond and two sureties. The applicant did not prefer any appeal against such conviction and sentence. The State preferred a revision No. 1160 of 1983 against the sentence and the revisional court vide its order and judgment dated 9-12-1983 set aside the order of the Magistrate granting probation and remanded the case to the trial court directing that court to pass sentence according to law having in mind the provision of Section 9E of the Central Excise Act. The applicant has come forward with a prayer for quashing the entire proceedings. I may at the very outset observe that when a remedy of appeal against the conviction was available and no appeal was preferred against the conviction which was not assailed as such this Court cannot entertain any arguments on the merits of conviction...
Modi Spinning and Wvg. Mills Company Ltd. Vs. Assistant Collector of C ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-11-1984
Reported in: 1984(17)ELT1(All)
M.P. Mehrotra, J.1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks to question the validity or the order dated 8-3-1984, passed by the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Ghaziabad. A true copy of the said order is annexure 4 to the petition. The controversy is regarding the classification list of the petitioner dated 18-4-1983 in respect of celiulosic spun yarn. In the impugned order there is a passage which shows the nature of dispute between the parties and the same is reproduced below :--'M/s. Modi Yarn Mills, Modinagar, filed a classification list MNO. Yarn/5/83, dated 18-4-1983 in respect' of celiulosic spun yarn. In the classification test they claimed classification of yarn.(i) 2/40s N.C.S.W. 15% in admixture with viscose fibre 85% and(ii) 2/40s N.C.S.W. 48% in admixture with viscose fibre 52% under T.L No. 18-III (91) and sought assessment under notification no. 131/77 as amended by notification no. 275/82, dt. 13-11-1982. On perusal of the classification ...
Jograj Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-11-1984
Reported in: 1984CriLJ1319
ORDERM. Wahajuddin, J.1. The applicant has come forward with a prayer that the judgment and order dt. 30.6.1982 passed by the Magistrate and the judgment and order dated 28.1.1983 passed by the Sessions Judge may be quashed. The matter relates to a proceeding under Section 133, Cr.P.C. On 23.10.1979 the Magistrate passed an order that Jograj and Rampal by constructing their Chabutras in front of their houses have obstructed the public passage and directed that they should show cause why the Chabutra should not be removed, otherwise the final orders will be passed. The present application has been preferred by Jograj. Vide judgment Annexure '3' the Magistrate observed that the Station Officer has submitted report, dated 26.8.1979 that the public passage is 250 yards long and 70 yards wide and Jograj has constructed 3 yards wide and 12 yards long Chabutra thereon; while Rampal has constructed 3 yards wide and 9 yards long Chabutra thereon obstructing the public passage. Thereafter the Ma...
Mansa Ram and Sons (Bankers) and ors. Vs. Janki Dass Om Prakash and or ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-09-1984
Reported in: AIR1984All267
B.D. Agarwal, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 75(2) of the Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) directed against the order of the Insolvency Judge, Dehra Dun, dated April 22, 1976.2. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 presented the petition giving rise to this appeal as creditors under Section 9(1) of the Act on July 20, 1971. Appellant No. 1 is a registered partnership firm of which, appellant No. 2 is a partner. M/s. Mansa Ram & Sons was a registered partnership firm carrying on extensive business as bankers. Its partners were Mahabir Pershad and his four sons, namely, Chander Sen, Kailash Chand, Moti Lal and Sri Mander Dass. Chander Sen died on August 5, 1953, whereupon his widow Smt. Madan Kumari (Sundari) Jain, respondent No. 3, was taken in as partner. Mahabir Pd. died in the year 1960. Respondents Nos. 6 to 9 are also his heirs. The death of Sri Mander Dass has taken place on October 24. 1976. The respondent creditors had the following deposits with M/s...
Ram Chandra Gupta Vs. State Transport Appellate Tribunal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-05-1984
Reported in: AIR1984All204
S.K. Dhaon, J.1. This writ petition is directed against an order dated 30-3-84 passed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal), rejecting the application for interim relief made by and on behalf of the petitioner in an appeal pending before it.2. The Regional Transport Authority,Varanasi, rejected the application for therenewal of the permit of the petitioner,Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner preferred an appeal. Section 134 (1-A) MotorVehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referredto as the Act) empowers the Tribunalto pass an interim order in an appealagainst an order refusing to renew a particular permit. The sheet-anchor of theAct is public interest, i.e., the interestof the travelling public and around it theentire machinery rotates. In this background Section 134 (1-A) of the Actshould be read. The legislative intentin enacting the said provision is thattill the matter of renewal is disposed offinally status quo should be maintained.Therefore, ...
Jitendra Kumar Saxena Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-05-1984
Reported in: AIR1984All323
A.N. Varma, J.1. The petitioner is a confirmed Stenographer and was eligible to appear at the promotion examination for appointment as Inspector of Income-Tax. The said examination was held in 1978 at which the petitioner appeared.However, he was declared failed on the ground that in two of the papers he used unfair means as found by the competent authority. The petitioner contends that the said decision of the competent authority, holding that the petitioner had used unfair means at the said examination, is unsustainable in law having been arrived at without affording any opportunity to the petitioner. Aggrieved by the decision of the competent authority the petitioner filed representations before higher authorities but without any success. By a letter dated 6-9-1979 the petitioner was informed that the Central Board of Direct Taxes, to which the petitioner submitted representation, having considered the petitioner's representation, had declined to interfere in the matter.2. Aggrieved...
Ramchandra Gupta Vs. State Transport Appellate Tribunal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-05-1984
Reported in: I(1984)ACC162
S.K. Dhaon, J.1. This writ petition is directed against an order dated 30-3-84 passed by the State Transport Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal), rejecting the application for interim relief made by and on behalf of the petitioner in an appeal pending before it.2. The Regional Transport Authority, Varanasi, rejected the application for the renewal of the permit of the petitioner. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner preferred an appeal. Section 134 (1-A) Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) empowers the Tribunal to pass an interim order in an appeal against an order refusing to renew a particular nermit. The sheet-anchor of the Act is public interest, i.e., the interest of the travelling public and around it the entire machinery rotates. In this background Section 13(1-A) of the Act should be read. The legislative content in enacting the said provision is that till the matter of renewal is disposed of finally status quo should be maintaine...
Chikhuri Vs. Special Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-04-1984
Reported in: AIR1984All205
ORDERR.M. Sahai, J.1. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution orders passed by opposite parties declaring election of petitioner as null and void have been challenged.2. This declaration was granted while deciding the issue regarding the age of petitioner as preliminary issue. Although learned counsel for opposite parties attempted to defend the order on merits by referring to evidence relied by. Sub-Divisional Magistrate, but the order being bad for procedural irregularity and not inspiring confidence of impartiality and fairness has to be quashed. It is not disputed that on 2-11-1982 the case was directed to be fixed on 10-11-1982 for evidence of petitioner. On 9-11-1982 petitioner obtained stay of proceedings from the Court of District Magistrate on a transfer application alleging that Sub-Divisional Magistrate was being influenced against him by a local M. L. A. According to the petitioner the stay order was produced before the Sub Divisional Magistrate on 10-1...
Shakti Products Vs. Income-tax Officer
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-03-1984
Reported in: (1984)9ITD630(All.)
1. The assessee is aggrieved of the order dated 29-8-1980 of the learned AAC.2. The appeal was originally decided ex parte on 27-6-1981. However, on the basis of the assessee's MA No. 141 (All.) of 1981 the ex parte order was set aside vide order dated 5-5-1982 and the appeal was re-heard.3. The assessee is a registered firm carrying on business in proofing, dyeing and starching of canvas cloth. It did not maintain day-to-day record of consumption of wax and proofed material of cloth recovered after processing the same. In the assessment order, the ITO has referred to the issuance of a notice under Section 143(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') which fact was challenged by the assessee before the learned AAC as also before us. The trading account of the assessee disclosed a gross profit of Rs. 15,027 on gross receipts of Rs. 1,68,480 giving rise to a gross profit rate of 12.4 per cent as against the adjusted gross profit rate of 22.5 per cent declared by the assessee in the pr...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »