Allahabad Court August 1984 Judgments
United India Fire and General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Ram Gopal Garodia ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-31-1984
Reported in: [1986]60CompCas74(All)
A. Banerji, J. 1. This first appeal from order arises out of judgment dated September 13, 1977, passed by the 1st Civil Judge, Kanpur, on an application by the appellant for restraining the opposite parties to proceed with the arbitration proceedings before respondent No. 2. The application was rejected and against that order, the present first appeal from order has been filled.2. Although the respondents were duly served and Mr. B. R. Tripathi, advocate, filed his vakalatnama on behalf of respondent No. 1, no one has appeared to contest this appeal. Respondent No. 2 was named as arbitrator. He is not represented In this court. The Bench secretary has informed us that Mr. B. R. Tripathi has indicated that he has no instructions in this case.3. We have heard Mr. S. M. Dayal, learned counsel for the appellant. The principal contention of the learned counsel was that since the appellant-company had repudiated the agreement, there was no jurisdiction in the arbitrator to proceed with the a...
Tag this Judgment!Jyoti Prasad Dixit (Deceased by L.Rs.) Vs. Smt. Bitan Devi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-30-1984
Reported in: I(1986)ACC242; AIR1985All32; [1986]59CompCas348(All)
ORDERM. Wahajuddin, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the private individual concerned against the claim decree on account of accident and death passed in favour of respondents Nos. 1 to 4, The trial court held that the accident resulting into death of Chhedi Lal Dubey was caused due to rash and negligence of the driver of that bus. It determined the liability for damages for a sum of Rs. 12000/-. It further directed that out of the aforesaid sum Rs. 5000/- would be paid by the Insurance Company which has insured the bus in question while the remaining amount, that is, Rs. 7000/- will be paid by the owner of the Bus. Two arguments are urged on behalf of the appellant. The first argument urged is that the Bus was itself hit by the Railway Engine and it was unmanned railway crossing so Union of India was also a necessary party. When the crossing is unmanned it is the duty of the person driving any vehicle or cart at the crossing railway line at that point to be alert and vigilant. The driv...
Tag this Judgment!Anandan Gupta Vs. NavIn Agarwal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-30-1984
Reported in: AIR1984All387
ORDERN.N. Sharma, J.1. This is a tenants revision directed against the order dated 1-2-1984 recorded by Sri D.C. Srivastava, learned II Addl. District Judge, Kanpur in SCC suit No. 97 of 1982 who rejected the application of revisionist paper No. 113-C, under Sections 10 and 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for staying the suit till the disposal of the earlier suit No. 917 of 1981.2. Suit No. 917 of 1981 was filed by the revisionist against the landlord--opposite parties for declaration and perpetual injunction restraining the opposite parties from ejecting the revisionist and declaring him to be the tenant of the disputed premises.3. The defence in the earlier suit filed on regular side in the Court of Munsif City. Kanpur was that revisionist was a Thckedar and not tenant.4. SCC Suit No. 97 was filed subsequently by the opposite parties in the Court of District Judge, Kanpur for ejectment and recovery of dues with the allegations that revisionist was a Thekedar and the Theka period h...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Singh and ors. Vs. Rajendra Kumar JaIn and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-30-1984
Reported in: 1(1985)ACC271
M. Wahajuddin, J. 1. Smt. Shanti Devi died of accident, which took place on 20-11-1974. A claim petition was preferred by her husband and children for Rs. 20,000/- as compensation. The Claims Tribunal allowed the claim against the respondents 1 and 3 for Rs. 5,000/- with interest at Rs. 6% per annum from 10-5-1975 with proportionate costs directing that the amount shall be payable by the insurance company. The claimants not being satisfied with the quantum of the compensation preferred this appeal.2. To be brief I may mention that the deceased was not earning any amount and there was no such pleading, nor any averments was made concerning special damages on such score. The law is, however, well settled that even in absence of any claim for special damages, where the victim is non-earning, general damages are never the less to be awarded for deprivation of the company and association of the victim and loss of such affection which would have been extended. In the very nature of things a ...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Balram Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-29-1984
Reported in: (1985)44CTR(All)132; [1984]150ITR687(All); [1985]23TAXMAN285(All)
Ojha, J.1. Consequent upon a sale deed being executed by the assessee-opposite party of a plot of land in favour of M/s. Quality Ice Cream, Calcutta, proceedings under Chapter XXA of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), for acquisition of the said plot were initiated by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax (Acquisition) and, ultimately, an order was passed on November 11, 1975, under Section 269F(6) of the Act, wherein it was held that the apparent consideration in the sale deed fell short of the fair market value of the plot sold by about 60 per cent. and, accordingly, in view of the provisions of Section 269C(2)(b) of the Act it had to be held that there was conclusive proof that the consideration agreed upon between the parties had not been truly shown in the deed. Thereafter, proceedings under Section 52(2) of the Act were initiated against the opposite party and accepting the reasonings of the IAC (Acquisition) in the acquisition proceedings, t...
Tag this Judgment!Jai Gurudev Dharam Pracharak Sangh and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-29-1984
Reported in: AIR1985All158
R.M. Sahai, J. 1. The short question that arises for consideration in this petition is if opposite parties were justified in invoking Section 17 of Land Acquisition Act and dispensing with the hearing of objections under Section 5A of the Act. 2. It is not disputed that proceedings for acquisition of land in dispute for planned industrial development were initiated in June 1973 and notification under Section 4 was issued. On that occasion petitioner was not deprived of right of filing objection Under Section 5A obviously because State Government was not of opinion that it was an acquisition to which Section 17(4) should have been applied. The objection resulted in exclusion of one of the plots as it was found to be tank. For remaining plots petitioner came to this court by way of Writ Petition No. 7575 of 1975. It was allowed on 16th Sept. 1975. Both the notifications issued under Sections 4 and 6 were quashed as substance of notification was not published in the locality within 21 day...
Tag this Judgment!Additional Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Solar Chemicals (P.) Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-28-1984
Reported in: (1985)44CTR(All)300; [1984]150ITR410(All)
Ojha, J. 1. The assessee-respondent, M/s. Solar Chemicals Private Ltd., Kanpur, is a private limited company. It was incorporated on August 30, 1960, and carries on business of manufacture of sodium sulphate. Earlier, this business was being carried on by a partnership firm, M/s Solar Chemicals. Subsequently the respondent took over this business and started manufacturing sodium sulphate on January 1, 1960. It filed its return for the assessment year 1963-64 showing an income of Rs. 5,604. However, the assessment was made under Section 143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), on an income of Rs. 17,628. Subsequently on coming to know that some hundi loans and unexplained share capital appearing in the balance-sheet had not been shown by the respondent in the return, a notice was issued under Section 148 of the Act. In response tothat notice, the respondent appeared and filed its return. Subsequently, however, it moved an application before the IAC offering t...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Nath Vs. Smt. Tapesara and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-27-1984
Reported in: AIR1985All26
V.N. Khare, J.1. This second appeal arises out of Execution Application filed by decree-holder appellant under Order 21, Rule 32 C.P.C. before the Additional Munsif, Varanasi.1-A. Brief facts relevant to this appeal are these :Bhairo Ram and Mathura Prasad, the predecessors-in-interest of decree-holder appellant filed suit No. 87 of 193.3 against Ghasi Kewat and others, the predeeessors-in-interest of Judgment-Debtors-respondents. The case of plaintiffs in that suit was that they were residing in house No. A1/28, Mohalla Balebir-ki-Gali, Ghaighat, Varanasi and defendants of that suit were residing in the house lying north to the house of plaintiffs. Three doors and windows in the northern wall of plaintiffs' house were in existence. It was pleaded in that suit that the defendants be restrained from constructing the wall towards north of that house in a manner so as to obstruct the light and air of the doors and windows of the plaintiffs' house. Ultimately the suit was decreed in the te...
Tag this Judgment!Mohd. Faiyaz Ali Khan Vs. Mohd. Mubarak Ali Khan and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-27-1984
Reported in: AIR1985All57
ORDERI.P. Singh, J.1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India (hereinafter referred to as the Constitution) has been filed by Mohd. Faiyaz Ali Khan, petitioner against Mubarak Ali Khan and five others for the issuance of a writ directing the respondents 1 to 5 to appear in the Court and produce Smt. Qamar Sultana, wife of the petitioner in this Court.2. The allegations in paras 11 and 14 of the petition are that Smt. Qamar Sultana is being forcibly detained by his in laws (respondents 1 to 5) at Aligarh.3. In paras 10, and 12 to 14 of the counter-affidavit of Mohd Mubarak Ali Khan, on behalf of the respondents it is alleged that the petitioner had given Talak to Smt. QamarSultana and that after the expiry of the period of Iddat she was remarried to Wegar Tofique Khan son of Manzoor Khan of village Majhpurwa, district Farrukhabad on 31-12-82 and thereafter from their wedlock a male child was horn who on the date of the counter-affidavit had attained the age of 6 mon...
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Wahab and anr. Vs. Chandra Prakash
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-23-1984
Reported in: 1(1985)ACC1
B.P. Agarwal, J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, directed against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kanpur, dated May 10, 1977.2. Abdul Naqi, son of Abdul Wahab, aged about 2 years, was at pay on the foot-path opposite the premises No. 25/39, Karachi Khana, Kanpur on August 14, 1975 at about 5.40 P.M. The father Abdul Wahab was at work in cycle repairing close by Car No. UPG 5073, belonging to respondent No. 1. was standing at a distance of merely 20 paces from the child. Driver Arif, respondent No. 2, was at the steering. He gave a start to the car and proceeded from south towards north overrunning the child. Abdul Naqi sustained mutiple injuries; he was rushed to hospital, but be succumbed to the injuries within about two hours. First Information Report was lodged by Abdul Wahab at 8.45 p. m. the same day. On November 20, 1975, Abdul Wahab and his wife applied for the award of compensation contending that the accident occurred...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »