Allahabad Court September 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.
Garware Paints Ltd. Vs. Prem Chand Gupta and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-12-1984
Reported in: AIR1984All364
ORDERN.N. Sharma, J.1. This is a defendants revision directed against the judgment and decree recorded by learned II Addl. District Judge, Ghaziabad in S. C. C. Suit No. 26 of 1981 by which claim of landlords for ejectment, arrears of rent and mesne profits was decreed with costs on 29-5-1982.2. The dispute relating to a part of building No. 48, Nav Yug Market, Ghaziabad. Admittedly plaintiffs Prem Chand Gupta and Harish Chand Gupta who were owners of the disputed premises were the landlords when it was let out on a monthly rent of Rs. 1450/- on 20-7-1979.3. The tenement comprised a basement and one room in the south west portion of the first floor. There is no dispute now on the point that U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting. Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972) is inapplicable to this building as it was constructed in February 1978.4. The tenancy of defendant was terminated by serving upon them a notice dated 14-5-1981 under Section 106 Transfer of Propert...
Chandrabhan Srivastava Vs. Badri Prasad Gupta and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-12-1984
Reported in: 1(1985)ACC253
A. Banerjee, J. 1. This is an appeal under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, hereinafter referred to as the Act, by the claimant Chandra Bhan Srivastava. He claimed a sum of Rs. 80,040/- by way of damages and expenses incurred for treatment of injuries received during the accident while he was a passenger in Bus No. UPI 2455. The owners of the Bus were respondents 1 and 2, Badri Prasad Gupta and Ram Prasad, and the Bus was being driven by Ram Chandra, respondent No. 3. His case further was that the Bus was being driven rashly and negligently, inasmuch as it had left the road on the right side, injured an old man and then crashed against a tree. He became unconscious and suffered a fracture in his right leg and had to remain in hospital for some time. His further case was that he had lost Rs. 500/- which he had in his pocket at the time of the accident. He had spent Rs. 500/- on medicines; Rs. 200/- on attendants and Rs. 60/- on consultation. He claimed Rs. 54,000/- as comp...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Vijai Kumar Mishran
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-11-1984
Reported in: (1985)45CTR(All)325; [1985]156ITR456(All); [1985]20TAXMAN405(All)
1. Shri Vijai Kumar Mishran, the opposite party, in these three applications, had filed two returns each during the years in question, namely, assessment years 1974-75, 1975-76 and 1976-77, one in his capacity as Hindu undivided family and the other in Ms individual capacity. A certain income was shown by the opposite party in these returns as belonging to Hindu undivided family. The Income-tax Officer, however, did not accept the contention of the opposite party in this behalf and treated that income as his individual income. Against the assessment orders passed by the Income-tax Officer, appeals were preferred by the opposite party. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner reversed the order of the Income-tax Officer on this point and held that the said income was of the Hindu undivided family. In compliance thereof, that income was deleted from the assessment of the opposite party in his individual capacity. The orders passed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner in the appeals filed ...
Avadhesh Kumar Vs. Sheo Shankar and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-11-1984
Reported in: AIR1985All104
M. Wahajuddin, J.1. The plaintiff-appellant brought a suit, for cancellation of the mortgage deed dated 29-1-1978 and sale deed dated 29-1-1971 executed by Bhaiya Lal, defendant No. 3, father, of the plaintiff in favour of defendants Nos. 2 and i respectively.2. The suit was based on the allegations that Bhaiya Lal had an ancestral house in which plaintiff had interest as a member of Hindu joint family and the house was sold by Bhaiya Lal in the year 1962 for a sum of Rs. 5800/-. According to the plaintiff the house covered under the aforesaid mortgage and sale deed, was constructed with the sale proceeds of the sale of the ancestral house in question and was thus a joint family property. It is further alleged that Bhaiya Lal became a Sanyasi in 1965 (as to die a civil death) and the mot tgage deed was executed in Lotan's favour for a sum of Rs. 2,000/- later and the sale was in favour of defendant No. 1 for a sum of Rs. 6,000/- also thereafter both collusively and secretly when the pl...
State of U.P. Vs. Bhura and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-11-1984
Reported in: 1985CriLJ536
ORDERR.A. Misra, J.1. The State has moved this application under Section 378 of the Cr.P.C. on 1st Jan. 1983 for leave to appeal against the order of acquittal passed on 24th June 82. The Stamp Reporter has reported that the application as well as appeal were within time up to 22nd Sept. 82 and are thus beyond time by 101 days. The learned Counsel for the State has made a two-fold submission. His first contention is that the application and appeal are within time because the appeal arises out of a case instituted upon a complaint by a public servant, so the period of limitation prescribed, is six months and thus the appeal is within time. His second submission is that in case the period of limitation is taken to be sixty days then the delay is explained by the affidavit filed in support of the application under Section 5 of Limitation Act and the same should be condoned.2. The application for leave to appeal as well as the memorandum of appeal have been filed on 1st June 1983 when the ...
Commissioner of Wealth Tax Vs. Naresh Chand BhargavA.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-10-1984
Reported in: (1985)45CTR(All)327
1. JUDGMENT : N. D. Ojha, J. - The original assessment in respect of asst. yr. 1964-65 of the opposite party under the WT Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was completed on 23-2-1967. The opposite party had for the said year, submitted his return on 19-5-1965. Subsequently a notice was issued by the WTO under s. 17 of the WT Act to the opposite party for re-opening the assessment on the ground that he had failed to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment of his net wealth inasmuch as the amount of additional compensation in respect of acquisition of Tipra Estate, Dehradun, together with interest thereon had not been disclosed in the return. The opposite party, on the receipt of the said notice, appeared and showed cause. However, the WTO passed afresh order of assessment on 28-3-1979. Aggrieved by that order the opposite party preferred an appeal before the CIT (Appeals) Allahabad. The appeal was allowed and the assessment was set aside. The aforesai...
Achchey Lal and ors. Vs. the Vice Chancellor, Gorakhpur University and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-06-1984
Reported in: AIR1985All1b
A.N. Verma, J. 1. These two petitions are being disposed of by a common judgment as the controversy involved therein is the same. The petitioners claim that they were validly admitted by the Tilakdhari Post Graduate College. Jaunpur to the B.Sc. (Agriculture) Part I course for the academic session 1982-83, but they were illegally refused by the Gorakhpur University, to which the said College was affiliated, permission to appear at the B.Sc. (Agriculture) Part I Examination, beginning from April 9, 1983. Writ Petition No. 4380 of 1983 was filed on April 7, 1983 and under an interim order of this Court, the petitioners of that petition were provisionally permitted to appear at the said examination. The petitioners of Writ Petition No. 11116 of 1983, on the other hand, appeared at the said examination on the strength of an injunction order issued in a suit filed by them for a mandatory injunction commanding the University and the College to allow the petitioners to appear at the said exam...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. S.B. Sugar Mills
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-05-1984
Reported in: (1985)44CTR(All)129; [1985]156ITR273(All); [1985]22TAXMAN277(All)
Ojha, J. 1. Aggrieved by the appellate order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'B', Delhi, in regard to the assessment years 1973-74 and 1974-75, the Commissioner made applications before the said Tribunal under Section 256(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for referring the following question of law to this court for its opinion :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the assessee, M/s. S. B. Sugar Mills, through the receiver could not be taxed in the year under consideration in the status of an ' association of persons' or 'body of individuals' as held by the Income-tax Officer '2. The Tribunal rejected these applications on the ground that the finding recorded by it in the appellate order was a finding of fact and the aforesaid question of law did not arise. The Commissioner has filed these two applications under Section 256(2) of the Act with a prayer that the Tribun...
Luxmi NaraIn Kapoor Vs. Radhey Mohan Kapoor and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-05-1984
Reported in: AIR1986All244
K.N. Misra, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dt. 24-2-1981 passed by Civil Judge, Mohanlalganj. Lucknow on the basis of compromise. The plaintiff had filed a suit for declaration alleging that in the family settlement, which took place before the filing of the suit, the property was divided in metes and bounds between the parties. It was, thus, prayed that by means of declaratory decree it be declared that the plaintiff is the exclusive owner and in possession over the property shown by letters A and E' in the list of site-plan annexed to the plaint by virtue of mutual family settlement mentioned in paragraph 4 of the plaint The parties to the suit entered into a compromise which was filed and verified before the court. The learned court below accepted the compromise, but it passed an order which reads as follows : -- 'In this suit for declaration parties have filed compromise which has been verified before me. In terms of compromise parties; have settled t...
Beni Madhav (Deceased by L. Rs.) and anr. Vs. Smt. Chameli Devi (Decea ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-04-1984
Reported in: AIR1985All89
B.D. Agarwal, J.1. The sole question raised in this second appeal arising from Original Suit No. 61 of 1961 institutued in the Court of Civil Judge, Budaun on July 12, 1961 is of limitation. Far back on October 6, 1947 one Dr. Laxmi Narain executed a mortgage in favour of the plaintiff No. 2 by a registered instrument The mortgage was simple; the consideration for the mortgage was a sum of Rs. 13,000/- in cash and there was stipulation for repayment with interest at the rate of 6% per annum. The plaintiff No. 2 is the son of the plaintiff No. 1 since dead. The plaintiffs constituted a joint Hindu family of which the plaintiff No. 1 was the karta The loan was advanced from the joint family fund The plaintiffs contended that a sum of Rs. 3,900/-had been paid by the mortgagor on October 6, 1952 towards the interest and Rs. 10/- were paid on October 3, 1958. These payments were allegedly endorsed on the back of the mortgage deed. The action was for recovery of a sum of Rs. 19,831.50 (inclu...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »