Allahabad Court December 1988 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.
Rajendra Singh Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-15-1988
Reported in: [1989]176ITR237(All)
1. Upon hearing the parties, we are of the view that the following question raised by the application is a question of law and that does arise from the Tribunal's order dated March 4, 1987 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in upholding the valuation of unquoted equity shares as per Rule ID of the Wealth-tax Rules, 1957, without the Wealth-tax Officer referring the valuation of these shares to the Valuation Officer as required under Section 16A of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, read with the Board's Circular No. 96 dated 25-11-1972 ?' and we, therefore, direct the Appellate Tribunal to draw up a statement of the case and refer the aforesaid question to this court for its opinion.2. The application is partly allowed....
Kallu Prasad Dinkar Vs. Regional Manager, Allahabad Bank and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-15-1988
Reported in: (1989)IILLJ478All
B.L. Yadav, J.1. By the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the order of termination dated 8th October 1987 (Annexure-6 to the petition), is sought to be quashed by issuing a writ of certiorari.2. The petitioner was appointed on 15th October 84 as Agriculture Field Officer by the Allahabad Bank through its Chairman and Managing Director, in the Junior Management of the Allahabad Bank and was posted at Jaspura Branch of the Allahabad Bank in the District of Banda. The petitioner was placed on probation for a period of two years in view of Regulation 15 of the Allahabad Bank (Officers') Service Regulations. 1979. (for short the Regulations), framed in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 19 read with Sub-section (2) of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970, vide appointment letter dated 25th September 84 (Annexure-1 to the petition). Para 2 of the appointment letter indicates that the appointment in the first place ...
Dwarika Prasad Sharma Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-15-1988
Reported in: 1989CriLJ772
ORDERG.B. Singh, J.1. This criminal revision is directed against the order dated 22-9-1981 passed by the Ist Addl. Sessions Judge, Bahraich, holding that the Magistrate cannot take cognizance against Vidya Sagar Singh, opposite party No. 2, and Nebu Lal, opposite party No. 3, without sanction under Section 197, Cr. P.C.2. Dwarika Prasad Sharma revisionist filed a complaint against Vidya Sagar Singh and Nebu Lal for offences under Sections 192, 196, 418, 164, 163, 120, 504, 463, 500 and 465, I.P.C. on 27-2-1981 on the allegation that Vidya Sagar Singh is Executive Engineer in Asthai Khand No. 2, Sarvjanik Nirman Vibhag, Bahraich and Nebu Lal is an accountant in that Khand. Five tenders were invited for pavement of Bahraich-Barabanki-Banda road between 32 Kms. and 36 Kms. by the Executive Engineer of the aforesaid Khand on 3-11-80 the revisionist submitted tenders in time and they were accepted but the Executive Engineer and the Accountant did not give any information to the complainant ...
Smt. Ram Pyari Devi Vs. Iind Addl. Distt. Judge, Azamgarh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-14-1988
Reported in: AIR1989All93
ORDERA.N. Varma, J. 1. This petition is directed against the concurrent orders passed by the courts below rejecting an application filed by the petitioner's husband Janaki Prasad and his two brothers Kanhaiyalal and Munnalal (respondents 4 and 5) under Order 9, Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure for setting aside an ex parte decree dated 13-5-1977 passed in a suit instituted by Chandrika Prasad the respondent 3 herein. Both the courts below have concurrently found that the summonses of the suit had been duly served on the three defendants, namely, Janki Prasad, Kanhaiyalal and Munnalal. The trial court rejected the application under Order 9, Rule 43 on an additional ground, namely, that even if it be assumedthat the service through publication was treated as irregular, the application is liable to be dismissed on the ground that despite the knowledge of the suit while the same was pending, the application for setting aside of the ex parte decree was filed seven months after the pas...
Tunda and anr. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-14-1988
Reported in: 1990CriLJ868
V.P. Mathur, J.1. Mr. O. P.Mehrotra, the then Sessions Judge, Mathura, vide his judgment and order dt. 4-7-1978, passed in Session Trial No. 208 of 1977, eonvicted the appellants under Section 302/34, I.P.C. and sentenced each one of them to imprisonment for life. Now they have come up through this appeal against that order.2. According to the prosecution case, Tunda and Bhagwan Singh are cousins. In their statements recorded under Section 313, Cr.P.C. Tunda denies this fact and Bhagwan Singh admits it and no cross-examination has been made to the witnesses who have spoken about this fact.3. The occurrence took place at 6.30 p.m. on 14-3-1977 near Jhanda Chauraha, Kachchi Sarak Mathura in front of the shop of appellant Bhagwan Singh on the road at a distance of about 11/2 kilo-metres the first information report was lodged the same day at 7.30 p.m. by Ramesh Chandra (P.W. 1), who is real younger brother of deceased Radhey Shyam. The prosecution contends that Tunda and Bhagwan Singh arm...
Shyam Sundar and anr. Vs. Lala Bhawan Kishore and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-14-1988
Reported in: 1989CriLJ559
ORDERV.P. Mathur, J.1. This petition under Section 482, Cr. P.C. is moved with the prayer that the criminal complaint No. 1174 of 1981 pending in the court of Munsif Magistrate, Sambhal, district Moradabad, may be quashed and further proceedings in that case may be stayed.2. The complaint was filed for an action for the offences under Sections 415, 417 and 420, I.P.C. and the case of the complainant was that on 24-10-80 the petitioners went to their firm and purchased 61 bags of Khandsari sugar. The price was settled at Rs. 40395.14. A sum of Rs. 2,500/- was paid on the spot. Cheques for Rs. 30,000/- were also handed over and there is no dispute that they were duly encashed afterwards. Three further cheques were also issued for the amounts of Rs. 5,000/-, Rs. 6.000/- and Rs. 5,000/-, respectively. The payment of the first cheque was due on 7-9-81, of the second cheque on 7-10-81 and the third cheque on 7-11-81. They were presented to the bank concerned on 14-9-81,22-10-81 and 13-11-81,...
Avinesh Kumar Yadav Vs. Employees State Insurance Corporation
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-14-1988
Reported in: II(1990)ACC579
S.R. Bhargava, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 82 (1) of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 against an appellate order fixing disability of the appellant at 60% and allowing his compensation for the same.2. Appellant was Machinist in the Indian Telephone Industries, Naini, Allahabad. On 29thJune, 1981 he was victim of accident and sustained employment injury. Medical Board alter considering the X-ray report and clinically examining the appellant found that there was reduction of inter vertibral disc space between T 11 and T 12 with anterior wedging of T 12 vertibra and fixed the disability of the appellant at 40%. Being aggrieved, appellant preferred appeal to the Employees Insurance Court, Kanpur. Before the Court there was medical evidence of reduction of inter vertibral disc space between T 11 and T 12 with anterior wedging of T 12 vertibra and slight bending in the spinal chord in thoraxic lumber region. There was also medical note that appellant was unable to stand up. H...
Chotey Lal Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-1988
Reported in: [1989]176ITR132(All)
Om Prakash, J.1. These are applications relating to the assessment years 1975-76 and 1976-77 by the assessee-applicant. Upon perusal of the orders of the Tribunal, we are of the view that, the following common question of law arises from the Tribunal's order in both the applications :'(1) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the income-tax authorities and the Tribunal were right in holding that the penalty under Section 18(1)(c) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, was leviable on the assessee ?'2. The Appellate Tribunal is, therefore, directed to draw up a statement of case and refer the aforesaid common question of law for the opinion of this court.Both the applications are partly allowed....
Mithlesh Kumari Vs. Bindhawasani and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-1988
Reported in: 1990CriLJ830; I(1991)DMC360
G.B. Singh, J.1. This Criminal Revision is against the judgment and order dated 20-1-1983 of IV Additional Sessions Judge, Faizabad allowing the Criminal Revision preferred against the judgment and order dated 11-5-1982 passed by the Munsif Magistrate, Sitapur, Faizabad in a case under Section 125, Cr.P.C.2. Smt. Mithlesh Kumari revisionist is wife of Bindhawasani opposite party 1. Their marriage was undisputedly celebrated on 1-3-1979. It is undisputed that in the month of July, 1980 a daughter was born to Smt. Mithlesh Kumari. Smt. Mithlesh Kumari filed petition for maintenance under Section 125, Cr.P.C. on 25-5-1981 claiming it at the rate of Rs. 300/- per mensem for herself and the minor daughter. It was filed on the allegations that Bindhawasani and his family members used to pass taunts for bringing less dowry and used to ill-treat her. Bindhawasani was always pressing her to ask her father to give him one Scooter otherwise he would have second wife. When the daughter was born, t...
Lallu Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-1988
Reported in: 1990CriLJ835
ORDERG.B. Singh, J.1. Lallu, revisionist was convicted under Section 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and sentenced to six months R. I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-and in default to undergo three months R.I. by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow. Against this order he preferred an appeal which was dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge. Lallu has now preferred this present revision.2. The prosecution case is that on 29-12-1977 Lallu revisionist was found carrying milk in a milk can for sale. The Food Inspector S.K. Varma purchased sample of milk from him. It was described by the revisionist as a mixed milk of cow and buffalo. The Food Inspector paid the price of the sample and obtained receipt from him. He divided the sample into three parts; put it in three phials separately after adding formal in preservative; sealed them and completed other formalities. He sent one phial to the public analyst for analysis and report. The public analyst submitted his...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »