Allahabad Court October 1989 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.
U.P. State Sugar Corporation Ltd. Vs. Deputy Labour Commissioner and o ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-27-1989
Reported in: (1992)ILLJ177All
B.N. Misra, J.1. Challenge in this writ petition is to the orders under Annexures-12 and 14 of the Deputy Labour Commissioner, Meerut, Respondent No. 1 finding that the late Bennett Solomon was 'workman' under the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and that his date of birth was 15th January, 1918and, therefore his retirement on 15th January, 1976 before he attained the age of 60 years was illegal.2. The late Bennett Solomon was workimg as an Asst. Engineer under the U.P. State Sugar Corporation Ltd., the petitioner. He died on 15th May, 1977 and his legal representatives are respondent Nos. 2 to 6. According to the petitioner, Solomon's date of birth was 15th January, 1916 and therefore he was due to retire on 15th January, 1976. The petitioner served a notice on 9th December, 1975 on Solomon (Annexure-5) stating therein that he would be retired from service from 15th January, 1976. Against the said notice Solomon made a representation (Annexure-6)...
U.P. State Sugar Corp. Ltd. Vs. Deputy Labour Commissioner and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-27-1989
Reported in: [1990(60)FLR97]; (1994)IIILLJ122All; (1990)3UPLBEC1919
B.N. Misra, J. 1. Challenge in this writ petition is to the orders under Annexures-12 and 14 of the Deputy Labour Commissioner, Meerut. Respondent No. 1, finding that the late Bennett Solomon was 'Workman' under the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and that his date of birth was January 15, 1918 and, therefore, his retirement on January 15, 1976 before he attained the age of 60 years was illegal. 2. The late Bennett Solomon was working as an Assistant Engineer under the U.P. State Sugar Corporation Limited, the petitioner. He died on May 15, 1977 and his legal representatives are respondent Nos. 2 to 6. According to the petitioner, Solomon's date of birth was January 15, 1916 and, therefore, he was due to retire on January 15, 1976. The petitioner served a notice on December 9, 1975 on Solomon (An-nexure-5) stating therein that he would be retired from service with effect from January 15, 1976. Against the said notice Solomon made a representation...
Anwar Ahmad Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-27-1989
Reported in: 1991CriLJ717; I(1991)DMC285
S.I. Jafri, J.1. The instant revision by Anwar Ahmad Applicant thereby impugning his conviction under Section 494/109 was admitted on the question of sentences only.2. Initially, the applicant aforesaid was prosecuted under Section 494, 109 and 199 I.P.C. and he was tried by Sri Suresh Chandra, Chief Judl. Magistrate Aligarh in Criminal Case No. 802 of 1988 Usman Khan v. Anwar Ahmad. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate upon a consideration of the materials on record, recorded a finding of conviction under Section 494 I.P.C. against the applicant and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for three years. However, the learned Magistrate purged the applicant of the charge under Section 199 I.P.C. Aggrieved by the order, the applicant went up in appeal before the Sessions Judge, Aligarh which came to be heard by II Addl. Sessions Judge, Aligarh, who by his judgment and order dated 17-10-85 dismissed the appeal and affirmed the conviction and sentence awarded to him by the trial court.3. The fact...
Latoori Singh Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-27-1989
Reported in: I(1991)ACC595
S.I. Jafri, J.1. This revision filed by Latoori Singh, applicant hereby impugning his conviction under Section 279/304 A I.P.C. was admitted by this Court on the question of sentences.2. On being convicted under Section 279/304 A I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 3 months under Section 2791.P.C. and further to undergo R.I. for nine months under Section 304 A I.P.C. in Criminal Case No. 754 of 1982 by 1st Additional Munsif Magistrate Etah, the applicant went up in appeal before the Sessions Judge, Etah, who upon a consideration of materials on record dismissed the appeal and affirmed and the conviction and sentences recorded against him by the trial Court.3. The facts of the case are that on 24.7.82 at about 6.30 P.M. Afsar Ali a child aged about 3 years son of the daughter of Informant Dafedar was playing by the road-side, when Truck No. UPT1217 driven by the applicant, coming at a high speed from Aliganj, hit the child and after hitting the child at some distance it dashed agai...
Sri Siya Ram and Others Vs. Smt. Lilawati
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-24-1989
Reported in: AIR1990All75
1. This is a defendants' second appeal arising out of a suit for cancellation of sale-deeds alleged to have been executed by the plaintiff respondent. The plaintiff-respondent has challenged the sale-deeds' on the ground that she was defrauded by the defendants. The defendants are her cousins. They got the sale-deeds in their favour fraudulently and did not explain the contents of the deeds to the lady who is illiterate. Relevant allegations challenging the sale-deeds have been made in para 16 of the plaint.2. The defendants-appellants contested the suit and justified the execution of the sale deeds by the lady and asserted that the sale deeds were valid documents and conferred valid title upon the defendants.3. Both the courts below have given judgments for the plaintiff-respondent. Aggrieved by their judgments the defendants appellants have approached this Court under S. 100 of the Code of C.P.4. The learned counsel for the appellants has raised two substantial questions of law for c...
Ram Gopal and Others Vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-23-1989
Reported in: AIR1990All44; (1990)1UPLBEC258
ORDERG.D. Dubey, J.1. This writ petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, has been preferred challenging the acquisition proceedings of the plot belonging to thepetitioner situated in village Rampur district Saharanpur, Uttar Pradesh.2. The petitioners have alleged that they are owner of plot No. 107 situated mentioned above. They had constructed a big hall. In this hall they had installed an oil expeller after spending huge money. The Mandi Samiti of the locality had made proposal for acquisition of the land in dispute alongwith the other plots in 1981. The matter, however, proceeded at a snails speed. Later on a notification under S. 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as Act) was issued on 25th Jan., 1988. A notification under S. 6 of the Act was published in official gazettee on 10th of June, 1988. It is an admitted fact that the proclamation of the substance of the notification by the collector Saharanpur in the locality was made on 4th July, 1988. T...
Bishambhar Nath Agarwal Vs. Kishan Chand and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-23-1989
Reported in: AIR1990All65
ORDERG. D. Dube, J.1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree passed by Fourth Additional District Judge, Agra. The lower Court has decreed the suit of the respondents for specific performance of the contract. The defendant No. 1 has been directed to execute a sale-deed within a period of three months after receiving the amount ofsale consideration and rent up to 31st October, 1974-75 as is disclosed in the compromise entered into between the parties. The defendant No. 1 was further directed to obtain permission from the District Magistrate, if necessary. It was ordered that in case defendant No. 1 failed to comply the decree, then the sale-deed would be executed through Court at the cost of the appellant. It has also been declared that after 31st October, 1975, the plaintiffs and defendants 2 to 6 are not required to pay rent or interest to defendant No. 1.2. It is an admitted case between the parties that the house in dispute situated at Agra belonged to the pl...
Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-23-1989
Reported in: [1990(60)FLR134]; (1992)ILLJ172All; (1990)1UPLBEC13
ORDERM.P. Singh, J. 1. This writ petition is directed against an award of the Industrial Tribunal III, Kanpur dated April 24, 1987, published on June 9, 1987.2. The petitioner is a company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1956 having its registered office at Bangalore. The petitioner has seven units in the country. The dispute relates to the Kanpur unit in which there are about 3,500 workmen.3. The respondent No. 3 is a registered Union espousing the cause of the workmen and looking after their welfare.4. The entire controversy hinges on the interpretation of the settlement which was entered into between the respondent No.3 and the petitioner on April 5, 1975. The question further is whether the present proceeding under Section 4-K of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referrred to as the Act) is valid or is barred on account of that settlement.5. Now let us examine the settlement of 1975 and its effect.6. In the year 1969, 110 workmen were promoted as Fitt...
U.P. State Road Trans. Corpn. Vs. Kripa Shanker Tripathi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-23-1989
Reported in: 1990ACJ382
N.N. Mithal, J.1. U.P. State Road Trans. Corpn. has come up in appeal against the award given by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (IInd Additional District Judge), Allahabad. Against a claim of Rs. 87,000/-, a sum of Rs. 20,000/- in all has been awarded. The appeal has been filed challenging the amount awarded. A cross-objection has also been filed by the claimant claiming Rs. 67,000/- in addition to the amount already awarded by the Tribunal.2. The list has been revised but nobody is present for the respondent to press the cross-objection. The cross-objection is accordingly dismissed.3. Coming to the merits of the appeal, a few facts may be stated. The claimant was travelling by appellant's bus No. UTB 3188 on 9.3.1977. He was travelling from Mirzapur to Allahabad. At about 8 a.m. one of the tyres of the bus burst which resulted in collision with the tree. On account of the collision, the claimant received severe injury in which his right arm and right leg were fractured. On the ba...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. S.P. Textiles Co.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-21-1989
Reported in: [1990]185ITR272(All)
1. Through this application filed under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, the Commissioner of Income-tax seeks a direction to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to refer the following two questions to the High Court:'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the expenditure incurred by the assessee for purchasing dinner sets for distribution among selected purchasers was not for advertisement, publicity or sales promotion and, therefore, Rule 6B has no role to play and the same was allowable expenditure ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that interest paid by the assessee-firm on the deposits of a sister concern was allowable expenditure especially when the deposit was out of funds transferred to the sister concern by the partners ?'2. On the first question, the finding recorded by the Tribunal was that the assessee incurre...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »