Allahabad Court November 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.
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Schreiner Airways B.V.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-17-1989
Reported in: (1990)81CTR(All)201; [1990]182ITR429(All); [1990]48TAXMAN204(All)
K.C. Agarwal, Actg. C.J.1. This application filed under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act by the Department raises the following two questions of law :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that there is neither any business connection between M/s. Schreiner and M/s. Inter Aviation Service Co. in India nor is there any payment to them by M/s. Schreiner from India ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) was entirely justified in drawing the inference that M/s. Schreiner cannot be held as an agent of M/s. Inter Aviation Service Co., A. G. ?' 2. In brief, the background of these two questions raised was that M/s. Schreiner Airways B. V., a non-resident company, during the accounting period relating to the assessment year 1985-86, carried on the business of providing helicopter servic...
Hajari Lal Vs. Siya Saran and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-15-1989
Reported in: AIR1990All73
ORDER1. This revision under section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887, hereinafter called 'the Act', is directed against the order dated 15th September, 1989, passed by the 1st Additional District Judge, Banda, exercising the power of Judge, Small Cause Court, in suit No. 14 of 1987, between Hazari Lat and Siya Saran & others, whereby the learned Judge has held the document 52C, which is, indisputably, a copy of an award, to be inadmissible in evidence.2. Under section 25 of the Act only such decrees or orders are open to challenge which are made in any case decided. It cannot be gainsaid that any order which docs not adjudicate upon any right or obligation of theparties in controversy cannot amount to a case decided, which is a condition precedent for exercise of powers under section 25 of the Act. In its decision, rendered in the Central Bank of India Ltd. v. Gokal Chand, reported in AIR 1967 SC 799, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that orders regarding summoning o...
Raghunath Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-15-1989
Reported in: [1990]182ITR234(All)
K.C. Agarwal, Actg. C.J.1. We have heard Sri A. D. Prabhakar, learned counsel for the petitioner, at length with regard to relief (a). The initial relief (a) is for a direction to the respondents to refund the amount of Rs. 28,000 which had been seized from Smt. Hasmat Kaur. Subsequently, the petitioner, who is the husband of Smt Hasmat Kaur, moved an application for amendment of the writ petition praying for a direction to pay interest on the seized amount at the rate of 12% per annum.2. The petitioner did make an application to the Commissioner of Income-tax for the refund of the principal amount but had never made any prayer for the payment of interest. In that view of the matter, we decline to issue mandamus to the petitioner, the principal amount having already been paid. The writ petition is dismissed, If law permits, the petitioner may approach the Commissioner of Income-tax for payment of interest....
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Himmat Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-15-1989
Reported in: 1990ACJ986
N.N. Mithal, J. 1. These are two connected appeals directed against an award given by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Additional District Judge, Allahabad) dated 24th January, 1978. By this award the Tribunal has allowed the claim petition awarding a sum of Rs. 17,500/- to the claimant while rejecting the rest of the claims. The claimant has filed F.AF.O. No. 464 of 1978 seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded, while F.A.F.O. No. 220 of 1978 has been filed by the assurance company on the ground that the amount awarded was excessive and the claimant was not entitled to any compensation at all. Since both these appeals arise out of the same award they can be conveniently disposed of by a common judgment.2. The fact about the accident and the injuries caused to the claimant are not seriously in dispute. The claimant was travelling along with his wife in tempo No. UPZ 6327 on 27th April, 1976 from Karchhana to Allahabad city. At about 10.30 a.m. the said tempo collided with an...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Pankali and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-15-1989
Reported in: I(1990)ACC655
N.N. Mithal, J. 1. These three appeals have been filed against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal in a petition under Section 110-AofMotor Vehicles Act, 1939,2. The Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 90$00/- against the opp-parties. Aggrieved by the award the Assurance Company has filed F.AJF.O.No.221 of 1978 challenging that the entire liability to pay compensation awarded could not be levied against the appellant as under the contract of insurance its liability was limited to Rs. 50,000/-.3. F.A.F.O.N0.245 of 1978 has been filed by the owner of the vehicle in which the deceased was travelling at the time of accident. He has challenged his liability to pay the amount & quantum of compensation awarded as well as the findings on the question of negligence of the driver of his vehicle.4. The third F.A.F.O.N0.295 of 1978 has been filed by the widow of deceased on the ground that the compensation awarded was inadequate and it should be enhanced.5. Since all these F.A.F....
Nepal Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-09-1989
Reported in: I(1991)DMC497
S.I. Jafri, J.1. This revision filed by Nepal applicant impugning his conviction under Section 494/109 I.P.C., was admitted by this Court on the question of sentences only.2. Initially, applicant and others were prosecuted under Section 494/109 I.P.C. on a complaint filed by Smt. Urmila Devi and they were tried by Sri B.K. Sharma, Special Judicial Magistrate Bulandshahr in Criminal Case No. 106 of 1982 Smt. Urmila v. Nepal and Ors., the learned Magistrate upon a consideration of the material son record, recorded a finding of conviction against the applicant under Section 494/ 109 I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for two years and further to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- under Section 494 I.P.C. accused Umrao was sentenced for 18 months R.I. under Section 494/109 I.P.C. and Rs. 1500/-as fine. The learned Magistrate also recorded conviction against Smt. Dhapo and sentenced her to pay a fine of Rs. 1500/. The remaining accused persons Jagram and Smt. Rohati were acquitted. Aggrieved, t...
Sanjay Kumar Vivek Kumar Vs. Inspecting Assistant Commissioner and ors ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-06-1989
Reported in: [1990]184ITR87(All)
1. Through this writ petition, the petitioner has claimed a number of reliefs including the quashing of assessment order dated February 20, 1986, and the order passed in appeal dated August 5, 1988. Against these orders, an appeal is, admittedly, pending before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal at the instance of the petitioner. Another relief claimed is quashing of a notice dated September 20, 1988, issued under Section 276C(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and notices issued under Sections 221(1), 271(1)(a), 271(1)(c) and 273(2)(b) of the aforesaid Act The petitioner has also sought a mandamus for return of the account books which were impounded and retained under Section 131(3) of the Act.2. We have heard counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel appearing for the Revenue.3. In our opinion, the petitioner is not entitled to any of the reliefs claimed in this writ petition.4. Regarding different notices mentioned earlier, the petitioner has adequate remedy provided under...
Abhishek Malviya Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-06-1989
Reported in: 1990CriLJ747
A.P. Misra, J.1. We have already passed the operative portion of the order in open court on 25th October, 1989, and are giving reasons for the same by means of the present judgment.2. Abhishekh Malviya alias Munnu has filed the present Habeas Corpus petition for a direction for setting the petitioner at liberty forthwith and for quashing his detention order dated 30th November, 1988.3. According to the petitioner, police of police station Attarsuiya, Allahabad, due to pre-existing enmity got a false Case Crime No. 197 of 1988 under Section 297, I.P.C. registered on 22nd September, 1988. While the petitioner was in jail after his arrest in the aforesaid crime the local police obtained orders for his preventive detention from the District Magistrate, Allahabad under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The aforesaid order of detention was served on the petitioner in jail on 1st December, 1988, Grounds of detention of the petitioner are as follow...
Asha Hariya and ors. Vs. Pushpa Rani and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-06-1989
Reported in: II(1990)ACC608; 1990ACJ226
N.N. Mithal and G.D. Dubey, JJ.1. These two appeals along with another FAF.O. No. 567 of 1978, Pushpa Rani v. Asha Hariya, had been filed against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Nainital, dated 6th October, 1978. All these three appeals arose out of the same accident which is said to have occurred on 4.12.1976 in which one M.C. Hariya lost his life.2. The appeal No. 567 of 1978 had been filed by the owner of the vehicle and has already been dismissed by a Division Bench of this court on 11.3.1988. Out of two remaining appeals one has been filed by claimants being FARO. No. 667 of 1978 and other appeal has been filed by the insurance company being FA.F.O. No. 641 of 1978. Since the question of negligence on the part of the driver of the truck No. UPD 742 has been finally determined in appeal No. 567 of 1978 that question need not detain us any longer. The only question that remains is the amount of compensation which may be awarded to the claimants. Against a claim of ...
M/S. Jhansi Concrete Products, Jhansi and Others Vs. State of U.P. and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-03-1989
Reported in: AIR1990All53
ORDERG. Malviya, J.1. The petitioner M/s. Jhansi Concrete Products, Jhansi along with its partners has moved this petition under An. 226 of the Constitution for quashing the investigation pursuant to the first information report giving rise to Crime No. 245 of 1988 under Ss. 30/40/44 of the Electricity Act, P.S. Jhansi. As per allegations in the first information report, a flying squad of the Electricity Department on 22nd June, 1988, found the meter of the petitioners firm burnt and the electricity to the concern connected with the main line. As per allegations in the first information report the petitioners were guilty of theft of electricity making them liable to prosecution under Ss. 39/40/44 of the Electricity Act.2. Shri Dharam Pal Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners contended that although a bare perusal of the first information report may disclose an'offence, yet if the other attending circumstances are taken into consideration which according to him have been brought to...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »