Allahabad Court December 1990 Judgments
Flight Lieutenant H.B. Misra Vs. Air Marshal M.S. Bawa, Air Officer an ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-21-1990
Reported in: 1991CriLJ1402
Acts/Rules/Orders: Civil procedure Code (CPC) - Order 6, Rule 16OrderR.S. Dhavan, J.1. When this court had heard this contempt petition and delivered its order of 26 May, 1990, the issue was on the non-compliance of the order of 18 May, 1989 or the disobedience of it. The opposite parties in their defence claimed, that the order has beencomplied with, while the petitioner made a counter claim that the order was being disobeyed.2. On 26 May, 1990 the case did not go into the consideration of framing of charges against the four opposite parties on a notice of motion, as amidst proceedings an affidavit was filed on behalf of opposite party No. 1, Air Marshal M.S. Bawa, subsequently fortified by his personal affidavit, that the terms of the order of 18 May, 1989 were misunderstood by him and his establishment, and the order shall now be complied with, and an opportunity was sought to do so.3. In the face of these circumstances there was no occasion for this court to take the matter further...
Tag this Judgment!Asha Saxena Vs. S.K. Chaudhari and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-19-1990
Reported in: (1995)IIILLJ182All; (1990)1UPLBEC516
V.K. Khanna, J. 1. These are two connected writ petitions. The relevant facts for the purposes of deciding these writ petitions are that Shrimati S. K. Chaudhari was appointed as C.T. Grade teacher in Vidyawati Darbari Intermediate College, Lukerganj, Allahabad (hereinafter described as the 'College') in the year 1964- and she continued to work in that capacity in the College till her promotion to the post of Lecturer on 8.7.1973. It may be noted that she had passed her L.T. Examination in the year, 1970. 2. Dr. Asha Saxena was appointed in the College on 22.7.1969 as L.T. Grade teacher and she continued to work on that post till her promotion as a Lecturer on 8.7.1973. Ku. Radha Raizada was appointed L.T. Grade teacher in the year 19/1 and was promoted to the post of Lecturer on 8.7.1973. 3. Dr. Asha Saxena filed an objection against the seniority list which had been prepared in the year 1986-87 before the Committee of Management as in the seniority list Smt. S.K. Chaudhari was shown ...
Tag this Judgment!M/S. Govardhan Kagaj Udyog Rankuta, Agra Vs. U.P. Financial Corporatio ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-18-1990
Reported in: AIR1991All211
ORDERD. S. Sinha, J.1. By means of this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India an industrial concern M/s Goverdhan Kagaj Udyog, Agra-Mathura Road, Village Runkuta, Agra, the petitioner, beseeches this court to command the U.P. Financial Corporation through its Regional Manager, Shiv Hare Marg, Agra and U.P, Financial Corporation through its Managing Director, Civil Lines, Kanpur, the respondents Nos. 1 and 2 respectively, to hand over the possession of its firm and to disburse the balance of loan sanctioned to it and also to make fresh schedule for re-payment. The petitioner, besides the usual ritualistic prayers for any other and further writ, order or direction andaward of costs, prays that a writ of certioran quashing the auction sale, if any, may also be issued.2. The case of the petitioner, as pleaded in the petition, is that it applied to the respondent No. 1 for a loan of Rs. 15,00,000/-(Rupees fifteen lacs) which was ultimately sanctioned and in that connection an...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Panchayati Akhara Nirmal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-18-1990
Reported in: [1991]190ITR121(All)
B.P. Jeevan Reddy, C.J. 1. Under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question for our opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the agricultural income of theassessee-trust could not be considered for the purposes of Section 11(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. The reference has been made at the instance of the Revenue. The assessment years concerned herein are 1971-72 and 1972-73. 3. The assessee is a trust assessed as an association of persons. It derives income from agricultural land, donations and offerings, house property, interest on securities, bank interest and ground rent. The accounting year is the financial year. The assessee-trust was created in the year 1925. 4. For the assessment year 1971-72, the Income-tax Officer found that out of the total income derived by the assessee (including agricultural as well as non-agricultural income), an...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Rama Shanker Gupta
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-18-1990
Reported in: [1991]190ITR157(All)
B.P. Jeevan Reddy, C.J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following two questions, relating to the assessment years 1972-73, 1974-75 and 1975-76, under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :'(1) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the value of the assessee's share in the let out portion of the assessee's property is to be computed after exclusion of reversionary value of land ? (2) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the question of valuation was not referred to the proper valuer and directing the Wealth-tax Officer to refer the valuation again to the competent valuer to determine the assessee's share in the firm and not to go by the valuation made by the Valuation Officer who had valued the assets of the firm ?' 2. In respect of the assessment years 1977-78 and 1979-80 too, the v...
Tag this Judgment!Additional Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Solar Chemicals Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-18-1990
Reported in: (1991)98CTR(All)196; [1991]190ITR216(All)
B.P. Jeevan Reddy, C.J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has stated the following question under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, theIncome-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that Section 104 of theIncome-tax Act, 1961, was not attracted ?' 2. The assessee is a private limited company in which the public are not substantially interested. It manufactures sodium sulphate. It was incorporated on August 30, 1960, and started manufacturing on January 1, 1962, on which date it took over a partnership firm known as Solar Chemicals which was carrying on the said business and was assessed thereon up to the assessment year 1962-63. The first assessment year for the assessee was 1963-64, the relevant accounting year being the calendar year 1962. Assessment was completed in the first instance but later it was reopenedunder Section 147, since it was found that there were some factitious loans and some un...
Tag this Judgment!Ramesh Singh Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-18-1990
Reported in: 1991CriLJ1874
G.D. Dube, J.1. Ramesh, Dhanpal, Naresh, Nem Singh, Satish Singh, Shree Pal and Suraj Pal were charged for the offence punishable under Section 396 of the Penal Code by the Special Judge (Dacoity Affected Area), Etah. During the trial Ramesh was also charged for the offence punishable Under Section 302, I.P.C. while the rest six were charged Under Section 302 read with 149, IPC. Out of them only Ramesh was found guilty, convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life Under Sections 396 and 302, IPC each. Rest six were acquitted. As against this order of conviction appellant Ramesh filed this appeal. The State also filed Government Appeal No. 188 of 1985, State v. Dhanpal Singh and 5 others against acquittal in this court. This appeal has been summarily rejected by this Court on 10-2-1987. Hence we are left with this appeal only.2. The prosecution case is that the daughter of maker of the report Smt. Ramawati was married recently. This married girl Smt. Pravesha had returned to her fat...
Tag this Judgment!Goel Textile Industries and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-17-1990
Reported in: (1999)IIILLJ751All; (1990)3UPLBEC1780
D.S. Sinha, J. 1. M/s. Goel Textile Industries, Pilkhuwa, Ghaziabad, and its partner Sri Prahlad Saran, the petitioners No. 1 and 2 respectively, have challenged the legality of the orders dated January 5, 1979, July 2, 1979, and November 17, 1980. The orders dated January 5, 1979 and July 2, 1979 were passed by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner, Uttar Pradesh, Kanpur, the respondent No. 2, in exercise of his powers under Section 7A of the Employee's Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, hereinafter called the 'Act' while the order dated November 17, 1980 was passed by the Central Government the respondent No. 1, in exercise of powers under Section 19-A of the Act.2. The case of the petitioners is that they are carrying on business of manufacturing cotton at a very small scale at Pilkhuwa. The petitioner No. 1 is registered under the provisions of the Sales Tax Act, the Shops and Commercial Establishments Act and the Small Scale Industries Act. On September 20,...
Tag this Judgment!Nafees Haider Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-17-1990
Reported in: 1991CriLJ1690
ORDERS.I. Jafri, J.1. Instant application has been filed by Nafis Haider Under Section 482, Cr. P.C. praying therein that the order dated 27th Oct. 1990 passed by C. J. M. Jaunpur issuing there-by non-bailable warrants against the applicant in complaint case No. 3700 of 1990. It has also been prayed by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant be exempted of his personal attendance in the Court of C.J.M. Jaunpur where the aforesaid case is pending.2. I have heard Sri Kamal Krishna, learned counsel for the applicant as well as the learned counsel for the State. The learned counsel for the applicant has submitted before the court that the applicant has been serving in Saudi Arabia and as such it is not possible for the applicant to be present on each and every date in the court below. It is next contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that an application seeking exemption of personal attendance in the court was moved before the C.J.M. Jaunpur and while rejecting...
Tag this Judgment!Raj Bahadur Vs. the State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-17-1990
Reported in: 1991CriLJ2239
ORDERG.D. Dubey, J.1. This is an application for bail.2. On a search of the applicant 5 gm. of brown sugar was recovered. The applicant has been arrested in connection with an offence punishable under Section 17/18, N.D.P.S. Act (hereinafter referred to as Act).3. It has been argued that the search was not in accordance with Section 51 of the Act. It was also urged that public witnesses were not summoned to witness the search and recovery. Lastly, it was urged that Section 37 of the Act is not applicable to the High Court. Therefore, the High Count can look into the matter from its own angle.4. I have heard the learned A.G.A. also. He has raised the preliminary objection that the Union of India should be also made a party to this case because the Union of India has a cell to control the menace of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic substances.5. In reply to the above objection the learned counsel for the applicant has urged that the sole purpose of making the State Government or Union of I...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »