Allahabad Court July 1991 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.
Jagdish Saran Singhal Vs. the Collector, Hamirpur and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-31-1991
Reported in: AIR1992All40; (1991)2UPLBEC1092
ORDERN.N. Mithal, J.By means of this petition, the petitioner has sought a mandamus directing respondent No. 1 to make a reference under Section 37 of the Land Acquisition Act.2. The relevant facts giving rise to this petition are that certain pieces of land belonging to the petitioner had been temporarily acquired for its use and occupation by the State under Section 35 of the Land Acquisition Act. There was some litigation in respect of compensation payable in respect thereof, which ultimately became final. However, at the time when the land was sought to be handed over to the petitioner, he made an application before the Collector pointing out that some quantity of earth has been removed from the land in question and consequently damage has been caused to it. He, therefore, prayed that a reference under Sec. 37 of the Act be made to the court. This application has been rejected by the Collector by an order dated 16th Nov. 1977, a copy whereof has been filed as Annexure I to the supp...
Sita Ram Dixit Vs. Divisional Commissioner, Allahabad Division and Oth ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-31-1991
Reported in: AIR1992All252
ORDER1. The petitioner, who is freedom fighter, has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution challenging the legality of the order dated 16-1-1987 passed by the Addl. District Magistrate (City) Kanpur Nagar revoking his firearm licence in respect of a DBBL gun (licence No. 2909) and a revolver (licence No. 8757) and the order dated 26-2-1990 passed by the Commissioner Allahabad Division, Allahabad in appeal directed against the aforesaid order of revocation seeking the relief for quashing these orders.2. Brief facts leading to the controversy in the petition are that :(a) the petitioner, who is a freedom fighter, political and social worker having received a recognition for his service from the people of Kanpur, was elected as Corporator in the Municipal Corporation, Kanpur Nagar and was also elected as Dy. Mayor.(b) The petitioner was a licensee in respect of a gun and a revolver. On account of a criminal case (crime No. 824/76) under Ss, 147/148/149/3...
Ram Nath Exports (P.) Ltd. and anr. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and anr ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-31-1991
Reported in: [1993]88STC508(All)
A.P. Mishra, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and also learned Standing Counsel,2. The petitioner has challenged the validity of the recovery certificate dated 19th September, 1980, for Rs. 32,125.90 as interest for the assessment year 1974-75, under Section 8(1) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 (annexure 7 to the writ petition).3. According to the petitioner after the decision in the case of Mod. Serajuddin [1975] 36 STC 136 (SC) ; 1975 UPTC 482 (SC) transaction in question is not being treated as a transaction in the course of export, even though earlier the respondents-authority also were treating it to be so. After the decision the respondents started proceeding for levying tax under the relevant provision of the Acts. The dealers in order to salvage from the onerous liability likely to be fastened on them approached the Central Government through representation for redress. The representations were also by different associations of exporters. In consequence thereof the...
Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Jhansi Ram and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-31-1991
Reported in: 1992ACJ665
A.N. Varma, J.1. This petition is directed against the order of Claims Commissioner, Northern Railway, Allahabad, dated 23rd March, 1979, allowing a claim put forward by one Jhansi Ram, a railway employee and his minor son Dalip Kumar. Under the impugned order a sum of Rs. 34,500/- was awarded to Jhansi Ram and Rs. 25,000/- to Dalip Kumar. The compensation has been granted under Section 82-A of the Indian Railways Act, 1890, which provides for adjudication of claims by passengers for injuries sustained by them or by their dependants, if the passengers die in a railway accident.2. In the present case, the accident took place while Jhansi Ram, his wife Gyan Kumari, their daughter Geeta and a minor son Raju were travelling by the Deluxe Express (103 Up) on 10.10.1977 from Durgawati to Allahabad. In the accident Gyan Kumari, Geeta and Raju aforesaid all died. Jhansi Ram, however, escaped death but sustained certain injuries. The accident had taken place while the Deluxe Express was nearing...
Vijai Kumar Kohli and Others Vs. the Life Insurance Corporation of Ind ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-30-1991
Reported in: II(1993)ACC686; 1993ACJ597; AIR1992All45
ORDERN.N. Mithal, J.1. By means of this petition the petitioners seek a direction to the respondent for making payment of the amount due for the life insurance policy taken by the deceased Lalit Kumar Kohli on 15th June, 1982. At the time of filing the petition Sri R.G. Padia appeared on behalf of respondent and he was granted a month's time to file counter-affidavit. Thereafter on 6th of Feb., 1991 again further three weeks time was granted to the respondent to file counter-affidavii. When the matter was taken up on 6-3-91 Sri R.G. Padia, the learned counsel for the respondent stated that despite his writing letters to the respondent there was no response. In the circumstances we proceeded to hear the petition in the absence of counter affidavit and dictated the order in Court allowing the same. Before the order was signed some doubt about the maintainability of the petition arose in our mind and therefore, we did not sign the order and directed the office to list the petition again f...
Km. Maxey Charan Vs. Rohilkhand University, Bareilly and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-30-1991
Reported in: AIR1992All122
ORDER1. The petitioner challenges the order dated 27-11-1984. Her results of the examination of B.A. part II and LL.B.I yearhave been cancelled. She also challenges the resolution of the Examination Committee dated 20-5-1986, The facts giving rise to the filing of this petition may be put in brief compass.2. The petitioner is said to have appeared in B.A. Part I examination from Bareilly College, which is affiliated to Rohilkhand University. Her roll number was 45455. She was declared successful. In 1983 the petitionerappeared in B.A. Part II examination and she was declared successful and is said to have passed the said examination in III Divison. In 1984 the petitioner is said to have appeared in LL.B.I year examination. However, she failed and sought permission to appear in the supplementary examination. On 27-11-1984 the Assistant Registrar (Confidential) of the respondent No. 1 informed the petitioner that she had failed in B.A. Part I examination, therefore, her result of B.A. Pa...
Riyasat Ali Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-30-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ1217
ORDERB.P. Singh, J.1. This is an application for revision against the judgment and order dt. 31-8-1990 passed by the Sessions Judge, Budaun, in Criminal Revision No. 95 of 1990 (Smt. Rashida Begum v. Riyasat Ali).2. A complaint under Sections 323, 149, 406, 504 and 506, I.P.C. was filed by Riyasat Ali (the applicant) against Smt. Rashida Begum.3. The case of the complainant was that he was married to Smt. Rashida Begum, daughter of Badrul Hasan. Upon the advice of his wife and in-laws, Riyasat Ali had taken separate residence from his parents. He also deposited Rs. 10000/- 10 tolas of gold and 1/2 kgs silver ornaments with his in-laws. The entrustment of the money and ornaments was only by way of security on 21-10-1989, Riyasat Ali went to his in-laws to demand the money and ornaments. He was asked to come back on the next evening. When he went again on the next evening, his in-laws refused to return the money and ornaments and gave him a cane beating. His brothers Ibadat Ali and Fasah...
Modi Industries Limited (Steels), Modinagar, Ghaziabad Vs. Executive E ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-26-1991
Reported in: AIR1991All351; (1991)2UPLBEC1213
ORDERV.K. Khanna, J.1. These are fiveconnected writ petitions raising similar questions of fact and law. Learned counsel for the petitioner in these writ petitions and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents have raised common arguments in these writ petitions and thus they are being disposed of by a common judgment. Besides oral arguments, the petitioners in these cases have also submitted written arguments twice. The last written argument was submitted by the petitioners on 10th July 1991. The contentions raised in the written arguments have also been taken info account while disposing of these writ petitions.2. All the petitioners are running various industries and for running their industries, are taking the electrical energy under written agreements from the respondents. The U.P. State Electricity Board, by different notifications issued from time to time u/S. 49(1) of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 imposed additional charges described as 'coal variation adjustment '...
Benaras State Bank Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-26-1991
Reported in: [1992]198ITR267(All); [1991]59TAXMAN542(All)
R.R. Misra, J.1. For the assessment year 1981-82, the assessee raised the following questions before the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to be referred to this court for its opinion :' 1. Whether, under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in disallowing a sum of Rs. 6,75,000 pertaining to bonus relating to the assessment year 1980-81, paid during the year in question ?2. Whether, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in not allowing the claim of bad debts in the accounts of M/s. Andrews Erectors, Obra, and Shri Rum Prakash Sharma during the year in question when the amounts were written off and its bona fides were not in dispute ?3. Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal relying on the letters of the Tahsildar dated 15th February, 1981, based on a letter from Hindustan Steel Works and Construction dated December 29, 1980, was not wrong and misdirected in finding that the bad debt of M/s. Andrews Erectors fell beyond the da...
Nisar Ahmad and Others Vs. V Addl. District Judge, Azamgarh and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-25-1991
Reported in: AIR1992All198
ORDER1. This writ petition is directed against the orders of Vth Addl. District Judge, Azamgarh dated 25-9-89 passed in Civil Revision No. 27 of 1988 by which the order dated 5-2-1988 passed by Munsif rejecting the application (88C-2) in Execution Case No. 22 of 1974 Sabira Bibi v. Abdul Qavi had been affirmed. The order dated 2-12-1983 passed by Munsif, Gohana (Azamgarh) is also sought to be quashed. Further prayer is to issue a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent No. 2 Munsif to dispose of application (67C-2) dated 19-1-75 and recall the order dated 20-12-75.2. The brief facts of the case would be necessary for properly appreciating the controversy in the petition. The Original Suit No. 471 of 1967 was filed by Smt. Sabira Bibi for recovery of possession over a shop room and also for recovery of damages from Abdul Qavi. The plaintiff Smt. Sabira Bibi has purchased the property in question by a sale deed dated 15-9-60 executed by one Mohd. Ali. The original suit was decreed in ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »