Allahabad Court November 1992 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.
Kisan Seva Sahakari Samiti Ltd. Vs. Bachan Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-25-1992
Reported in: 1993CriLJ2540
ORDERB.P. Singh, J.1. Both these applications for revision arise out of the same order dated 30-5-1989 passed by Special Judge, Meerut, Sri Ratiram, in E.C. Case No. 21 of 1986 under Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act, P.S. Mawana, District Meerut.2. Criminal Revision No. 1305 of 1989 was admitted as the learned Counsel for both the parties had agreed for its admission Criminal Revision No. 1287 of 1989 was connected with Criminal Revision No. 1305 of 1989 and is being disposed of finally at the admission stage.3. Bachan Singh, the opposite party, was being prosecuted in E.C. Case No. 21 of 1986 under Section 3/7, E.C. Act in the court of Special Judge, Meerut. On 29-5-1989, an application was moved by the applicant in the court concerned with the prayer that the proceedings may be dropped. It was alleged by the applicant that he was facing trial and was out of service for the last four years. The charge sheet in the case was submitted in the year 1985 and his statement was r...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Hindustan Metal Works
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-24-1992
Reported in: [1993]202ITR978(All)
Om Prakash, J.1. The following questions have been referred by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (briefly, 'the Act'), for the opinion of this court :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the proposal submitted to the Commissioner under Section 147(a) on March 20, 1965, was too vague to show that there were any reasonable grounds for the Income-tax Officer to believe that there had been any non-disclosure of facts having a material bearing on the question of underassessment ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in cancelling the reassessment made under Section 143(3)/147(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?' 2. The facts as briefly stated are that, for the consecutive assessment years 1957-58 to 1959-60, the Income-tax Officer made assessments under Section 143(3) of the Act on the assessee, a registe...
Amar Singh and anr. Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-24-1992
Reported in: I(1993)DMC165
K.C. Bhargava, J.1. In order to appreciate the controversy it will be necessary to briefly state the facts.2. One Asha Devi aged about 19 year was married to Shivnarain Singh on 23rd May, 1991. In the F.I.R. it was alleged that on account of dowry there was a dispute and (he in-laws of the deceased used to treat the deceased, Smt. Asha Devi, cruelly. On 9-4-92, complainant was informed that his daughter had been murdered. The accused were thereafter challaned The learned Magistrate as well as learned Sessions Judge, Raebareili, rejected the bail application of the applicants. The applicants have now approached this Court.3. Learned Counsel for the applicants as well as learned State Counsel have been heard. Learned counsel for the applicants has argued that in the present case the applicants are entitled to be released on bail as of right under the provisions of Section 167(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code (hereinafter to be called as the Code) as the charge sheet was filed after stat...
Mohammad Sami Vs. Ashraf Ali and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-23-1992
Reported in: AIR1993All135
ORDER1. Mohammad Sami, the judgment-debtor in original suit No. 435 of 1973, decided by the 1st Addl. Munsif, Nagina, district Bijnor, seeks to challenge the order and judgment dated 13th September, 1982 passed by the Special Judge (Addl. District Judge), Bijnor where by the order and judgment of the learned Munsif rejecting theobjection of the petitioner under Order XXI Rule 90 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, hereinafter called the Code, has been upheld.2. Heard Sri R. H. Zaidi and Sri T. P. Singh, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and contesting respondents Nos. 1 and 2 respectively.3. The executing court as well as the appellate court have concurrently recorded a finding of fact that the petitioner judgment-debtor has not sustained any substantial injury by reason of any alleged irregularity. As noticed by the appellate court, it was not alleged by the petitioner that there was any fraud of irregularity in conducting the auction sale. What was complained of by the p...
Meekan Transmissions Ltd. Vs. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-18-1992
Reported in: (1999)IIILLJ79All; (1993)1UPLBEC499
D. P. S. Chauhan, J. 1. The petitioner is an undertaking running the business of manufacturing automatic gears. Proceedings under Section 7-A of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') were initiated against it. A detailed objection (Annexure 6 to the Petition)was filed before the authority under Section 7-A of the Act consequent upon the notice dated January 28, 1992. One of the objections taken was regarding the rate of contribution applicable to the petitioner undertaking and was based on the Government Order No. 50360 (1) dated May 17, 1989, which provided for the rate of contribution to be made by the employer towards the provident fund of the employees. The grievance was that, under the second proviso of the said notification, the revised rate of contribution i.e. 10 per cent, was not applicable to the petitioner undertaking. Apart from this, there were other objections claiming set off of the amount already dep...
Vikas Industrial Gases Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-17-1992
Reported in: 1993(64)ELT396(All)
A.P. Misra, J.1. In view of the exchange of affidavits, the present petition is being disposed of finally at the stage of admission in accordance with the Rules of the Court.2. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.The petitioner seeks quashing of notice dated 3rd August, 1990/3rd November, 1990 (Annexure 13 to the petition) and further the demand notice dated 12th September, 1990, 21st September, 1990 with corrigendum dated 15th October, 1990 (Annexures 14, 15 and 16 respectively to the writ petition). According to the case of the petitioner since last 20 years, the Government of India has been giving exemption from Central Excise Duty under Rule 8(1), Central Excise Rules, 1944 by issue of notification in order to boost the production of the SSI units. The notification was issued time and again in the past. The petitioner has started its production since 13th March, 1984 and the relevant concessional notification applicable to the petitioner-unit then was Notification No....
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Sri Kishan Gopal Gupta
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-16-1992
Reported in: [1993]202ITR952(All)
R.K. Gulati, J. 1. In pursuance of the directions given under Subsection (3) of Section 27 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question for the opinion of this court :'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in not disallowing the claim for deduction of debt amounting to Rs. 43,022 under Section 2(m)(ii) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, in Sri Krishna Gopal Gupta's wealth-tax assessment for the year 1969-70 ?'2. Briefly stated, the facts are that the assessee is an individual and the reference relates to the assessment year 1969-70. The assessee withdrew a sum of Rs. 43,022 from a firm, Messrs. Krishna Gopal Jagat Narain, where he had already a debit balance and, on the corresponding valuation date, the debit balance stood at Rs. 68,295. In the determination of 'net wealth', the assessee claimed deduction of the said debit balance as...
Zakir HussaIn Vs. Engineer-in-chief, Irrigation Dept. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-13-1992
Reported in: (1994)ILLJ5All; (1993)1UPLBEC15
R.A. Sharma, J. 1. Petitioner claims to have been appointed as Electrician by the respondent No. 3 on May 23, 1990 on daily wages basis at the rate of Rs. 54 per day. Petitioner further claims that he was continued to work as Electrician on the above basis till July 31, 1992, on which date his services were terminated. He has accordingly filed this writ petition for quashing the order of termination of his services for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to regularise his services and absorb him in the department on regular basis and pay him the salary equivalent to the salary of regular employees.2. In support of the writ petition, the learned counsel for the petitioner has made three submissions, viz., (i) the petitioner falls within the definition of workman and has completed service of 240 days and as such he is entitled to be regularised by the respondents; (ii) in any case, the petitioner has worked on daily wage basis for about two years and in pursuance of the Governme...
India Supplies Engineering Works Ltd. and anr. Vs. State of U.P. and o ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-11-1992
Reported in: (1999)IIILLJ74All; (1993)1UPLBEC734
B.L. Yadav, J. 1. Whether the principles of natural justice were required to be followed by the State of U.P. before passing an order for imposing damages or penalty on the petitioners, the employers for their failure, either to make contribution towards provident fund of the workmen or to transfer the amount deposited by the workmen towards the provident fund accounts (known as Employees' Provident Funds) under the provisions of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short the 'Act'), is the short question for our determination in the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, with the prayer to quash the orders dated September 28, 1968, January 7, 1970 and January 20, 1971 (Annexures 4, 5 and 6 to the amendment application) by issuing writ of certiorari. These orders have been passed under Section 14-B of the Act.2. The factual matrix of the case is that the petitioners are Employers and there are 49 workmen on the roll of the petition...
Prag Vanaspati Products Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-11-1992
Reported in: (1993)IILLJ121All; (1993)1UPLBEC90
S.R. Singh, J.1. The writ petition is directed against the Notification dated June 16, 1992 issued by the State Government under Section 3(a) of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (herein after referred to as the Act) published in Extra Ordinary Official Gazette Uttar Pradesh under Section 19 of the said Act on the same date. The State Government in purported exercise of its power under Section 3(a) of the Act has prohibited lock-out in M/s. Prag Vanaspati Product for a period of 180 days w.e.f. the date of publication of the Notification in the Official Gazette. The notification being relevant for the purposes of discussing the controversy involved the case is quoted below:2. M/s. Prag Varnaspati Product, the petitioner is a registered firm engaged in manufacture of Vanaspati. It is an Industry within the meaning of the term defined in Section 2(k) of the Act. The production in the petitioner-factory was, it is alleged, quite smooth and normal upto 1990 but in the month of January...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »