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.
U.P. State Sugar Corporation Ltd. Vs. Collector of Central Excise
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-11-1992
Reported in: 1993(64)ELT391(All)
1. Petitioner seeks direction to opposite-party No. 2 to refund the balance amount of Rs. 56475/- and Rs. 1,33,666.10 to the petitioner which is pending disposal with the respondents. According to the petitioner he is eligible for the total amount of refund claim of Rs. 97,256.25 under Notification No. 132/82 and for Rs. 5,73,390.00 under Notification No. 135/83. However, it is admitted that out of the same amount the amount of Rs. 40,791.15 and Rs. 4,42,724.00 have already been refunded to the petitioner, the petitioner is entitled for the balance amount as aforesaid for which he has made a prayer. The challenge made by the petitioner is that the respondent No. 2 by not disposing of the same is acting as against the instruction of the Central Board of Excise and Customs (Annexure 10 to the writ petition). According to the petitioner on account of this claim of refund which is pending since long, the petitioner is suffering a great financial loss. In the counter-affidavit filed on beha...
Arun Kumar Mathur Vs. Labour Court and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-10-1992
Reported in: (1994)IILLJ370All; (1993)1UPLBEC456
M.L. Bhat, J. 1. The Labour Court has rejected the claim of the petitioner by its award dated October 19, 1984. The petitioner seems to have filed a review petition for reconsideration of the award, which also came to be rejected on August 13, 1985.2. The petitioner's case is that his services were terminated by the respondent No. 2 and the petitioner raised an industrial dispute about the same. The said dispute was referred by the State Government to the Labour Court. The reference made by the Stale Government was:'Whether the termination of service of the petitioner with effect from July 15, 1981 by the employer is legal and valid and if not, to what relief the petitioner is entitled?'3. After recording evidence of the parties the Labour Court gave the impugned award. The petitioner submits that after the award was passed against him his review application for reconsideration of the award was also dismissed but he received the orders passed on the review application in January, 1987,...
State Bank of India Vs. Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal-cum-labour C ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-09-1992
Reported in: (1994)IILLJ329All
D.S. Sinha, J.1. This petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is directed against the order dated May 23, 1985 passed by the Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal cum-Labour Court, Kanpur, the respondent No. 1 under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, hereinafter called the Act.2. The relevant facts, as they emerge from the pleadings of the parties, are that Harinder Mohan Singh, the respondent No. 2, was working as a Cashier in the Charbagh Branch of the State Bank of India at Lucknow and he was discharged from service with effect from May 14, 1973. Aggrieved by the order of discharge dated May 14, 1973, the respondent No. 2 raised an industrial dispute which led to a Reference under Section 10 of the Act vide order of the Central Government dated March 11, 1977. During the pendency of the Reference before the Industrial Tribunal, a settlement was arrived at on May 29, 1981 which led to an award of the same date in terms of the s...
Regional Manager, S.B.i. Vs. Central Govt. Industrial Tribunal-cum-lab ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-09-1992
Reported in: (1993)IILLJ449All
D.S. Sinha, J.1. This petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is directed against the order dated May 23, 1985 passed by the Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Kanpur, the respondent No. 1, under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, hereinafter called the Act.2. The relevant facts, as they emerge from the pleadings of the parties, are that Harinder Mohan Singh, the respondent No. 2, was working as a Cashier in the Charbagh Branch of the State Bank of India at Lucknow and he was discharged from service with effect from May 14, 1973. Aggrieved by the order of discharge; dated May 14, 1973, the respondent No. 2, raised an industrial dispute which led to a Reference under Section 10 of the Act vide order of the Central Government dated March 11, 1977. During the pendency of the Reference before the Industrial Tribunal, a settlement was arrived at on May 29, 1981 which led to an award of the same date in terms of th...
Rajeev and ors. Vs. Ram Kishan Jaiswal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-09-1992
Reported in: I(1993)DMC233
B.P. Singh, J.1. The facts leading to this application for revision may briefly be stated as follows : Ram Kishan Jaiswal, opposite party No. 1, is resident of Chanakyapuri, Meerut Cantt. Ram Kishan Jaiswal's daughter, Kumari Seema, (aged about 19 yearn) was engaged to applicant No. 1, Rajeev Jaiswal, on 20-11-89 through a common relative Pradeep. A sum of rupees 12 thousand was spent in the engagement ceremony. The Sagai ceremony was performed on 24-11-1989 and a sum of rupees 1 lakh 50 thousand was spent on that occasion. Prior to the Sagai ceremony it was agreed between Ram Kishan Jaiswal and Mool Chand Jaiswal (father of Rajeev Jaiswal) that a sum of rupees 1 lakh would be paid by Ram Kishan Jaiswal for the purchase of Maruti Van. This sum of rupees 1 lakh was in fact paid by Ram Kishan Jaiswal, the Maruti Van was purchased and was shown at the Sagai ceremony.2. The marriage of Seema and Rajeev was performed on 30-11-1989. Ever since the marriage, the in-laws of Seema started haras...
Ram Pal Singh and ors. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-09-1992
Reported in: 1993CriLJ2715
G.P. Mathur, J.1. This appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 27-8-1979 of V Addl. Sessions Judge, Bijnor in Sessions Trial No. 144 of 1978. By the aforesaid order the appellant No. 1 Ram Pal Singh has been convicted under Section 302, IPC and has been sentenced to imprisonment for life. Appellants Nos. 2, 3 and 4 namely, Smt. Ram Kali, Smt. Prakshi, and Bhishan have been convicted under Section 323, IPC and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 25/- each and in default to undergo one month's Section 1.2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that Ram Pal Singh accused is son of Bishan accused and Smt. Prakashi is his wife while Smt. Ram Kali is his mother. The houses of the accused and the complainant Smt. Savitri are adjoining to each other in village Pundri Kalan. At about sun set time on 9-10-1977 the accused started constructing a 'Manger' in the open land which is in front of both the houses. Smt. Savitri came out of her house and made a protest. Ram Pal Singh ac...
Mrityunjay Singh Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-07-1992
Reported in: 1993CriLJ2738
A.S. Tripathi, J.1. The petitioner has been detained under Section 3(3) of National Security Act 1980 (Act No. 65 of 1980)(hereinafter referred to as the Act) by an order passed by the District Magistrate, 'Gorakhpur on 24-3-1992.2. Eleven grounds have been given in the detention order, as under :(1) It has been alleged that on 7-9-1982 at about 11 a.m. the petitioner had beaten one Kapildeo Singh, Clerk in Co-operative Department, for which a case under Section 332, I.P.C. was registered at Police Station Bansgaon.(2) On 24-4-1983 at about 8 p.m. the petitioner was arrested having a gun of different person and a case under Section 25/27 Arms Act was registered.(3) On 25-5-1984 between 11 and 12 in the day the petitioner entered the shop of Sanjay Singh in village Dondhar firing his gun and looted Rs. 500/- along with sweets, for which a case under Sections 147, 148, 149, 427 and 323, I.P.C. was registered.(4) On 19-2-1985 at about 5 p.m. Sri Sharda Prasad Misra, Sub Inspector of Polic...
Damber Son of Hoti Lal and anr. (In Jail) Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-07-1992
Reported in: 1993CriLJ3745
Virendra Saran, J.1. Damber son of Hoti Lal and his wife Smt. Jaiwanti have filed this appeal against judgment and order dated 28-8-1970 of Sri Prem Singh, VI Additional Sessions Judge, Etah. passed in Sessions Trial No. 656 of 1978. The learned Sessions Judge has convicted and sentenced appellant Damber under Section 302 I.P.C. to Imprisonment for Life and under Section 404 read with Section 34 I.P.C. to One year's R.I. Appellant Smt. Jaiwanti has been convicted and sentenced under Section 302 read with Section 34 I.P.C. to Imprisonment for Life and under Section 404 I.P.C. to one year's R.I. Sentences of the appellants have been ordered to run concurrently. By the same judgment the learned Sessions Judge has acquitted Bhoop Singh who happens to be brother of appellant Damber.2. The prosecution case is that deceased Hoti Lal was married to Smt. Ram Devi. Appellant Damber and Bhoop Singh, since acquitted, are sons of Hoti Lal from Smt. Ram Devi. He then married Smt. Jaiwanti (deceased)...
Anil Kumar Singh (In Jail) Vs. the District and Sessions Judge and anr ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-06-1992
Reported in: 1993CriLJ2541
ORDERVirendra Saran, J.1. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Chief Standing Counsel. The learned Chief Standing Counsel prayed that he may be allowed one week's time to find out whether any Judge has been appointed to the Special Court, Varanasi, (Constituted under the U. P. Gangsters and Anti-Social (Activities) Prevention Act). The request of the learned Chief Standing Counsel cannot be accepted for the reason that I had called for a report from the Registrar day before yesterday whether any such appointment has been made or not. The Registrar has reported that under the orders of the Hon'ble Chief Justice dated 15-9-1992 the name Sri M. P. Pandey, Additional District and Sessions Judge, Varanasi was recommended to the Government of U.P. for appointment as Special Judge for the disposal of the cases under the Act. No notification has been issued by the Government and a reminder was also sent but till date no notification has been received.2. The petitione...
Bislery Beverages Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-06-1992
Reported in: 1993(64)ELT393(All)
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner Sri A.P. Mathur and Sri Shishir Kumar, appearing for respondent-Union of India.2. Petitioner has sought for quashing orders dated 24th February, 1988, 12th January, 1989 passed by Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Noida and Collector of Central Excise (Appeals), New Delhi - respondent No. 4 and 2 respectively and further to direct the respondents not to impleadment the directions contained in letter dated 17th April, 1989, of the Superintendent, Central Excise, Noida and further to approve the price list submitted by the petitioner for the purpose of assessment of duty under Section 4(1)(a)(i) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944. The petitioner was given a show cause notice earlier in respect of sales to different units engaged in bottling of its product in terms of Rule 173C of Central Excise Rules, 1944.3. According to the case of respondents and as per said show cause notice the price list so filed by the petitioner in para 2 are ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »