Allahabad Court December 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.
Shri Masood and Others Vs. Shri Mohd. Yunus Khan and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-21-1992
Reported in: AIR1993All159
ORDERG.D. Dube, J. 1. This revision has been preferred against the judgment and order of Civil Judge, Aligarh, rejecting the application of the revisionists under O.1, R. 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure for being impleaded in Suit No. 661 of 1990 : Mohd. Yunus Khan and another v, Smt. Shahnaz Hussain and others.2. The opposite parties 1 and 2 filed a suit against other opposite parties claiming that they purchased the land in suit from Azizud-din and the defendant-opposite-parties 3 to 7 are interfering in their possession and constructions over the land purchased by them. The defendant-opposite-parties alleged that Azizuddin had actually left the land in suit as a park and had a carved out twenty plots around the land. It was alleged that the plaintiffs were not entitled to make constructions over the land in suit.3. The revisionists moved an application for their impleadment on the ground that the land in suit has been shown as a park in their sale deeds. They are interested in the...
Neeraj Sharma (In Jail) Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-18-1992
Reported in: 1993CriLJ2266
ORDERG.P. Mathur, J.1. Two questions of law of some importance arise for determination in this revision. The first question is whether a Magistrate has power to direct that sample of hairs of an accused may be taken for the purpose of comparison against his wishes and the second question is whether such a course of action violates the fundamental right of the accused as guaranteed by Article 20(3) of the Constitution.2. Before considering the rival contentions advanced at the Bar it will be useful to notice the facts of the case in brief.Dr. P. S. Negi, Chief Medical Officer, Hardwar was murdered and when inquest was held on his body some hairs were found in his hands. The hairs were sealed in a packet by the Investigating Officer. During investigation it was revealed that at the time of incident a scuffle had ensued between the deceased and the assailant and in the course of said scuffle the deceased had caught the assailant by holding the hairs of his head and the same had come in hi...
Ganga Chit Fund (P.) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-10-1992
Reported in: [1993]203ITR7(All); [1993]69TAXMAN480(All)
M.C. Agarwal, J.1. In pursuance of the directions made by this court under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad, has referred the following question for the opinion of this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, any part of the sum of Rs. 12,000 paid as remuneration to Shri Ram Awadh Dubey, managing director of the company, was liable to be disallowed in law ?'2. We have heard learned counsel for the assessee, Sri Vikram Gulati, and learned standing counsel.3. The proceedings relate to the assessment year 1973-74, for which the assessee's accounting year had ended on December 31, 1972. The assessee is a private limited company and, for the year under consideration, it had paid a salary of Rs. 1,000 per month to its managing director, Sri R. A. Dubey. He was a practising advocate and the learned Assessing Officer noted that, in the immediately preceding year, he was paid a salary of only Rs...
Pradeep Kumar Gupta Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-09-1992
Reported in: 1993CriLJ1671
G.D. Dube, J.1. The petitioner was detained under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as 'the COFEPOSA Act') by an order dated 23-1-1992 of the State Government of U.P. The petitioner challenged his detention by this Habeas Corpus petition.2. The circumstances alleged in the grounds of detention were that at about 2.00 p.m. on 29-8-1991, the Custom Officers apprehended the petitioner, who was coming on a Yakka from the side of Gulariya Bazar (Nepal), near Mithi Purwa, Behraich. On interrogation, the petitioner informed his name. On search of his person in presence of two witnesses, six gold biscuits, one gold Guinea, Rs. 350/- in Indian Currency and two China made locks were recovered from him. The gold biscuits were found to be of 24 carrat purity and Guinea of 22 carrat purity. Their value was assessed at Rs. 2,16,000/-and Rs. 2,000/- respectively. As the petitioner did not possess any valid permit or custom r...
Gorey Lal (In Jail) Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-09-1992
Reported in: 1994CriLJ1337
G.D. Dube, J.1. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant from jail against the judgment and order of Fifth Additional Sessions Judge, Hamirpur convicting and sentencing the appellant to imprisonment for life under Section 302 of I.P.C. and six months rigorous imprisonment on each count for voluntarily causing hurt to Mewa Lal, Umesh Chandra, Rajaram under Sections 324, I.P.C. and to one year rigorous imprisonment for voluntarily causing hurt to Shiv Kumar under Section 324 of I.P.C. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.2. The case of the prosecution was that Gaya Prasad had come to his village after taking leave from the District Hospital Hamirpur. He alongwith Prahlad, Bihari, Jagannath and Malkhan were present on the morning of 24-5-1983 in the vegetable field of Ramlal situated in village Kewtara Majra Patara P. S. Kurara district Hamirpur. Appellant Gorey Lal came and demanded some vegetable and 'Kharbuja'. When Ramlal refused to give the vegetable etc. Gor...
Brij Behari Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-08-1992
Reported in: 1993CriLJ2536
ORDERJ.P. Swmwal, J.1. By means of this application under Section 482, Cr. P.C. the applicant-Brij Behari seeks to quash the order dated 23-3-1980 (though in the certified copy date mentioned is 28-3-1980), passed by the Joint Magistrate, Basti, and revisional order dated 24-10-1981, passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Basti, in proceedings under Section 145, Cr. P.C.2. The facts giving rise to the present application are that on the report of S.O. Walterganj dated 10-7-1979 proceedings under Section 145, Cr. P.C. with regard to plot No. 255 area 0-14-7 of village Baheria commenced. The learned Joint Magistrate Basti passed the preliminary order on 10-7-1979. Both the parties filed written statements and adduced evidence regarding their respective claim with respect to the plot in dispute. The opposite party No. 2 of the present application-Jagdambika Prasad, was first party and the applicant Brij Behari, was the 2nd party in the proceedings under Section 145, Cr. P.C. The fir...
Muneshwari Devi Vs. Jitan Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-07-1992
Reported in: AIR1993All198
ORDER1. The short question arising in this revision is whether an application under order 9, Rule 4, C.P.C. to set aside dismissal of a suit and restore it to its original number, moved beyond the period of one month an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is necessary. Since the opposite party did not appear when this revision was called for hearing, it is being disposed of on merits on perusal of record and hearing the revisionist.2. Admittedly, on 30-4-1983 the date fixed for issues the suit was dismissed for default of the parties under Rule 3 of the Order 9 C.P.C. The application for restoration of the suit under Rule 4 of Order 9 was moved on 1-8-1983. The said application was dismissed by the learned Civil Judge, Ballia, by the impugned order on the ground that it was barred by limitation and there was no application for condonation of delay under Section 5 Limitation Act.3. The contention in the grounds of revision that Section 5 of Limitation Act is not applicable...
Chet Singh and Others Vs. Shashi Shankar Pathak and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-03-1992
Reported in: AIR1993All168
1. This is defendant's second appeal against the judgment and decree dated 29-11-1975 of the then IVth Additional District Judge Varanasi dismissing the 1st appeal, and confirming the judgment and decree of the trial court whereby the plaintiffs suit for possession was decreed. The suit was filed by late plaintiff Chandra Shekhar Shastri whose legal representatives have now been brought on record, against the defendants with allegations that he had purchased O-16 decimals area out of plot No. 29, village Khajuri Pargana Shivpur District Varanasi along with a room situate therein by means of a sale deed dated 7-2-1966 executed by one Behari s/o Mangroo. The area of plot No. 29 is 19 decimals. It wasoriginally recorded as old Banjer of the Zamindar and is now in the shape of Abadi within Municipal limits of Varanasi. In a portion of this plot one Ghissu s/o Darshan had constructed Shiwala and one Kashi a pucca well. The well does not stand now. In a portion of this plot there is a room c...
Kamta Prasad and ors. Vs. State and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-03-1992
Reported in: 1993CriLJ2002
ORDERJ.P. Semwal, J.1. This application under Section 482, Cr. P.C. has been filed by the applicants for quashing the order dated 11-2-1981 passed by the Special Judicial Magistrate, Meerut and for discharge of the applicants. The relief claimed in the application is for allowing the revision but it is brought to my notice that before filing this application it was converted under Section 482, Cr. P.C. as is clear from the title of the case, but the relief claimed in the application has not been amended. I am proceeding to dispose of this application treating it to be under Section 482, Cr. P.C.2. None has appeared on behalf of the opposite party No. 2 in spite of personal service. Learned counsel for the applicant and the learned Addl. Govt. Advocate appearing for the State are present.The facts leading to the present proceedings are very short. The opposite party No. 2, Raghuraj Singh, is a military man, who was posted at Meerut at the relevant time. He filed a complaint before the S...
Nirmala Devi and anr. Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-02-1992
Reported in: II(1993)DMC225
J.K. Mathur, J.1. This revision is directed against an order passed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge on 26.9.1991 by which he allowed the revision against the judgment of the Magistrate passed on 8.4.1991 and set aside an order of granting of amount of Rs. 250/- per month as maintenance to the petitioner No. 1 and Rs. 100/- per month for petitioner No. 2.2. The notice was issued to opposite party No. 2. It has been served upon him through his brother, He did not appear.3. I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and have gone through record.4. The finding recorded by the Trial Court that the petitioner was entitled to the maintenance was upset mainly on the ground that it was not shown that opposite party had refused or neglected to maintain the petitioner.5. The learned Sessions Judge discussed the evidence addused on behalf of petitioner that she was being treated cruelly and an attempt was also made to set her on fire her. The opposite party did not controvert either of the two ...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›