Allahabad Court July 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.
Nawab Khan Vs. Vishwanath Shastri
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-31-1992
Reported in: AIR1993All104
ORDER1. This is an application by the respondent under the Representation of the People Act, 1951 (briefly the Act) that the election petition filed by the petitioner be dismissed under Section 86 of the Act for non compliance of the provisions of Section 81 of the Act. The election of the respondent to the Parliament from 50, Ghazipur Parliamentary constituency in which the poll was held on 20th May 1991, has been challenged by the petitioner who also filed his nomination to contest from the aforesaid constituency but his name did not appear in the list of contesting candidates on the ground that hisnomination was withdrawn, though according to the petitioner the fact was that he never withdrew his nomination.2. It is contended by the respondent that Section 81 of the Act is mandatory where-under an election petition may be presented only to the High Court by any candidate or any elector but the instant election petition was presented by the petitioner to the Registrar of the High Cou...
Thakuri Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-31-1992
Reported in: 1993CriLJ2860
1. This is a criminal appeal filed by Thakuri against the order of the then Sessions Judge, Shahjahanpur dated 30th November, 1978 in sessions trial No. 288 of 1978, State v. Thakuri convicting the appellant under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentencing him to imprisonment for life.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the deceased Bishanpal was the only son of the accused Thakuri. On 25th day of July, 1977, at about 7 p.m., Bishanpal's mother had upbraided his wife and when the accused Thakuri started upbraiding Bishanpal, the latter objected to it. On Bishanpal's so objecting, Thakuri started hitting him with lathi blows saying that he would not be given any share in the family property. Thakuri also asked Bishanpal to get out of the house. Bishanpal was saved by the intervention of Budhpal, Shyam Sunder and Rajendra Singh, who had reached there on hearing Bishanpal's cries. Next day Bishanpal went with his cousins Meharban and Ram Bharose to the police Station at Kalan and 2.3...
Mohd. Adil Siddiqui Vs. Jai Devi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-31-1992
Reported in: 1994ACJ883
K. Narain, J.1. An accident took place on 11th June, 1978, at about 11.00 a.m. near bus station, Sarsaul, Police Station Maharajpur, District Kanpur, in which one Kunwar Bahadur died. The deceased was travelling in truck bearing registration No. USA 1062 in which his goods were loaded for transport from Kanpur to Khaga. The truck overturned at the time of accident killing the deceased. Mohammad Rasid and Abdul Rahim, the appellants before this court, are owners of the said truck. A claim petition was brought against them by the legal representatives of the deceased, Jai Devi and others, for recovery of Rs. 1,01,000/- on account of damages, etc. It was disclosed that the truck was insured with New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and, therefore, the said insurance company was contended to be liable to pay the damages. Though various pleas were raised before the Tribunal, it will be of no purpose to go into their details as the position relating to details of accident has been worked out by Trib...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Saraya Sugar Mills (P) Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-30-1992
Reported in: (1993)110CTR(All)23; [1993]201ITR181(All)
Om Prakash, J. 1. At the instance of the Revenue, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, has referred the following three questions relating to the assessment year 1972-73 under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the opinion of this court :' 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal, was legally correct in allowing the assessee's claim of interest of Rs. 1,90,435 paid on account of late payment of cane purchase tax? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in reducing the disallowance of interest made by the Income-tax Officer on the ground that part of the bank overdraft for which such interest was paid was utilised by the persons substantially interested in the affairs of the company and by the concerns closely connected with them? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in basing its findings on the proposition that in a case ...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Chhotelal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-30-1992
Reported in: [1993]201ITR260(All)
1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (Allahabad Bench) has referred the following question for the opinion of this court under Section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Aet, 1957 : ' Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case that may be found by the High Court on a reappraisal of the evidence, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee was entitled to deduction of income-tax liabilities as claimed and the deduction made thereof by the Wealth-tax Officer was correct in view of the provisions of Section 2(a)(iii)(b) of the Wealth-tax Act ?' 2. It would not be disputed that a similar question came up for consideration before this court in CWT v. B. K. Sharma : [1977]110ITR902(All) and there this court answered such question in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. 3. Similar question was considered by the Supreme Court in Ahmed Ibrahim Sahigra Dhoraji v. CWT : [1981]129ITR314(SC) and there the Supreme Court approved the view taken by this court in the case of B. K. ...
Baij Nath and Etc. (In Jail) Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-30-1992
Reported in: 1994CriLJ398
D.K. Trivedi, J.1. Both the above mentioned criminal appeals are directed against the judgment and order dt. 22-2-79 passed by the Sessions Judge, Rae Bareli, convicting Kailash appellant Under Section 452, IPC and Section 302, IPC and sentencing him to one year's R.I. and imprisonment for life, respectively. Baij Nath appellant was convicted under Sections 452 and 323, IPC and sentenced to one year's R.I. and six months R.I., respectively. The sentences of both the appellants were directed to run concurrently. Baij Nath filed Criminal Appeal No. 191 of 1979 and Kailash appellant filed Criminal Appeal No. 206 of 1979. Both these appeals were consolidated and are being decided by this judgment.2. The prosecution case in brief is that Satya Narain deceased was brother of Baij Nath appellant and Kailash appellant is son of Baij Nath. It is said that there had been consolidation operations in the village in which lands of both the parties were recorded jointly in the names of Baij Nath app...
National Winder Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-29-1992
Reported in: 1993(64)ELT388(All)
1. Heard Shri Bharat Ji Agarwal, the learned counsel representing the petitioner and Shri Shishir Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the two notices dated 16-11-1990, issued to it under Rule 9(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 (hereinafter called the Rules), read with proviso to Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter called the Act), copies whereof are annexures 21 and 22 to the petition.3. The impugned notices are demand-cum-show cause notices and are based on the assertion that during the given period the petitioner collected from the customers Dharmada charges on the sale of fans manufactured by it but did not declare the same in the price list with the intention of evading payment of Central Excise Duty.4. Shri Bharat Ji Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner, contends that Dharmada charges collected by the petitioner cannot be included in the assessable value of the goods manufactured by the pe...
Mohammad Mahroz Iqbal and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-27-1992
Reported in: AIR1994All168
ORDERS.C. Mathur, J.1. The petitioners,seventeen in number, residing within the jurisdiction of Town Area Committee, Manikpur, district Pratapgarh, and having houses in the area and doing business, have approched this Court through the instant petition to challenge the imposition/levy of certain taxes/fees. The imposition/levy has been made through notification dated 7th Sept. 1979 issued by the District Magistrate,Pratapgarh under Section 298(2) read with Section 301(2) of the U.P. Municipalities Act, 1916 (II of 1916), for short Municipalities Act, a copy of which has been filed as Annexure-1 to the writ petition. It is alleged by the petitioners that this notification was published in the U.P. Gazette dated 13th October 1979. This notification refers to an earlier notification dated 2nd April, 1928.2. The above notification contains bye-laws on various subjects like -(1) Tahbazari (2) Licnsing of bicycles (3) Use of loud speakers (4) Regulation of house building (5) Control of s...
Mahabir Prasad Dwivedi Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-27-1992
Reported in: AIR1992All351; (1992)2UPLBEC1074
ORDERM. Katju, J.1. The petitioner was elected Chairman of Town Area, Oran, District Banda in 1988. By means of thepresent petition the petitioner has challenged the impugned order of the District Magistrate, Banda dated 10-1-1992 (Annexure-9 to the writ petition) under Section 7-A of the U.P. Town Area Act removing the petitioner from the post of Chairman, as well as the order of the State Government dated 21-1-1992 (Annexure-10) to the writ petition) confirming the aforesaid order, and also the order Of the District Magistrate dated 24-1-1992 (Annexure-1) appointing a prescribed authority.2. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been filed and 1 have heard Shri R. N. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Yatindra Singh and Standing Counsel for the respondents, and I am disposing of this writ petition finally.3. Section 7-A(l) of the U. P. Town Areas Act states as follows :--'7-A. Removal of a Chairman or a member of a committere.-- (1) The prescribed authority, or, where...
Kali Charan Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-24-1992
Reported in: 1993CriLJ1199
G.S.N. Tripathi, J.1. These two writ petitions have been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with a prayer that a writ in the nature of Habeas Corpus directing the respondents to set the petitioners at liberty, be issued.2. The petitioners have been detained under Section 3(2) of the National Security Act, 1980 (for short N.S.A.) The grounds given to the petitioners are as under:--(1) On 13-10-1991 at about 9 p.m. the petitioners and others were cutting wire of transformer and putting the same inside to a bag. The police party arrived. The said persons tried to escape. Two of them succeeded in escaping. However, the petitioners were arrested on the spot. First Information Report under Section 379/411, I.P.C. was registered at police station Makhnupur, district Firozabad (vide Annexure 2 to the writ petition). In that case the petitioners were not named.3. While the petitioners were in jail, the disputed order was served upon them. They made a representation which has b...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »