Allahabad Court August 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.
Sri Mahesh Chandra Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-24-1992
Reported in: 1993CriLJ1151
ORDERV.N. Mehrotra, J.1. This petition has been filed under Section 482, Cr.P.C, for quashing the entire proceedings along with the charge framed in Criminal Case No. 1 of 1990, State v. Mahesh Chandra pending in the Court of Special Judge, Anti Corruption (E), Dehradun.2. The facts of the case, as appear from the material on record, are that the present applicant Mahesh Chandra was posted as Chief Engineer, National Hydro-Electric Project Corporation, Tanakpur, district Nainital (U.P.) Some information was allegedly received by the C.B.I. to the effect that the petitioner was a corrupt officer and he, by corrupt and illegal means or by otherwise abusing his official position as a public servant, had acquired movable and immovable assets in his own name and in the name of his family members dependent upon him disproportionate to known source of his income. A case was registered and after investigation charge sheet was submitted by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, C.B.I. New Delhi a...
Mohd. Idris Alias Banney Mian Vs. the Special Judge (E.C. Act) I Addit ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-20-1992
Reported in: AIR1993All223
ORDER1. This writ petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India arises out of proceedings for ascertainment of vacancy and allotment of the premises No.71/177 A Sutarkhana Kanpur Nagar under Ss. 12 and 16 of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (In short the 'Act) and is directed against the order dated 9-10-1991 passed by Special Judge (E.C. Act) Addl. District Judge, Kanpur Nagar in Rent Revision No. 131 of 1985, Ram Prasad Singh v. District Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar and another setting aside the order dated 14-8-1985, whereby the V Addl. City Magistrate/Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Kanpur Nagar had held that the shop in dispute was not vacant inasmuch as Mohd. Idris alias Banne Mian had been in occupation thereof from before July 1976 and carrying on tea-stall/ Dhaba business therein.2. The summed up facts necessary to highlight the controversy between the parties and to decide the questions raised at the bar, may he set out as th...
Ashok Kumar SarIn Vs. Municipal Board, Dehradun and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-18-1992
Reported in: AIR1993All70; (1993)1UPLBEC33
ORDER1. The petitioner owns a property identified as quzer No. 6/10 Bhagwan Das Quarter, Dehra Dun. He contends that he had submitted a building plan before the Municipal Board, Dehra Dun, respondent No. 1 and that the building plan was sanctioned by resolution No. 11-376/196970 dated May 7, 1970.2. The petitioner contends that one Mahendranath objected to the sanction of the plan and filed an appeal No. 14 of 1970 in the court of the Additional District Judge (E), Dehra Dun and the latter set aside the sanction of the plan and remanded the case to the Municipal Board, Dehra Dun for examination afresh.3. In between one B.S. Saluja, respondent No. 2 filed a suit against the petitioner seeking an injunction for a relief that unauthorised construction by the petitioner be demolished and the petitioner be restrained from making other constructions. The suit was decreed. In Appeal No. 99 of 1972, allowed on June 14, 1976 the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Dehra Dun set aside the de...
Bijay Singh and Others Vs. Additional Dist. Judge, Iind, Muzaffarnagar ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-1992
Reported in: AIR1993All22
ORDER1. By means of the aforesaid writ petition, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 11-11-1987, passed by the II Additional District Judge, Muzaffarnagar (Respondent No. 1) allowing the application of the defendants-opposite parties under S. 5 of the Limitation Act for condoning the delay in filing the application under Order 9 Rule 13, CPC for setting aside the ex parte decree dated 28-5-1986. By the connected Civil Revision the revisionists have challenged the subsequent order dated 13-1-1988 by which the respondent No. 1 allowed the application under Order 9 Rule 13, CPC and set aside the ex parte decree. The counsel for the parties are agreed that the writ petition and the CivilRevision should be heard and decided together at the admission stage itself. With the consent of the parties, the aforesaid cases are being decided together at the admission stage under the rules of the Court.2. Briefly stated the facts so far as they are relevant for the purpose of the present ...
Kashi Nath Misra Vs. Vikramaditya and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-1992
Reported in: AIR1993All32; (1992)2UPLBEC1239
ORDER1. This is an application under O.6, R. 16, read with O.7, R. 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure (C.P.C.) and S. 86(1) of the Representation of People Act, 1951 (briefly, the Act) by respondent No. 1 to strike out paragraphs No. 14 and 15 of the election petition and then to dismiss the election petition under O. 7, R. 11, C.P.C., read with S. 86(1) of the Act.2. Respondent No. 1 was elected as a member of the U.P. Legislative Assembly from 227 Ballia Legislative Assembly constituency, district Ballia when that constituency had undergone poll on 15-6-1991. Next to respondent No. 1 was the petitioner who was defeated with a margin of 2008 votes. Thereafter the petitioner filed this election petition calling in question the election of respondent No. 1 on grounds of corrupt practice and reception of invalid votes and rejection of valid votes as stated in grounds A, B, C and D in para 13 of the election petition. Grounds A and B relate to the corrupt practice of booth capturing, as in...
Indian Oxygen Shramik Sangh Vs. Additional Labour Commissioner and ors ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-1992
Reported in: [1992(65)FLR961]; (1994)IILLJ425All; (1992)2UPLBEC1139
M. Katju, J.1. This writ petition and connected writ petition No. 11967 of 1991 (Indian Oxygen Shramik Sangh v. The Additional Labour Commissioner and Ors.) as well as Writ Petition No. 3010 of 1991. (IOL Limited v. State of V.P. and Ors.) are being disposed of by a common judgment.2. I have heard Shri S.N. Verma, Shri Prabhat Mukerji, and Shri Prem Chandra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri J.N. Tewari and Shri Rakesh Tewari, learned counsel for the respondents and have perused the counter and re joinder-affidavits and I am disposing of the same finally. 3. The Writ Petition No. 4206 of 1991 is directed against a show cause notice dated February 15, 1991 issued by Additional Labour Commissioner, Kanpur on the application of the respondent No. 3 Union for payment of Rs. 2,91, 178.82 as wages under the U.P. Industrial Peace (Timely Payment of Wages) Act, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as the 1978 Act.) A true copy of the said notice dated February 15, 1991 is Annexure-1 to the ...
Thomas Jaikab Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-16-1992
Reported in: (1993)ILLJ774All
S.K. Dhaon, J.1. The material averments in the memorandum of this petition are these. The petitioner is a poor citizen of this country. He is penniless, unemployed and without any shelter. Thoroughly disappointed, he sent a letter to the Prime Minister requesting that he may be given financial aid so that he may arrange for his fooding, clothing and lodging. He also informed the Prime Minister that in case help was not given there will be no alternative but to either commit some crime or commit suicide. By a letter dated February 17, 1988, the Secretariat of the Prime Minister informed the petitioner that the Prime Minister had not been allotted any fund from which financial aid, as claimed by the petitioner, could be given. The petitioner addressed a letter to the President of the country. The President's Secretariat forwarded the letter of the petitioner to the Chief Secretary of this State. The Chief Secretary informed the petitioner that his problem had been forwarded to the Distri...
Surinder Prakash Goel Vs. the State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-12-1992
Reported in: AIR1993All50
ORDERM. Katju, J.1. The petitioner was elected President of Municipal Board, Ghaizabad in February, 1989. He belongs to the Congress-I party and it is alleged that ever since he assumed office attempts have been made by members of other parties to remove him from the office of President. It is alleged that one Sri K. C. Tyagi, Member of Parliament, who belongs to the Janta Dal and had animosity against the petitioner, made repeated efforts to dislodge the petitioner from office. Hence he initiated a no-confidence motion against him, but it failed. Thereafter Sri Tyagi wrote a letter to the then Chief Minister, Sri Mulayam Singh Yadav, true copy of which is Annexure 1 to the writ petition. On the basis of this letter, the Chief Minister directed the Commissioner, Meerut Division, Meerut to hold an enquiry and the Commissioner appointed the Additional District Magistrate (City), Ghaziabad to hold an enquiry who held an enquiry and found the petitioner to be innocent. True copy of the rep...
Saraya Sugar Mills (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-12-1992
Reported in: [1993]201ITR711(All)
Om Parkash, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (Allahabad Bench, Allahabad), at the instance of the assessee, has referred the following questions to this court under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for its opinion :' 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is justified in law in holding that the rebate of central excise duty amounting to Rs. 22.85,565 and remission of cane purchase tax of Rs. 2,71,923 allowed to the assessee by the U. P. Government were taxable in the assessee's hands ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally justified in holding that the assessee had no right to agitate against the levy of interest under Sections 139 and 217 in the course of an appeal against the assessment order on other grounds as well ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in holding that interest to the extent of Rs. 40,000 was...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Mahendra Kumar Bansal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-12-1992
Reported in: [1993]200ITR335(All)
1. These are three applications made by the Revenue under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, requiring us to direct the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal to draw up a statement of the case in all the matters and refer the following common questions to this court for its opinion :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is correct in law in setting aside the order of the Commissioner of Income tax passed under Section 263 holding that it was based on mere suspicion and surmises ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is legally correct in holding that the order of the Income-tax Officer was not erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the Revenue ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is legally correct in drawing a conclusionthat the Commissioner of Income-tax has failed to establish nexus between the s...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »