Allahabad Court February 1993 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.
Harban Sahai Alias Harbans Sahai and ors. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-16-1993
Reported in: 1994CriLJ23
Palok Basu, J.1. This appeal has been filed by Harban Sahai, Sarwan Sahai (both brothers) Virendra and Vimlesh, who is nephew (Bhanja) of appellants No. 1 and 2, against their conviction under Section 302/ 34, IPC and sentence of imprisonment for life awarded to them by the VI Additional Sessions Judge, Shahajanpur on 16-2-1979 in Sessions Trial No. 418 of 1978.2. The charge against the appellants was that on 6-1-1978 at about 4.30 p.m. they in furtherence of their common intention caused the murder of one Jagdish Prasad in village Kamalnainpur, falling within police station Kanth, district Shahjahanpur.3. The prosecution case as disclosed by Shashi Bhushan, informant, who is said to have lodged a first information report about the incident on 6-1-1978 at 6-30 p.m. is that he and Jagdish Prasad were returning from Shahajahanpur and when they reached the sugarcane field of one Maiku at about 4.30 p.m., the appellants came out of that field, from the sugarcane plants. The appellants Harb...
Co-operative Cane Development Union Ltd. Vs. Nahar Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-15-1993
Reported in: [1995(71)FLR670]; (1999)IIILLJ305All
B.L. Yadav, J.1. Whether the respondent No. 1 in these nine analogous writ petitions (hereinafter referred to as first, second and third petitions and so on), was entitled to payment of gratuity under Section 4 of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (compendiously the Act) and under similar other law, or whether the respondent No. 1 in all these petitions were seasonal employees and not entitled to be paid gratuity as their services were governed by the U.P. Cane Co-operative Service Regulations, 1975 (for short the Regulations) are the short questions for determination. As these petitions involve similar questions, consequently it is convenient to dispose them of by a common judgment. Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 23042 of 1990 shall, however, be the leading case.2. Factual matrix of the case is that the petitioners in these petitions are the Cane Growers Union, the employer, whereas respondent No. 1 in all these petitions are the workmen. Respondent No. 1 in the Writ Petition No. 23042...
U.P.S.R.T.C. Vs. Sushila Devi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-15-1993
Reported in: 1(1994)ACC25
A.P. Singh, J.1. The present First Appeal from Order has been filed against the judgment and order dated 16.5.1984 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal Additional District & Sessions Judge, Azamgarh in Motor Accidents Claims Case No. 90 of 1982. The facts of the case are that one Deepak Kumar owner of Sweet Meat Shop was going on a Rickshaw along with one Tilak Dhari who was seated with him and one Algoo was following him on a cycle. It is alleged in the claim petition filed by respondent Nos. 1 to 5, who are the dependents of deceased Deepak Kumar, that in the night of 23/24 June, 1982 at about 12.30 a.m. the deceased was going on Rickshaw toward the Railway Station and that when he reached near the Civil Court Crossing adjacent to Church, the Rickshaw was hit from behind at the right side by Bus No. U.P.C. 5690 which was going from Allahabad to Deoria at a very high speed and was being driven rashly and negligently. As a result of said accident, deceased Deepak Kumar receive...
Puspa Devi Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-11-1993
Reported in: (1993)112CTR(All)285; [1993]203ITR42(All)
M.C. Agarwal, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal 'A' Bench,Allahabad, has, under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), referred the following question for theopinion of this court :'Whether, on a true construction of Section 64(1)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in taking the view that the income arising to the minor sons of the assessee as a resultof their admission to the benefits of partnership is liable to be included and assessed in the hands of the assessee notwithstanding that the assessee had no income of her own from any source whatsoever to which the income earned by the minor could be included ?'2. The relevant facts are that one Sri Narendra Kumar was a partner in a firm styled as Messrs. Malik Chemical Works, Bulanala, Varanasi. The said Sri Narendra Kumar died leaving behind him the present assessee as his widow and five minor sons, namely, Ashok Kumar, Rakesh Kumar, Rajesh Kuma...
Shambhu Kumar Tripathi Vs. the Assistant Registrar, Firms, Societies a ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-10-1993
Reported in: AIR1994All209
ORDER1. Petition in hand has been filed impugning the order dated 3rd of December 1992 passed by the Asstt. Registrar, Firms, Societies and Chits, Allahabad directing renewal of the registration certificate of the society known as Acharya Kripa Shanker Ramanugreh Tripathi Sansthan, village Ibrahimpur, post Lalgopal Ganj, Allahabad on an application dated 22-6-1992 moved by respondent Sri Harihar Prasad Tripathi.2. Facts giving rise to the present petition lie in a narrow compass and they are encapsulated as below: Acharya Kripa Shanker Ramanugreh Tripathi Sansthan situate at village Ibrahimpur, post Lalgopalganj, district Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as the 'society') was registered under the provisions of The Societies Registration Act, 1860 (in short the 'Act') originally on 5-12-1981. The following were the office-bearers of the Society at the time of its registration on 5-12-1981:(i) Harihar Prasad Tripathi, Advocate, Adhyaksh (ii) Maya Shanker Tripathi, Prabandh Sanchalak ...
Dadan Singh Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-10-1993
Reported in: 1993CriLJ1785
I.S. Mathur, J.1. In these bail applications, similar questions of law have been raised and these are accordingly being disposed of by this common order.2. The submission made on behalf of the learned counsel, for the applicants are that Sections 42 and 50 of the Narcotric Drugs and Pshychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter to be referred as N.D.P.S. Act) are mandatory and their violation must lead to the presumption of prejudice to the accused. It is further submitted by the learned counsel that if these provisions are violated, the prosecution and trial will itself be vitiated, and, as such, the accused will be entitled to bail. As a corollary to this proposition, it is submitted that, in considering the grant of bail for violation of these provisions, the alleged fact that large quantity of the narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances was recovered, will be quite irrelevant consideration.3. On the other hand, learned Additional Government Advocate submitted that these provisi...
Vinayak Prasad and ors. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax and o ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-09-1993
Reported in: (1993)111CTR(All)278
A. P. MISRA, J. :Heard the learned counsel for the parties.2. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the present petition is being disposed of finally at the stage of admission as agreed to by the counsel for the parties.3. The petitioner seeks mandamus directing the respondent No. 4 not to recover the amount of tax and penalty alongwith interest for the asst. yr. 1989-90 and further directing Tribunal to dispose of his appeal pending before the said authority.4. The petitioner being aggrieved by the assessment order, filed an appeal before CIT(A) but the same was also dismissed by means of an order (Annexure-7 to the writ petition). The petitioner, thereafter filed second appeal before the Tribunal on 9th March, 1992. He also moved a stay application on 24th November, 1992 which is Annexure-9 to the writ petition. As per the averments made in the petition, the said appeal and stay application have not yet been disposed of. In the meanwhile a penalty was also imposed under...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. M.S.J. (Engg. and Co.)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-08-1993
Reported in: [1993]203ITR1(All)
Om Prakash, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (Delhi Bench 'A'), has referred the following questions 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 Tribunal was correct in holding that the Income-tax Officer had exercised his discretion in not charging interest under Section 217(1A) in the original assessment ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that interest under Section 217(1A) of theIncome-tax Act, 1961, could not be charged by taking recourse to Section 154 ?' 2. The relevant assessment year is 1972-73. The assessee, a partnership firm, carried on the business of manufacture and sale of earth digging equipment and it also derived income from Government contracts. During the financial year 1971-72, relevant to the assessment year 1972-73, the assessee was required to pay advance tax of Rs. 3...
Awadesh Rai Vs. Regional Manager, U.P.S.R.T. Corporation and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-05-1993
Reported in: (1993)IILLJ460All
R.B. Mehrotra, J.1. Awadhesh Rai, the petitioner, was appointed on the post of conductor on August 12, 1980 in U.P. State Road Transport Corporation of Azamgarh Depot. It is alleged that on September 10, 1987, when the petitioner was taking the Bus No. U.H.S. 357 on Renukoot-Kota Route, at 10.10 P.M. in the night, a checking was conducted by Traffic Supdt., Sri Mohammad Jamil Khan and two Traffic Inspectors, namely, Sri K.B. Lal and Sri Iqbal Narain. The bus was signalled to stop by the checking staff. The bus was not totally stopped and only Sri Iqbal Narain, the Traffic Inspector managed to enter the bus. The bus was not stopped even on his asking. Consequently the remaining persons of the checking staff followed the bus by the Staff Car and thereafter the bus was made to stop forcibly and after checking it was found that all fifty passengers travelling in the bus were with-out tickets whereas the amount of the fare was received by the petitioner. On the basis of the aforesaid report...
Sudhir Kumar Gupta and ors. Vs. Director of Investigation, Income-tax ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-04-1993
Reported in: (1993)114CTR(All)340; [1993]202ITR829(All)
A.P. Misra, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. In view of the exchange of affidavits both the writ petitions are being disposed of by means of a common order in accordance with the rules of the court. Writ Petition No. 993 is by the persons who are said to be travelling along with the petitioners, Mahesh Kumar and others of Writ Petition No. 994 of 1992, against whom the warrant of authorisation was issued.2. The petitioners in Writ Petition No. 993 of 1992 have sought for quashing the entire search and seizure operation carried on by the officers of the Income-tax Department, and further directing the respondents to release all the cash seized from the vehicle on September 2, 1992, as mentioned in the panchnama (annexure II to the petition) and also not to proceed further against the petitioners under Section 132 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. In Writ Petition No. 994 of 1992, the petitioners have sought for quashing the entire search and seizure dated September 2, 1992, as th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »