Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 1996CriLJ464
ORDERD.S. Sinha, J.1. Adhering to the well established and known practice of the Court, on Tuesday the 25th October, 1994 unlisted miscellaneous applications were taken up at 12 O'clock and disposed of by 12.25 p.m. Some applications were rejected as there was no counsel or party present to press them. In two such applications Shri Murlidhar Misra, Advocate was the counsel for the applicant.2. Soon after the Court resumed consideration of left over fresh petitions in seriatim, Shri Misra appeared in Court and, without seeking usual permission and in a very agitated manner, started making complaints about rejection of his applications.3. He was asked not to disturb the judicial proceedings that were going on and was advised that, conventionally, time for mentioning matter in Court was after lunch at 1.45 p.m. On this Shri Misra exhibited great rage and virtually started shouting and insisted that the order rejecting his applications be recalled at once otherwise, he warned :^^vkidks Hk;...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : I(1995)DMC490
N.B. Asthana, J.1. Smt. Meera was married to opposite party No. 3 in the month of February 1985. Opposite parties Nos. 1 and 2 are his father and mother. She died on 15-4-1988. it is said that the opposite parties wanted a Scooter in dowry and since their demand was not satisfied, they poisoned her and cremated the dead body without informing even the father of Smt. Meera. On 17-4-1981 report of this incident was lodged at the Police Station. A case was registered under Sections 498-A, 304-B. and 201 IPC. The matter was investigated by C.B., C.I.D. and a chargesheet submitted in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hamirpur who committed the opposite party to the Court of Session. It was registered as sessions trial No. 130 of 1989 and transferred to the Court of IVth Addl. Sessions Judge, Hamirpur who vide his order dated 23.7,1992 discharged the opposite parties under Section 227 Cr.P.C. holding that there was no sufficient evidence to connect the opposite parties with the crime. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : I(1995)DMC628
N.B. Asthana, J.1. Opposite party No. 2 Smt. Susheela Devi filed an application on 18.9.1987 under Section 125 Cr.P.C. Upon the allegations that she was married to the revisionist according to Hindu rites and customs, came to resides with the revisionist after the marriage and performed her marital obligations. About four years back he fell into wrong habits, started taking intoxicant and fell into the company of ill repute women and when she objected she was beaten. He was also complaining about the dowry given by her father, in marriage and was demanding more dowry. She was being harassed and cruelly treated. For the aforesaid reasons and in the month of October, 1984, the revisionist deprived her to her clothes and ornaments beat her and threw her out of the house. She claimed Rs. 400/- per month as maintenance allowance stating that the revisionist is earning Rs. 800/- per month.2. The revisionist had not dispute the marriage but stated that she was married about 11 years back when...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [1995]82CompCas578(All)
O.P. Jain, J.1. This is an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, for quashing the proceedings in Criminal Case No. 456 of 1990 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter called 'the Act').2. The brief facts of the case leading to the application are that the accused, Pankaj Jain, is the managing director and the accused, Sanjai Jain, is the executive director of Jain Food Products (P) Ltd. The complainant, Gyanendrapal Singh, is the partner of Rajpoot Enterprises. On December 2, 1989, the accused, Sanjai Jain, gave five cheques for a total amount of Rs. 1,60,000 to the complainant. These cheques were presented on December 16, 1989, for payment but payment was refused with the remark 'exceeded arrangement'. The complainant contacted the accused who assured the complainant that payment will be made by the bank on December 20, 1989. The cheques were again presented on December 21, 1989, but the payment was refused with the same rem...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [1996]85CompCas771(All)
O.P. Jain, J. 1. This is an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, for quashing the proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.2. The brief facts of the case leading to the application are that the accused, Deepak Agarwal, is the managing director of Sharp Carbon India (P.) Ltd. and the complainant, Shanti Swamp Jain, is a partner of Jain Paper Mart, Agar. The accused issued two cheques to the complainant-firm for a sum of Rs. 45,000 and Rs. 10,000, respectively. The cheques were sent for encashment through Union Bank of India but the cheque of Rs. 45,000 was returned by the bank with the remark 'refer to drawer'and the cheque for Rs. 10,000 was returned with the remark 'cheque is mutilated'. On receipt of the information that the cheque has been dishonoured a notice was issued by the complainant under postal order as well as by registered post and when the accused failed to make payment within a period of fifteen days, the presen...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (1995)129CTR(All)76; [1995]212ITR451(All); [1995]78TAXMAN249(All)
M.C. Agarwal, J.1. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks a mandamus directing respondent No. 1, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), Muzaffarnagar, to dispose of an application for staying the recovery of the income-tax dues for the assessment year 1991-92 and also a direction staying the recovery proceedings till the disposal of the said stay application by respondent No. 1.2. Since the petition involves a purely legal question about the power of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) to stay recovery of dues during the pendency of an appeal before him, I have heard learned counsel forthe parties and the petition is being disposed of finally without calling for a counter-affidavit.3. The petitioner's income-tax assessment for the assessment year 1991-92 has been made by the Assessing Officer, vide order dated March 31, 1994, raising a demand of Rs. 17,46,002. The petitioner filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-ta...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 1996CriLJ364
G.S.N. Tripathi, J.1. The then IIIrd Addl. Sessions Judge, Mainpuri, vide his judgment and order dated 28-7-79, convicted the accused Raghubir on a charge under Section 324, I.P.C. He acquitted him and others accused under others heads of charges in S.T. No. 94 of 77, State v. Raghubir and five Ors., of District Mainpuri.2. The prosecution case started on the basis of a written FIR, Exhibit Ka-4, lodged by Amar Singh at P. S. Kotwali, Mainpuri on 28-4-74 at 11.15 a.m. The incident is of the same date of about 9 a.m. The distance of the police station is 7 miles. It has been alleged that the complainant along with Smt. Ram Kunwar, Karan Singh, Bhim Sen and Mewa Ram was cutting sugarcane in the field of Shcovati, widow of Ram Kishan. Sewa Ram was a Sajhidar, Then all of a sudden accused Behari, Shiv Charan, Raghuvir (appellant), Jhabbu, Ram Kishore, Bidu and Lakhan arrived there. Raghuvir had a gun and others had lathies. At the behest of Behari, Raghuvir fired at Sewa Ram. Behari injure...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 1995(76)ELT536(All)
ORDERM.C. Agarwal, J.1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against an order dated 8th August, 1994 passed by the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi whereby it partly accepted the petitioner's application under Section 35F of the Central Excises and Salt Act for the waiver of the conditions of pre-deposit of the dues and allowed the petitioner to deposit Rs. 25,00,000/-.2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Chief Standing Counsel for Union of India.3. The petitioner has filed an appeal before the Tribunal against an order passed by the Collector of Central Excise, Meerut whereby a sum of Rs. 27,68,594/- was levied as excise duty and Rs. 15,00,000 was levied as penalty. It is in respect of these two amounts that the Tribunal has allowed the petitioner to deposit only Rs. 25,00,000/- in compliance with the pre-condition of depositing of the dues before the entertainment of the appeal.4. Th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [1995(70)FLR184]; (1995)IILLJ122All; (1995)1UPLBEC110
S.R. Singh, J.1. This appeal under Section 82 of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948 (in short the Act) is directed against the order dated July 4,1980 passed under Section 75 of the Act by the City Magistrate/Judge, Employees Insurance Court, Allahabad in case No. 2 of 1980, Scientific Instrument Company v. Director General, Employees State Insurance Corporation and Anr. 2. The application under Section 75 of the Act was moved by the Scientific Instrument Company Ltd. Allahabad, a public Limited Company registered under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, which, it is alleged, mainly carries on the business of selling and distributing Scientific instruments of Foreign and Indian Manufacturers. It is alleged that though its registered head office is situated at 6 T.B. Sapru Marg, Allahabad, the company has its branch sales office at Delhi, Bombay, Calcutta and Madras as well as in Allahabad itself and its employees in the above mentioned branch sales offices are mainly and p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 1995ACJ60; AIR1995All269
1. This is an appeal under S. 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act.2. Deceased Katwaru, a rikshaw puller was driving his rikshaw on 6-4-93 at about 8 a.m. when Mini Truck No. U.P./53-6935 caused accident resulting in fatal injuries to the deceased. Deceased was aged about 35 years and his dependents widow, mother and minor daughter filed application for compensation. This application was contested by appellant insurer on the ground that policy was valid till the previous day, and a fresh policy was issued at 10 a.m. subsequent to the accident. Accordingly, at that time when there was accident, there was no valid policy to make insurer liable for the payment. Tribunal on materials on record held that just compensation is Rs. 1,15,200/- which is to be paid by insurer with interest at 12% per annum from the date of presentation of the application till date of payment. This is grievance of the appellant in this appeal.3. We are satisfied that the driver of the Mini Truck was negligent on account ...
Tag this Judgment!