Allahabad Court October 1994 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.
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Brijesh Kumar JaIn and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-21-1994
Reported in: 1995ACJ399
S.C. Mohapatra and V.P. Goel, JJ.1. This is an appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, by the insurer. Claimant aged about 42 years was moving in his car on 9.4.1991 when a truck in respect of which risk has been covered by the appellant hit the car. This resulted in serious injuries on the body of the claimant and it is in evidence that half of his body has been paralysed. Even after long treatment in sophisticated hospital, a special bed has to be used for his rest. In this background taking into consideration the expenses which were incurred for medical treatment, the expenses that would be in all likelihood incurred, cost of special bed, cost of repair of the car and employment of an assistant throughout the life for managing daily affairs, Tribunal has awarded compensation of Rs. 8,00,000/-. Thus, the compensation awarded includes pecuniary and non-pecuniary losses.2. Mr. Vineet Saran, learned Counsel for the appellant, strenuously contended that unreasonable qua...
Indian Herbs Research and Supply Co. and ors. Vs. Deputy Commissioner ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-20-1994
Reported in: (1995)129CTR(All)416; [1995]212ITR425(All); [1995]79TAXMAN134(All)
ORDER--Order under s. 154.Ratio :Order of rectification under s. 154 is appealable under s. 246(1)(c).Facts :The assessees submitted return for the asst. yr. 1990-91, along with the aforesaid return, complete details of account, including Auditor's report, were also filed. Dy. CIT(Asst.) made an adjustment under s. 143(1)(a) and completed the assessment on an income. The assessees filed an application under s. 154 submitting therein that certain mistakes, which are apparent on the face of record, according to them were liable to be rectified. The aforesaid application under s. 154 was disposed of by an interim order. Held :The question is as to whether order passed under s. 154 is appealable within the meaning of the provisions of s. 246(1)(c). A bare reading of this provision postulates that `an order under s. 154 or s. 155 having the effect of enhancing the assessment or reducing a refund or an order refusing to allow the claim made by the assessee under either of the said sections i...
Sudhanshu Kumar Vs. Sangeeta Kumari
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-20-1994
Reported in: 1995(2)ALT(Cri)19; I(1995)DMC216
N.B. Asthana, J.1. This revision has been directed against the order, said to have been passed on 1.12.93 of Judge Family Court, Bareilly in Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 337 of 1993 Sangeeta Kumari v. Sudhanshu Kumar under Section 125(3) of Cr. P.C. issuing direction to the employer of the revisionist to deduct the maintenance allowance from the salary of the revisionist and remit it to the opposite party by cheque or draft by 1.1.94 the date fixed in the case.2. Learned Counsel for the opposite party, has put in appearance and with the consent of the Counsel for the parties the revision is being disposed of finally at the stage of admission. It appears that vide order dated 22.9.93 the revisionist was directed to pay Rs. 300/- per month for maintenance of the opposite party and Rs. 150/- per month for maintenance of their minor daughter. She thereafter filed an application for the recovery of the maintenance allowance granted to her and their minor daughter upon which the order in ...
Sardar Surjeet Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-19-1994
Reported in: AIR1995All146
ORDER1. The respondents issued a notice for auction of the right to collect tolls over Shastri Bridge at Allahabad. One of the conditions in the auction notice was that the bidder had to deposit a sum of Rs. 1,50,000/- (One lac fifty thousands), as, earnest money which was to be refunded if his bid is not accepted. The petitioner in order to participle in the said auction deposited a sum of Rs. 1,50,000.00 (One lac fifty thousands) as earnest money through a Demand Draft of the State Bank of India. 'The petitioner participated in the auction but his bid was not thehighest. The bid of the highest bidder was accepted which was communicated to him by letter dated 14-7-1983. When the petitioner's bid was not accepted he made an application on 20-8-1983 before the respondents for refund of the earnest money deposited by him in accordance with the term and condition of the auction notice. The earnest money not having been refunded to the petitioner he made another application on 5-9-1983 but...
Om Saran Vs. Sub-divisional Magistrate, Chandausi, Moradabad and Anoth ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-19-1994
Reported in: AIR1995All315
ORDERR.A. Sharma, J.1. Petitioner, who is holding a licence of petty diesel dealer in village Majhole District Moradabad, has filed this writ petition challenging the advertisement for grant of another licence published in a newspaper dt. 17-9-1994 for the same village. His grievance is that the demand of diesel is not such so as to require grant of additional licence for the sale of diesel, and if such a licence is granted it will cripple his business. In this connection the petitioner has invited attention of the Court to a letter of theGovernment of U.P. dt. 16-12-1987, laying down guide-lines for grant of petty dealers licence. One of the guide-lines laid down by the Government is that where demand is about 20-25 Killo litres per month only one petty dealer licence should be granted.2. No law confers a right on the petitioner to raise objection against grant of petty dealer licence. Unless such right is conferred on a person by any law he cannot challenger the grant of licence to a...
S.K. Trading Co. and anr. Vs. Beerbal Dass Zindal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-19-1994
Reported in: [1995]84CompCas587(All)
O.P. Jain, J.1. The above six cases are being disposed of by a common judgment because the facts and law applicable to them are almost identical.2. Six cases were instituted by the opposite party, Beerbal Dass Zindal, against applicant No. 2, Rajendra Prasad Malviya, the proprietor of S. K. Trading Company, under Sections 138 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, and Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. For purposes of mentioning the facts of the case, the complaint filed by Beerbal Dass Zindal, in Criminal Miscellaneous Case No. 894 of 1992 is treated as the leading case. According to annexure 1 to the affidavit filed in support of the application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, (hereinafter called 'the petition') Beerbal Dass is the managing director of Nath Roller Flour Mill, Muzaffarnagar. The said mill used to supply maida, sooji and flour, etc., to the accused, S. K. Trading Company, and Rajendra Prasad Malviya is the selling agent of the...
Ashok Kumar Tewari Vs. Shishu Pala and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-19-1994
Reported in: I(1995)DMC156
Virendra Saran, J.1. Ashok Kumar Tewari has filed this application against the order dated 11.4.1994 of Sri Jhamman Lal, Special Judge. Sitapur partly allowing criminal revision No. 226 of 1992. Smt. Shishu Pala on her own behalf and on behalf of minor child Naunit Kumar filed application under Section 125 Cr. P.C. The case was registered as Mis. Criminal Case No. 87 of 1992 and was decided by Sri Prahlad Singh, Munsif Magistrate, Biswan district Sitapur.2. The learned Magistrate directed Ashok Kumar Tewari to pay monthly maintenance at the rate of Rs. 500/- to Smt. Shishu Pala and Rs. 290/- to the minor child Naunit Kumar. The applicant filed Criminal Revision in the Court of Sessions. The revision was partly allowed and the order passed by the learned Magistrate was modified to this extent that the amount of maintenance was directed to be made payable from the date of the order passed by the learned Magistrate in place of the date of the application. The applicant has come up to this...
Esic Vs. Raj Kali Devi and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-18-1994
Reported in: I(1995)ACC204; [1995(70)FLR405]; (1996)ILLJ482All
S.R. Singh, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated March 13, 1980 passed by the Employees' Insurance Court, Kanpur in Suit No. 10 of 1977 : Smt. Raj Kali Devi v. Employees' State Insurance Corporation through the Regional Director, Employees, State Insurance Corporation and Anr. 2. The facts giving rise to the suit are not in dispute. Late Sri Hanuman Prasad the son of the respondent-applicant sustained employment injury on July 12, 1976 and died on the spot. The deceased was admittedly an 'insured' person within the meaning of Section 2(14) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948, in short the Act, and the respondent-applicant Smt. Raj Kali devi 'dependent' within the meaning of Section 2(6-A)(i) of the said Act being the widowed mother of the 'insured' person. Her claim for dependents' benefits under Section 52 of the Act read with the 1st Schedule was based on the ground that a divorce had taken place between her son, the 'insured' person, and his wife...
Dhandrika Rai Vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation, Ghazipur and Other ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-07-1994
Reported in: AIR1995All262
ORDER1. Present petition is directed against the judgment and orders dated 12-3-1992 and 20-11-1992 passed by Settlement Officer, Consolidation Ghazipur and Dy. Director of Consolidation Ghazipur respectively, the genesis of which is owed to the proceedings for allotment of Chak under Section 20 of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (in short the 'Act'). It would transpire that the respondent No. 4-Rishikesh was not provided with the facility of a Chak road to facilitate his access to his chak and accordingly, on publication of statement of proposal, he filed objection under Section 20 of the Act staking demand to the facility of a Chak road and upon the objection, being rejected by the Consolidation Officer, the respondent No. 4 preferred an appeal before the Settlement Officer, Consolidation under Section 21 of the Act reiterating his demand which has been summed in the appellate order in the following words:--'Appealkarta Ki Mang Hci Ki Gata Sankhiya 466 Jis Per Appealkart...
Renu Goel Vs. Krishan Lal Goel and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-07-1994
Reported in: II(1995)DMC300
S.C. Mohapatra, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act against order directing production of the child at Bareilly every week once.2. Mother, who is the appellant, was given custody of the child aged about six years at present subject to condition that she will permit grand-father to visit the child every Saturday and Sunday. Grand-father filed an application before the Family Court alleging that once he went and the child was not permitted to be with him. On this, Family Court issued notice for production of the child. It also issued notice why proceedings for contempt should not be initiated against the mother, the custodian of the child. While dropping the proceedings for contempt, pursuant to the order for production of the child, the impugned order has now been passed that the child should be produced every week once at Bareilly after giving opportunity to the mother to produce the child once again.3. This is an order in exercise of the power under the Gu...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »