Allahabad Court September 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.
State of U.P. and Others Vs. Suresh Chandra
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-22-1994
Reported in: 1995ACJ245; AIR1995All253
ORDERS.C. Mohapatra, J.1. This is an appeal under S. 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Aggrieved by the award directing payment of compensation of Rs. 1,45,000/- to the injured respondent, undoubtedly on 8-5-1989 respondent was crushed by the road roller belonging to the appellant, as a result of which he lost his right leg which had to be amputated. Alleging negligence of driver ofthe roller, respondent made a claim of Rs. 5,30,000/- as compensation. Tribunal after consideration of materials on record has awarded Rs. 1,45,000/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of the application till date of realisation. Aggrieved by the same this appeal has been filed.2. At the time of admission of this appeal respondent entered caveat. Both the parties are in possession of copies of relevant documents and accordingly, with their consent the appeal is finally heard and disposed of by this judgment.3. Mr. Bisaria, learned Standing Counsel made a submission that toad roller not bei...
State of U.P. Vs. Dila and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-21-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ1143
V.N. Mehrotra, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the State of U.P. against the judgment dated 9-6-1980 by Shri B. B. Agarwal, the then Sessions Judge, Saharanpur, acquitting all the accused persons of the offences under Section 302/149, 323/149, 147 and 148 I.P.C.2. The prosecution case in brief was that deceased Om Pal had purchased some land from one Smt. Mukandi widow of Chhota of village Krishni for Rs. 20,000/-. Accused Dila is not the son of Chhota but he had come to him alongwith Smt. Mukandi. Om Pal was in possession over the land since the time of purchase. Accused Dila disputed the possession of Om Pal. On 27-9-1979 there was an altercation between Om Pal and Dila over the harvesting of the crop standing on the land. Dila at that time had threatened Om Pal.3. It is alleged that at about 12.30 A.M. in the night of 28/29-9-1979 all the five accused persons accompanied by four others came to the house of P. W. Kishan Singh. Dila enquired about the whereabouts of Om Pal and when...
Straw Board Manufacturing Co. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-21-1994
Reported in: 1995(75)ELT476(All)
ORDER1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. The writ petition initially filed on 5-2-1991 was for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the respondents to refund the excise duty paid by the petitioner under protest during the period from 3-7-1971 to 28-2-1986. It also claimed for interest at the rate of 18% on the amount of duty liable to be refunded. It is not disputed that the petitioner has applied for refund of excise duty pursuant to the order dated 17-10-1989 of Custom Excise Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi passed in Appeal No. E/1238/85-C. The application for refund was rejected vide order dated 9-11-1990, a copy of which has been annexed to the supplementary affidavit dated 19-4-1991. The said order was communicated to the petitioner vide covering letter dated 7-2-1991 and it was in fact received by them on 11-2-1991. This order has been brought on record by means of an application dated Nil filed on 29-4-1991 along with supplementary affidavit dated 19-4-199...
Baidyanath Ayurved Bhawan Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-21-1994
Reported in: 1995(75)ELT472(All)
ORDERA.P. Mishra, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the Union of India.2. The petitioner seeks quashing of notice dated 28th July, 1994 (Annexure 1 to the writ petition) and further directing the said respondent not to proceed further or take any action in pursuance of the same.3. The impugned show cause notice is issued under Section 11A of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 read with the provisions of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, by virtue of which the petitioner has been asked to pay excise duty amounting to Rs. 53,79,299/- under the Central Excise Act for the period July, 1989 to February, 1994.4. The petitioner has challenged the said notice on the grounds of it being barred by time and also being without jurisdiction. According to the case of the respondent as spelt out from the impugned notice on the basis of information, an officer of the Central Excise visited the premises of the petitioner on 18th, 24th and 25th January...
Vijay Kumar Sharma Vs. Appropriate Authority
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-20-1994
Reported in: (1996)135CTR(All)367; [1996]220ITR509(All)
M.C. Agarwal, J.1. In this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged and as agreed by the parties, the writ petition was finally heard and is disposed of by this order at the admission stage itself.2. The petitioner is a lessee of residential plot No, 133 in Block 'A', Sector 15A, at NOIDA, District Ghaziabad. The lessor is the New Okhla Industrial Development Authority and the area of the plot is about 465 square meters. The petitioner entered into an agreement to sell the aforesaid plot to one Devesh Behari Saxena for a consideration of Rs. 20,21,000, vide agreement to sell dated January 22,1993. In accordance with Section 269UC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'), a statement in Form No. 37-I was filed by the petitioner and the prospective buyer. The appropriate authority, vide order dated March 24, 1993, made an order under Section 269UD of the Act for the purchase by the Central Government of the said plot of land. It i...
Munna (In Jail) Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-20-1994
Reported in: 1995CriLJ1136
R.B. Mehrotra, J. 1. Munna, the petitioner in the present case, has filed the habeas corpus petition in this Court challenging the order of the District Magistrate, Kanpur City, dated 15th of February, 1994 exercising powers under Section 3(3) of the National Security Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and directing that the petitioner will be detained under Section 3(2) of the Act in Kanpur jail in ordinary class and has prayed for a relief of declaring the aforesaid detention order and the order approving/confirming the detention of the petitioner by the advisory Board/Government, dated 7-4-1994 to be illegal and also for a writ of habeas corpus calling upon the respondents to present the petitioner in Court and set him at liberty.2. The grounds of detention were also served on the petitioner along with the order of detention. 3. The grounds of detention served on the petitioner along with the detention order recite :On 1-2-94 at about 7.45 A.M. Km. Rizwana aged 14 Years was go...
Camphor and Allied Products Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-20-1994
Reported in: 1995(75)ELT733(All)
ORDER1. The petitioner filed the classification list No. 1/86 effective from 1-3-1986 in respect of their products Thymol Crystal I.P. Terpinhydrate I.P. Grade and Terpinecl B.P.C. seeking their classification under Chapter subheading No. 3003.30 claiming Nil rate of duty. The said classification was approved provisionally under Rule 9-B of Central Excise Rules, 1944 on 10-6-1986. Later on the petitioner filed another classification list No. 1/87 effective from 23-3-1987 in respect of their above products classifying them under the same head. This list was also provisionally approved under Rule 9-B of Central Excise Rules, 1944 on 30-3-1987.2. By order dated 27-4-1991 the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Bareilly has ordered final approval of classification of Thymol Crystal I.P. Terpinhydrate I.P. Grade and Terpineol B.P.C. and amended the provisional classification to the extent indicated in the impugned order dated 27-4-1991. It is evident that Chapter heading numbers as also th...
Ramala Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd. Vs. Payment of Wages Authority-cum-con ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-19-1994
Reported in: [1995(70)FLR58]; (1995)ILLJ1067All
P.K. Mukherjee, J.1. This matter is appearing for formal admission, but, since no counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents pursuant to the directions passed by Hon'ble J.N. Dubey, J. on May 17, 1988, this miscellaneous writ petition is taken for hearing.2. The facts of the instant miscellaneous writ petition are as follows:-3. The petitioner is a registered Co-operative Sugar Mill under the provisions of U.P. Co-operative Societies Act. The respondent No. 3, Payment of Wages Inspector, District Meerut who has the jurisdiction to deal with the petitioner's Mill, inasmuch as, the jurisdiction of respondent No. 3 under Section 14(1) extends to the district of Meerut only, filed an application under Section 15(3) of the Payment of Wages Act in respect of 157 labourers of the petitioner through the Mill, which was registered as Payment of Wages Case No. 12 of 1985.4. On perusal of the aforesaid application, it reveals that the claim filed by the respondent No. 3 was nei...
U.P. State Electricity Board and ors. Vs. Presiding Officer, Industria ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-19-1994
Reported in: (1995)IILLJ95All
P.K. Mukherjee, J.1. The present writ petition is listed for admission today. However, with the consent of learned counsel for both the parties, it is being disposed of finally.2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that a reference, under Section 4-K of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') was made by State of U.P. for adjudication by Industrial Tribunal. The reference was made in respect of two employees, namely, Sri Ishtiaq Hussain, Accountant and Sri R.C. Saxena, Clerk-Grade-A. They were employees of ex-licensee company, namely Electricity Supply Company Limited, Shahjahanpur, which was taken over by U.P. State Electricity Board with effect from December 1, 1975. The aforesaid employees opted the terms and conditions of service of the erstwhile Company and did not opt those of the Board. They retired from service in 1983. After retirement, these workmen claimed that their dependents are entitled to be absorbed in U.P. State Electricity Board as p...
Trilok Nath Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-19-1994
Reported in: I(1995)DMC579
N.B. Asthana, J.1. This revision has been directed against the order dated 21.4.92 passed by the then IIIrd Additional C.J.M., Kanpur Dehatin case No. 94 of 1991 under Section 125 Cr.P.C. granting interim alimony to the opposite party at the rate of Rs. 175/- per month w.e.f. 17.9.91. Kono appeared to press this revision. I have perused the order passed by the Trial Court as well as the Court of revision.2. It has been stated that the interim alimony could not have been granted by the Trial Court. In view of the law laid down in Smt. Savitri v. Govind Singh Rawat, 1986 Cr.L.J. 41 SC, the Trial Court was entitled to grant pendents life the maintenance allowance. In the aforesaid ruling the Supreme Court relying upon ATR 1975 Supreme Court 93, Rhagwan Dutt v. Smt. Kamla Devi held that 'Having regard to the nature of the jurisdiction exercised by a Magistrate under Section 125, the said provision should be interpreted as conferring power by necessary implication on the Magistrate to pass ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »