Allahabad Court January 1995 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.
Kamta Prasad and anr. Vs. Jaggan and Co. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-16-1995
Reported in: 1996ACJ57
S.R. Singh, J.1. The question of law of obvious significance and far-reaching consequence permitted to be raised and debated at the Bar, though not taken in the grounds of appeal, has been the subject-matter of conflicting decisions of various High Courts. The question is whether Section 92-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, as inserted by Amending Act No. 47 of 1982 with effect from 1.10.1982 and Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, are retrospective in operation and effect and the benefit thereof is extendible to a claim for damages in respect of death or permanent disablement which has resulted from an accident arising out of the use of motor vehicle, occurring prior to 1.10.1982?2. Before taking up the question a resume' of the facts giving rise to this appeal may be stated as thus: The accident arising out of the use of motor vehicle in the instant case occurred on 14.1.1977 on the G.T. Road in village Kazipur, P.S. Puramukti, District Allahabad. K. Tejia, the victim of th...
Kampta Prasad and anr. Vs. Jaggan and Co. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-16-1995
Reported in: II(1995)ACC199
S.R. Singh, J.1. The question of law of obvious significance and far reaching consequence permitted to be raised and debated at the bar though not taken in the grounds of appeal, has been the subject matter of conflicting decisions of various High Courts. The question is: whether Section 92-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 as inserted by Amending Act No. 47 of 1982 with effect from 1.10.1992 and Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 are retrospective in operation and effect and the benefit hereof is extendible to a claim for damages in respect of earth or permanent disablement which has resulted from an accident, arising out of the use of motor vehicle, occurring prior to 1.10.1982?2. Before taking up the question, a resume of the facts giving rise to this appeal may be stated as thus: The accident arising out of the use of motor vehicle, in the instant case, occurred on 14.1.1977 on G.T. Road in village-Kazipur, P.S. Puramukti, District Allahabad Km. Tejia, the victim of the ac...
Smt. Neelam Singh Vs. Vijaya Naram Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-13-1995
Reported in: AIR1995All214
ORDER1. This appeal by the petitioner-wife has been preferred against the judgment and decree dated 15th May, 1992 passed by the 1st Additional District Judge Ghazipur whereby he dismissed the wife's petition under Section 18 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act' and decreed the counter-claim of the husband-respondent for divorce and further granting the wife-petitioner permanent maintenance and alimony @ Rs: 500/- per month from the date of the judgment.2. I have heard Sri S.K. Varma, learned counsel for the appellant, and Sri Sankatha Rai, learned counsel for the respondent.3. The appellant had filed a petition claiming maintenance @ Rs. 1000/- per month: Her case was that she was married to Vijai Narain Singh respondent according to Hindu religious rites in the year 1977 at Village Mainpur, Pargana Karanda District Ghazipur and after the marriage she started living with the respondent in his village Manihara Pargana Barhwal District Varanasi. Later the respondent got employmen...
Kripa Shankar Sinha Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-13-1995
Reported in: AIR1995All303
ORDER1. The petitioner Prabha Shanker Sinha, since deceased, represented by legal representatives and heirs, filed the writ petition for a declaration that Section 5 of Ordinance No. 8 of 1984 which substituted new Explanation III to Section 21 of U.P. Urban Building (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 is ultra vires of the Constitution and also challenged the judgment and orders dated 5-3- 1979, and 15-9-1984 passed by the Prescribed Authority (Munsif), Ballia and the District Judge, Ballia, respectively.2. Premisess No. D/113 Mohalla Midhi, Ballia is owned by the respondent No. 4 as owner and landlord and the petitioner was a tenant. An application was filed on 27-3-1978 by the respondent No. 4 that he is a Warrant Officer in Air Force posted at Delhi and his son is studying at Ballia. He required thepremises in dispute for residence of his son and wife. The respondent had said that the accommodation in question fell in his share in the family partition. He needed th...
Prakash Timbers Pvt. Ltd. and Others, Vs. Smt. Sushma Shingla and Anot ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-13-1995
Reported in: AIR1995All320
1. The appellants who were respondents Nos. 1 and 3 to 6 before theCompany Law Board have preferred this appeal under Section 10-F of the Companies Act against an order dated 15th September, 1994, passed by the Company Law Board, Principal Bench, New Delhi, whereby it disposed of a petition preferred by Smt. Sushma Shingla and Smt. Sandhya Sharan, now respondents Nos. 1 and 2, under Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act. Their case was that Prakash Timbers Private Limited (now appellant No. 1) was incorporated as a Company in the year 1961 with an authorised capital of Rs. 5,00,000/- divided into 500 shares of Rs. 1,000/- each. The paid up capital of this Company was Rs.3,71,000/-. The said petitioners held 154 shares in the said company having a face value of Rupees 1,54,000/ -. The said company was formed by the joint family of Hirday Narain Goel, who was the grand-father of the petitioners. Various properties owned by the said joint family, including property No. 165, Civil Line...
Sukhbir Singh S/O Bachani Singh Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-13-1995
Reported in: 1995CriLJ2776
O.P. Pradhan, J.1. This criminal appeal Under Section 374(2), Cr. P. C. has been preferred against the judgment and order of Sri Jag Mohan Paliwal, the then VII Additional Sessions Judge, Unnao delivered on 30-3- 1984 in Sessions Trial No. 237 of 1984, whereby he convicted and sentenced the appellant Under Section 307, I.P.C. to undergo four years' R.I. 2. Briefly speaking the facts giving rise to this appeal are : that on 23-11-1982 there was an altercation between Ashok Kumar son of complainant Ram Khelawan and the accused Sukhbir Singh at about 6 p.m. Ashok Kumar had a betel shop and the accused had taken sweets and betels from that shop but did not pay the cost thereof, which resulted in the altercation between the two. It was, however, subsided by one Sappu Singh who was sitting nearby. On the same day at about 10 p.m., accused Sukhbir Singh went to the house of the complainant and began to shower abuses from the Galiyara. The complainant Ram Khelawan was in his room. He came out ...
Shamsher Tappi Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-12-1995
Reported in: 1995CriLJ2328
S.N. Tripathi, J. 1. Accused Shamsheralias Tappi has been convicted on a charge Under Section 376 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo 4, years R.I. vide judgment and order dated 28-6-1994 passed by IVth Addl. Sessions Judge, Agra. 2. The prosecution case started on the basis of FIR dated 16-2-1989 registered at 12.05 PM after covering a distance of 9 Kms. The incident is said to have taken place on 14-2-1989 at 12 noon. The complainant Id Mohd. P.W. 1 has alleged in the report dated 16-2-1989 that about 5-6 days earlier, he had gone to Sahadra (Agra) fair. On 15-2-1989 his wife Smt. Vakila, P.W. 2 met him in the fair and told him that 14-2-1989 his daughter Km. Sukhi was raped by accused Shamsher alias Tappi at about 12 noon. She raised an alarm, hearing which, Smt. Vakila and one Smt. Mamoonan, wife of Siddiq went towards the place. But the accused escaped. 3. On the basis of this report, a case was registered at the police station.,The blood stained smeared underwear of the girl was take...
Tulsi Devi and ors. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-12-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ940
G.S.N. Tripathi, J.1. The impugned judgment and order was passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Chamoli (Garhwal) convicting the appellants in Session Trial No. A-46 of 1974, State v. Chandra Prakash and Ors. as below: 'Accused Smt. Tulsi is convicted under Section 147, I.P.C. and is hereby sentenced to 1 (one) year's R.I. She is further convicted under Section 313, I.P.C. and is hereby sentenced to 4 (four) years' R.I.Accused Chandra Prakash alias Chandra Ram, Ganga Ram alias Gangi Ram, Alam Ram and Gopal Ram are convicted under Section 147, I.P.C. and are hereby sentenced to a fine of Rs. 250/- (two hundred fifty) each and in default of payment of fine to 3 (three) months R.I. each. They are further convicted under Section 323/149, I.P.C. and are hereby sentenced to a fine of Rs. 250/- (two hundred fifty) each and in default of payment of fine to 3 (three) months R.I. each.'2. The prosecution case started on the basis of a first information report dated 8th February, 1973, lodged by B...
Prashant Gupta and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-11-1995
Reported in: [1996]220ITR297(All)
1. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned senior standing counsel, Sri Bharatji Agarwal.2. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is directed against the impugned order dated March 28, 1989, passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Assessment), Special Range-I, Meerut. Admittedly, the petitioner has already filed revision against the impugned order before the Commissioner of Income-tax on December 12, 1994. In view of the fact that the petitioners are pursuing an alternative remedy available to them under law, we decline to go into the matter at this stage.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner then urged that the respondents may be directed to consider and dispose of the petitioners' revision expeditiously. Since there is no inordinate delay, we decline to issue such order. However, we hope and trust the respondents may decide the matter expeditiously in accordance with law.4. With the above observations, the petition is disposed of....
U.P. State Electricity Board and ors. Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Co ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-11-1995
Reported in: [1995(70)FLR1137]; (1996)IIILLJ758All
N.L. Ganguly, J. 1. This writ petition is directed against the award of the Labour Court. Gorakhpur dated October 5. 1993 in Adjudication Case No. 124 of 1988. Annexure 9 to the Writ petition. At the initial stage when the petition was filed the standing counsel had accepted notice for respondent No. 1 and Sri Shyam Narain had accepted notice for respondent No. 3. Counter affidavit and rejoinder affidavit have been exchanged between the parlies. The Writpetition is being decided finally at the admission stage with the consent of the parties. 2. The petitioner. U.P. State Electricity Board, filed this Writ petition with the allegations that the respondent No. 3 was appointed on the post of Beldar on April 16, 1974 by the Board at Gorakhpur. There is no post of condencer attendant at Gorakhpur nor he was ever appointed ascondencer attendant. The respondent No. 3 raised an industrial dispute under Section 4-A of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act. A reference was made by the state for adjud...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »