Allahabad Court November 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.
Gulab Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-27-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ2247
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. The present appeal has been filed against the judgment and ordfer of the V Addl. Sessions Judge, Bulandshahr dated 10-12-1979 passed in Sessions Trial No. 274 of 1979 convicting and sentensing the appellant under Section 302, IPC to undergo imprisonment for life.2. The prosecution case is that on 27-3-1979 at about 6-30 p.m. the appellant along with one coaccused appeared in front of Ashok Kumar (Deceased) who was going to his village after appearing in the examination of XII Class from Gulaothi on bicycle and on being instigated by the said co-accused, the appellant fired the first shot from his single Barrel Gun, which hit Ashok Kumar on the right side of his chest and fired the second shot when deceased Ashok Kumar tried to run towards the appellant and another. The second shot hit Ashok Kumar (deceased) in the chest. Ashok Kumar fell down there. The incident was seen by Ashok Veer (P.W. 1) and Jagdish Prasad (P.W. 2), one Dalip (not examined), who were coming beh...
Karan Electronics Ltd. Vs. Cegat
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-27-1995
Reported in: 1996(81)ELT484(All)
M.C. Agarwal, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorari for quashing an order dated 16th October, 1995 passed by the Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, under the proviso to Section 35F rejecting the petitioner's application for waiving the conditions of the deposit of the duty levied.2. I have heard Sri A.P. Mathur, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Shishir Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents who did not desire to file any counter affidavit. The writ petition therefore, was finally heard at the admission stage.3. The petitioner is engaged in the manufacture of Television sets and is availing the facility of modvat on the inputs mainly consisting of picture tubes. It had availed modvat credit to the tune of Rs. 2,16,349.43 paise during the month of June, 1992. In November, 1992 the Assistant Collector, Central Excise issued a show cause notice to the petitioner why the said credit be n...
Assistant Commissioner of Vs. Santosh Kumar Soni
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-24-1995
Reported in: (1996)57ITD220(All.)
2. On facts, return due to be filed on the 31 st of August, 1989 was filed by the assessee on the 20th of March, 1990. Assessment was completed under Section 143(3) at an income of Rs. 84,220 as against an amount of Rs. 18,200 returned by the assessee.3. Subsequently vide a rectification order passed under Section 154 of the IT Act, 1961, the Assessing Officer holding that the insterest required to be charged under Section 234A not levied due to oversight directed that such interest be charged treating the lapse as a mistake apparent from record.4. During first appeal, the Id. Dy. CIT(A) took the view that during the course of the assessment since the Assessing Officer failed to reach any conclusion that interest by the assessee was payable under Section 234A, rectification under Section 154 of the Act, was not permissible to rope in the assessee with the liability of payment of interest under this provision. Assessee's plea was, thus, allowed.Hence the present appeal by the departmen...
Raghunath Dwivedi Vs. the Vice-chancellor, University of Allahabad and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-24-1995
Reported in: AIR1996All310; (1996)2UPLBEC1295
ORDERR.R.K. Trivedi, J. 1. In this Special appeal legality of the order dated 16:5-1995, passed by the learned Single Judge, in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 5706 of 1995 has been questioned.2. Facts, in brief, giving rise to this appeal are that on 31-1 -1995 a notice was given for holding elections to elect the office-bearers of the students Union of Allahabad University. By this notice,24-2-1995 was fixed for holding election. However, this date was subsequently changed under the order of this Court and 25-2-1995 was fixed for election. Petitioner appellant herein and respondent no. 5 were candidates for the post of Vice President in this election apart from some others. As per schedule, the election took place on25-2-1995. However, on account of some disturbances in four polling stations, repolling was directed to take place on 26-2-1995. Counting of the votes started in the evening of 26-2-1995, which was completed in the night of 26/27-2-1995. After counting was over, the Returni...
Dropa Devi Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-24-1995
Reported in: I(1996)DMC611
R.K. Singh, J.1. Heard Mr. Raj Singh, learned Counsel for the revisionist, Mr. Devendra Swarup, learned Counsel for respondent No. 2 Laxmi Narain and the learned A.G.A. for the State respondent No. 1 at length and in detail.2. Perused the impugned order passed by Vlth Addl. Sessions Judge, Aligarh in Criminal Revision No. 723 of 1982 and the judgment and order passed by lVth Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh in Suit No. 252 of 1982 Under Section 125 Cr.P.C. The learned Judicial Magistrate allowed maintenance for the applicant, Dropa Devi and her minor son at the rate of Rs. 150/- per month. The revisionist, Dropa Devi was allowed maintenance on the ground that she is unable to maintain herself. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge set aside the order of the Judicial Magistrate holding that the evidence of the petitioner lady and her father was not corroborated by the maintenance application filed in the Court Page Nos. 3 & 4 of the impugned judgment. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge has given r...
Suresh Kumar Singh and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-24-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ1527
ORDERGirdhar Malviya, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and perused the record.2. Arguments raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners is that once the Magistrate in a case under Section 307, IPC has granted bail considering the offence to be only under Section 324, IPC the Sessions Judge should not have entertained the application for cancellation of bail by treating it to be under Section 307, IPC. The facts of this case that need to be mentioned is that in the incident giving rise to this case fire arm injuries were caused to the victim. Section 307, IPC says that if by the act hurt is caused to any person the offender shall be liable either to imprisonment for life or to such punishment as mentioned in the Section earlier. Section 437, Cr. P.C. visualises that the Magistrate cannot grant bail in cases where there appear reasonable grounds for believing that he has been guilty of an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Under Section 307, IPC on...
Dr. Rakesh Kumar Singh and Others Vs. Banaras Hindu University, Varana ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-23-1995
Reported in: AIR1996All281
ORDER1. Petitioners are students of M.D./M.S. (Ayurved) in the faculty of Ayur-vedic Institute of Medical Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, hereinafter referred to as the University. They by means of this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India challenged the validity of the orders dated 23-8-1995 passed by the Controller of Examination of the University cancelling the result of the examination of the petitioners and the order of Vice-Chanceller dated 20-8-1995 whereby the Vice-Chancellor directed to conduct the entrance examination of M.D./M.S. (Ayurved) again. Petitioners pray for issuance of a writ of certiorari quashing the aforesaid orders.2. The brief facts of the case giving rise to the present petition as set out in the writ petition, are that the Institute of Medical Sciences in the University has got two faculties namely Faculty of Ayurved and Faculty of Modern Medicines. The faculty of Ayurved runs only post graduate courses namely M.D./ M.S. (Ayurve...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ram Jas Rai Askaran Das
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-23-1995
Reported in: (1996)134CTR(All)407; [1996]218ITR18(All); [1996]85TAXMAN133(All)
1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal at the instance of the Revenue, referred the following question under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the opinion of this court ;' Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in directing that two assessments should be made, one for the period prior to change in the constitution of the firm and another for the period after the change in the constitution of the firm ?'2. The facts as found by the Tribunal are that the previous year of the assessee a registered firm ended on October 24, 1974. On March 31, 1974, Smt. Naini Bai and Sri Ramanand retired from the firm and the firm was reconstituted by the remaining four partners who also admitted some minors to the benefits of the partnership. The assessee claimed before the Income-tax Officer that on retirement of Smt. Naini Bai and Sri Ramanand, the partnership was dissolved on March 31, 1974, and a new partnership came into existence ...
U.P. State Road Transport Corporation Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and o ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-21-1995
Reported in: [1995(70)FLR453]; (1997)IIILLJ763All
D.K. Seth, J.1. In this case the petitioner has challenged the award dated September 2, 1992 passed by the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal (1), U.P., Allahabad, by which the Respondent No. 3 was directed to be reinstated in service with half wages.2. The facts in brief are that the Respondent No. 3 was included in the select list from which he alongwith others used to be appointed in short term vacancy as Conductor Driver from time to time by U.P. Roadways which is a Government Department w.e.f. June 1, 1972 (hereinafter referred as U.P. State Road Transport Corporation) when the State Government incorporated the petitioner. The Respondent No. 3 and others whose names appeared in the select list were being given short term employment against short term vacancy whenever it arose. The Respondent No. 3 was appointed for a fixed period on temporary basis from May 1, 1973 to May 31, 1973 and thereafter from August 1, 1975 to August 31, 1975 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition). It appea...
Agarwal Steel Industries Vs. Commr. (A), Cus. and C. Ex.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-21-1995
Reported in: 1996(83)ELT267(All)
ORDER1. Brief case of petitioners is that it filed an appeal alongwith the stay application against an order of the Assistant Collector, Central Excise in April, 1995. It is submitted that the stay application was not decided but the appeal was heard finally in 27-7-1995, decision in which is yet to be pronounced.2. The grievance of petitioners is that without awaiting decision in appeal, recovery proceedings were initiated by respondent No. 3 and petitioners' goods were detained on 2-11-1995.3. When the petitioners made stay application alongwith memo of appeal as early as April, 1995, it was the duty of the appellate authority to decide the stay application then and there. If the stay application was not decided and the appeal was heard, it was the duty of the appellate authority to decide the appeal without delay and further it is reasonable for respondent No. 3 to await appeal decision before proceeding with the recovery.4. On the facts and circumstances of the case we direct the a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »