Court : Allahabad
Reported in : II(1996)DMC422
Shobha Dikshit, J.1. Petitioner has invoked the revisional/supervisory jurisdiction of this Court praying for quashing of Order dated 19.2.1996 passed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Divisional), Sitapur, in Misc. Case No. 23 of 1996 by which an application moved by her under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for setting aside the ex parte decree of divorce dated 27.3.1995 allegedly obtained by the respondent/husband, a sitting Rajya Sabha Member, by means of a fraud upon the Court has been rejected as not maintainable. Petitioner's grievance is that her sacrosanct marriage with the respondent performed in the year 1973 as per Hindu customary rites and ceremonies at Allahabad has been dissolved by the impugned decree behind her back, thereby not only stripping her of her marital status but also the dignity and honour of a married Hindu wife. Petitioner alleges that a collusive suit for decree of divorce under Hindu Marriage Act was got filed by the respondent through an imp...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Reported in : (1997)62ITD151(All.)
2. The main dispute in this appeal relates to the question whether extra-shift allowance (ESA) is allowable in respect of the concern as a whole or in respect of each plant and machinery : 3. The AO calculated ESA in respect of each machinery depending on the number of shifts worked by such machinery, relying on the decision of the Madras High Court in South India Viscose Ltd. vs. CIT (1982) 135 ITR 206 (Mad).4. The CIT(A) observed that the issue was covered by an order of the CIT(A) for the previous year according to which, ESA has to be allowed for the concern as a whole, and not in respect of each machinery separately. According to him, it was based on a judgment of the Tribunal, though particulars of the same have not been given. He directed the AO to allow the ESA on the above basis. The Department is now in appeal before us.5. Both sides have argued before us with a considerable learning and erudition. The Department has relied on the following :Kerala Financial Corporation vs. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (1997)59TTJ(All)68
ORDERV. K. SINHA, A.M. :This is an appeal filed by the Department.2. The main dispute in this appeal relates to the question whether extra-shift allowance (ESA) is allowable in respect of the concern as a whole or in respect of each plant and machinery :3. The AO calculated ESA in respect of each machinery depending on the number of shifts worked by such machinery, relying on the decision of the Madras High Court in South India Viscose Ltd. vs. CIT (1982) 135 ITR 206 .4. The CIT(A) observed that the issue was covered by an order of the CIT(A) for the previous year according to which, ESA has to be allowed for the concern as a whole, and not in respect of each machinery separately. According to him, it was based on a judgment of the Tribunal, though particulars of the same have not been given. He directed the AO to allow the ESA on the above basis. The Department is now in appeal before us.5. Both sides have argued before us with a considerable learning and erudition. The Department has...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1997All24; (1996)3UPLBEC1603
ORDERL. M. Quddusi, J.1. By means of the present writ petition the petitioner has prayed for a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 25-4-1995 passed by the District Magistrate, Allahabad refusing to grant no-objection certificate pertaining to the lay out plan submitted by the petitioner for the proposed construction to the Allahabad Development Authority on the land in question with a further prayer that a writ in the nature of mandamus be issued commanding the opposite parties that a 'no-objection certificate' is required to be obtained from the District Magistrate State Government and in alternative to the second relief commanding the District Magistrate, Allahabad to pass orders and to grant no-objection certificate to the petitioner.2. The brief facts of the case are that on 1-4-1930 the Governor of the erstwhile United Provinces executed 8 lease-deeds in favour of M/s Allahabad Bank in respect of plot Nos. 112, 113, 114, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122 and 123 measur...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1997All163
ORDER1. These two writ petitions are inter-connected with each other, based on common facts between the same parties excepting respondent No, 6 Writ Petition No. 16725 of 1995 namely (V Additional Civil Judge, Agra, who is not a necessary party. The facts giving rise to the present case arc summarised as hereinafter.2. The election of the Committee of Management of Sri Ratan Muni Jain, Inter College, Agra was alleged to be held by the petitioner on 21-6-1991, in which one Sri Moti Lal Jain was elected as Manager. The said election was recognised by the District Inspector of Schools and the signatures of the said Manager, Sri Motilal Jain, was attested by him on 22-6-1991. The respondent No. 7 claimed to have held election on 1-7-1991, in which Sri Kamal Kumar Jain, was alleged to have been elected as Manager. On the basis of a dispute raised by the respondents, a dispute under Section 16-A(7) of the U. P. Intermediate Education Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was referred to t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1997All197; [1999]96CompCas527(All)
ORDER1. The question which has come up lor consideration before this Court in the present application is whether a receiver can be appointed over the properties of the company on which the secured creditors have first charge when Ihe company is in winding up and the Official Liquidator has already taken possession of the same2. Brief facts, so far as relevant for the purpose of deciding the present application, are that M/s Sidco Leathers Limited (in liq.) was ordered to be wound up by an order dt. 16-12-1993 passed by this Court on the application of the State Bank of India. The Official Liquidator, High Court, has been appointed the Liquidator. The present applicants namely, (i) The Indusirial Credit & Investment Corporation of India; (ii) Industrial Development Bank of India and (iii) The Industrial Finance Corporation of India (the applicants in short) in pursuance of Ihe request made by the company (in liq.) had advanced to the said company a term load of Rs. 277 Lacs in consortiu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1997All147
ORDERD.P. Mohapatra, C. J.1. The fate of this casc turms on the interpretation of the provisions made in the Informalion Bulletin of University entrance Test 1995-96 issued by the Banaras Hindu University regarding eligibility qualifications for admission in three year M.C.A. of computer centre under the Banaras Hindu University Varanasi and para 16 regarding reservation/ weightage and interaction of such provisions with other provisions in the Information Bulletin.2. The Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi (B.H.U. for short) through its Registrar, Deputy Registrar and Coordinator Computer Centre filed this Special Appeal challenging the judgment of this Court in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 4355 of1996 in which the learned single Judge allowed the writ petition filed by the respondent Anil Kumar Rai and ordered that the petitioner shall be allowed admission on the basis of his result in the entrance examination for the category of candidates coming within the purview of para 16(b) of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [1999]95CompCas436(All)
A.K. Banerji, J. 1. The short question which is involved in the present winding-up petition is whether the petition is not maintainable on account of the fact that the statutory notice under Section 434(1)(a) of the Act was not served on the registered office of the company at Kanpur.2. The relevant facts in brief are that Alliance Credit and Investment Ltd. ('the petitioner' in short) had entered into a lease agreement with Khaitan Hostombe Spinels Ltd. ('the respondent-company') in respect of one set of electrical equipment with certain terms and conditions con-tained in the lease agreement. One of the conditions therein was that the respondent was required to pay in advance lease rentals every quarter at Rs. 5,32,534 plus sales tax on the agreed dates mentioned in the schedule to the agreement. The petitioner's' case is that the cheque dated August 5, 1995, issued by the respondent-company in respect of the lease rental was dishonoured by the bank. Subsequently, another cheque for a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1997All86; (1996)2UPLBEC1344
ORDER1. In this petition counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged and learned counsel for parties have agreed that this petition may be decided finally at this stage.2. Facts, in short, giving rise to this petition are that petitioner Rekha Somani passed her Intermediate Examination from Central Board of Secondary Education and then she appeared in All India Pre-Medical/Pre-Dental Test of 1995. In this test, she was declared successful and shown at serial No. 135 in order of merit on All India basis. She was admitted in Seth G. S. Medical and King Edward VII Memorial Hospital, Bombay. Petitioner also appeared in the Entrance test for M. B. B. S. Course for seeking admission in Banaras Hindu University with Roll No. 30951. She was declared successful and her name found place at serial No. 28 in the first list of the selected candidates published on 16-8-1995. She was re-quired to appear for interview before Admission Committee on 31-8-1995. On 31-8-1995, however, she could n...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1997All201
ORDER1. Petitioner as plaintiff filed Suit No. 18 of 1974 against opposite party No. 3 as defendant for the recovery of a sum of Rs.2200/-in the Court of Munsif, Shikohabad. The said suit was decreed on 5th July 1978. Execution Case No. 26 of 1978 was levied for executing the said decree objection under S. 47 of the Civil P. C. hereinafter referred to as 'the Code', filed by the defendant Judgment-debtor was registered as Misc. No. 121 of 1979. By an order dl. 14th August, 1980 passed by the learned Munsif, Shikohabad in Misc. Case No. 121 of 1979, the objection under Section 47 of the Code was allowed. The plaintiff-petitioner filed Civil Revision No. 148 of 1980. By judgment and order dt. 31 st July, 1981, passed by the II Additional District Judge, Mainpuri, the said revision was dismissed and the order dt. 14th August, 1980 was confirmed. It is against these orders the present writ petition has been moved.2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that prior to the filing o...
Tag this Judgment!