Allahabad Court August 1996 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.
Kanoria Chemicals and Industries Ltd. Vs. Cegat
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-22-1996
Reported in: 1997(90)ELT28(All)
ORDEROm Prakash, J.1. The petitioner filed an appeal against the impugned order passed by the Collector (Appeals) Customs & Central Excise, Allahabad Annexure 3 to the writ petition and also made an application for stay and waiver for dispensing with the pre-deposit of duty required to be made by the petitioner. The Tribunal then passed the impugned order dated 26th July, 1996 on the stay/waiver application requiring the petitioner to make deposit within four weeks from the date of the order.2. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Supreme Court in Collector of Central Excise, Hyderabad v. Vazir Sultan Tobacco Co. Ltd. [1996 (83) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.)], held that Entry 84 of List-I of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India empowers the Parliament to make a law providing for levy of duties of excise on tobacco and other goods manufactured or produced in India. The Supreme Court says that indisputably, the special excise duty is an excise duty and is r...
Ex. No. 1387-5234-m Sepoy/D.B./M.T., Chabi Nath Rai Vs. Union of India ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-21-1996
Reported in: (1997)1UPLBEC236
Sudhir Narain, J.1. This Special Appeal arises out of the order passed by learned Single Judge whereby he declined to exercise jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution on The ground that this Court has territorial jurisdiction in respect of an order passed by respondent No. 1 on a representation being made by the appellant Under Section 164 of the Army Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).2. The facts of the case are that the appellant was charged of murder of Sipoy Driver Parvin Kumar Under Section 69 of the Army Act read with 302 of Indian Penal Code by a General Court Martial. He was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and was dismissed from service. The proceedings of the Genera) Court Martial were confirmed by the confirming authority and the appellant was sent to civil Jail at Katuwa, Tehsil Hira Nagar, Jammu from where he was subsequently transferred to Central Jail Naini, Allahabad on compassionate ground on the representation made by his wife.3. The ...
Faujdar Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-20-1996
Reported in: (1997)1UPLBEC48
G.P. Mathur, J.1. This writ petition has been filed praying that a writ of mandamus be issued commanding the respondent to issue appointment order in favour of the petitioner for the post of Forester in pursuance of the selection held in March, 1994.2. The petitioner claims that respondent No. 3 invited applications from Employment Exchange for making appointment on the post of Van Daroga which is a Class III post. The selection was to be made on the basis of a written test and interview. It is averred that Virendra Kumar (Petitioner in writ petition No. 682-SS of 1996) was placed at serial No. 1 and Faujdar, (petitioner in writ petition No. 815-SS of 1995) was placed at serial No. 3 in the merit list which was prepared after the examination Petitioners contend that those who were placed lower than them in the merit list, have been given appointment orders which violates Article 14 of the Constitution. A counter affidavit has been filed in writ petition No. 582-SS of 1995 by Sub-Divisi...
India Telecomp Ltd. Vs. Collector of Customs
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-20-1996
Reported in: 1997(90)ELT29(All)
ORDERR.K. Gulati, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 12-7-1996 passed by the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, By the impugned order the Tribunal has rejected the application of the petitioner seeking dispensation of the requirement of pre-deposit under Section 129E of the Customs Act, 1962. The order of confiscation and imposition of penalty and duty etc. in respect of the goods to which the dispute pertains was made by the Collector of Customs, Customs House, Calcutta arrayed as the second respondent. Against the order of the Collector, Customs, it appears that the petitioners have preferred an appeal before customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi together with an application for dispensing the condition of pre-deposit which was rejected has already stated. It would thus be seen that the orders complained of have been passed by the authorities located outside of the territorial limits of this State and ...
Modipon Ltd. Vs. Collector of C. Excise, Meerut
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-19-1996
Reported in: 2002(144)ELT267(All)
1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, petitioner M/s. Modipon Ltd. which is a public limited company carrying on the business of manufacturing Nylon-6 filament yarn in its factory located at Modinagar, seeks an order, direction or writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing the order of the Collector of Central Excise, dated 30-12-82 (Annexure M) and the show cause notice dated 26-6-76 (Annexure B) and the proceedings emanating therefrom. 2. The short facts leading to this petition are as under: 3. Petitioners manufacture Nylon Yarn falling under Central Excise Tariff Item No. 18. It is averred that during the period commencing 1-1-68 and ending 28-2-75, petitioners utilised certain raw materials as entered and recorded by them in their records and returns. The respondents found that the petitioners did not maintain proper records and entered incorrect figures of production in the statutory records consequently a show cause notice dated 26-6-76 was issued to the peti...
Ramesh Chandra Arora and anr. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-16-1996
Reported in: 1997CriLJ1689
G.P. Mathur, J.1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed for quashing the F.I.R. and investigation of case crime No. 168 of 1992 under Section 3/7 Essential Commodities Act and Section 353, IPC of P. S. Sybhara, district Bijnor. A Division Bench of this Court had granted one month time to the learned Standing Counsel on 14-9-92. to file counter-affidavit. However, till today, nocounter-affidavit has been filed. In view of the fact, that nearly four years have elapsed, we have not granted any further lime to the Slate to file counter-affidavit.2. Shri Bagawal, Regional Food Officer, Bijnor lodged a first information report on 30-7-92 at PS Syohara alleging that he along with SDM, Senior Marketing Inspector and three Marketing Inspectors went to the godown of M/s. Ramesh Chandra Krishna Kumar at about 1.30 p.m. on 30-7-72 for the purpose of inspection. The godown was found to be closed and consequently a request was made to Shri Ramesh Chandra Arora, ...
Krishna Rao Keshav Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-14-1996
Reported in: 1997CriLJ1129
ORDERI.M. Quddusi, J.1. The present petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. has been filed with a. prayer for quashing of the proceedings in. case No.945 of 1994 pending in the Court of chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun between State v. Krishna Rao Keshav under Section 403/406/420, I.P.C and Section 63 of Copyright Act arising out of case Crime No. 6 of 1989 under the aforesaid sections of police station Muni-ki-Reti, District Tehri Garhwal.2. The brief facts giving rise to the petition are that respondent No. 2 namely. Swami Dayanand lodged a first information report against the applicant on 4-2-1989 at police station Mum-Ki-Reti district Tehri Garwal under the aforesaid sections. According to the altegations made in the first information report, an Agreement date i 10-12-1986 was executed between the complainant (respondent No. 2)and the accused (Appellant) at Shiv Nand Nagar, Muni-Ki-Reti, distriet Tehri Garhwal for production of an english film on the life and mission of Swami Sivana...
Pawan Kumar Pandey Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-14-1996
Reported in: 1997CriLJ2686
ORDERA.N. Gupta, J.1. The petitioner at present is lodged in District Jail, Lucknow in Case Crime No. 206/91 under Sections No. 147/148/149/302, IPC P.S. Aminabad, District Lucknow. The petitioner is also an accused in Case Crime No. 185/ 96 under Ss. 147/148/149/302/120-B, IPC, P.B. Kahrajganj, District Faizabad. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faizabad on 18-6-1996 has sent a production warrant, popularily known as warrant 'B' to Superintendent, District Jail, Lucknow requiring him to produce the petitioner in his Court in Case Crime No. 185 of 1996. A copy of production warrant has been sent to the C.J.M., Lucknow also. However, in pursuance of this production warrant, the petitioner has not been produced before Faizabad Court and he continues to be lodged in District Jail, Lucknow.2. The petitioner applied before C.J.M. Faizabad for bail in Case Crime No. 185 of 1996 referred to above. Bail application of the petitioner has been rejected by C.J.M., Faizabad by his impugned order dated 2...
M/S. Rajhans Khandsari Udyog and Another Vs. Canara Bank, Kiratpur and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-13-1996
Reported in: AIR1997All276; [1999]97CompCas261(All)
ORDER1. Original Suit No. 65 of 1988 was filed by Canara Bank against M/s Rajhans Khandsari Udyog and others for realisation of a sum of Rs. Nine Lakhs and odd (Rs. 10 lakhs approximately) with interest etc. and in case of default in payment for sale of the, properties mortgaged for secured the loan.2. On 3-4-1989 when the suit was called out the plaintiff was present. The defendant was absent and had not, till that date, filed any writtenstatement although by an order dated 24-3-1989 they were directed to file the written statement on 3-4-1989 in terms of a prayer made by them. The Court, accordingly, decided/to proceed under Order 8 Rule 10CPC and it decreed the suit under the said provisions.3. Subsequently, the defendants came up with an application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC for setting aside the ex parte decree. Both the parties were heard on this application and by an order dated 29-9-1995 the learned trial Court allowed the application under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC on condition that...
Dheer Singh and anr. Vs. Asst. Director of Income-tax and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-13-1996
Reported in: (1998)146CTR(All)681; [1998]230ITR343(All); [1997]90TAXMAN392(All)
1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners seek the following reliefs :'(i) to issue a writ, order or direction, restraining respondent No. 1 from taking any action with regard to the seized documents and assets.(ii) to issue a writ, order or direction, restraining respondent No. 1 from encashing various F.D.Rs. standing in the names of the petitioners and standing in the names of the other persons which were seized from the premises of the petitioner at the time of search dated January 12, 1995, by the income-tax authority.(iii) to issue a writ, order or direction, directing respondent No. 1 to return a sum of Rs. 45,500 which was withdrawn from savings bank account No. 19538 of the Punjab National Bank, Eastern Kutchery Road, Meerut, on January 16, 1995.(iv) to issue a writ, order or direction directing the respondent No. 1 to hand over the entire seized assets and documents to the assessing authority, Income-tax Officer, Ward-6, Meerut.(v) to...