Allahabad Court April 1997 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.
U.P. Vidyut Mazdoor Sangh and ors. Vs. U.P. State Electricity Board an ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-11-1997
Reported in: (1998)IILLJ419All; (1997)2UPLBEC1295
ORDERS.P. Srivastava, J.1. The Executive Engineer of the Electricity Distribution Division, Bhadohi, Varanasi published a notice in the Daily Newspaper 'AAJ' dated April 27, 1992 with the information that services of all the persons who had been employed in the Electricity Distribution Division, Bhadohi on daily wage basis shall stand terminated from the afternoon of April 25, 1992 on the ground that they had been appointed on irregular basis and further that their services were no longer required. The aforesaid employees were further advised that they could get all the payments which were due under the rules from the concerned Sub-Divisional Officer or Assistant Engineer (Revenue) or the Cashier (works) on April 26, 1992 or April 27, 1992 otherwise the amount due to them will be sent to them by money order after deducting the money order charges on April 28,1992.2. It may be noticed that an office order had been issued by the Executive Engineer, Electricity Distribution Division, Bhad...
Hari Shanker Sharma and ors. Vs. Artificial Limbs Manufacturing Corpor ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-11-1997
Reported in: (2000)IIILLJ625All; (1997)2UPLBEC1086
ORDERM. Katju, J.1. This writ petition has been filed for a writ of certiorari to quash the impugned award of the Labour Court, Kanpur, dated January 10, 1996 Annexure-1 to the writ petition and for a mandamus directing the respondent No. 1 to treat the petitioners as their employees and pay them emoluments accordingly.2. I have heard Sri T. P. Singh and Sri B. N. Singh for the petitioners and Sri V. B. Upadhyaya, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1.3. The respondent No. 1 is a Government company registered under the Indian Companies Act and working under the supervision and control of the Ministry of Social Welfare, Government of India. The respondent No. 1 has set up a factory for manufacturing artificial limbs in which more than 700 workmen, supervisors and officers are working.4. The respondent No. 1 established a canteen for the use and benefit of the workmen, supervisors and officers as stated in paragraph 3 of the petition. The grievance of the petitioner is that although t...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd Vs. Jagdish Prasad Pandey and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-09-1997
Reported in: 1998ACJ404
Om Prakash, J.1. These are the cross F.A.F.O.S. - one filed by the New India Assurance Co. Ltd (hereinafter referred to as ' the insurer') and the other by the claimant against the impugned order dated 1.7.1991, made by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Allahabad awarding compensation to the claimant to the extent of Rs. 9,64,000/- as against the total claim of Rs. 52,37,000/-.2. The claimant while proceeding on his motorcycle UGB 4020 on 14.11.1989 with his security guard in connection with the election of the State legislature on the G.T. Road from Allahabad to Fatehpur, met an accident at about 4.30 p.m. near village Sikandarpur Bazaha, P.S. Kokhraj, District Allahabad with a truck DIG 4565 being driven rashly and negligently by the driver. When the motor cycle of the claimant was hit by the truck, he and his security guard both fell down and the former sustained serious injuries. The claimant was removed to Swaroop Rani Hospital, Allahabad where he remained under the treatment o...
Food Corporation of India Vs. Special Judge, Distt. and Sessions Judge ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-08-1997
Reported in: (1999)IIILLJ1075All
ORDERB.M. Lal, J. 1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is filed by the Food Corporation of India through the Distt. Manager, Food Corporation of India, Agra (for short F.C.I.) challenging the judgment passed by the Special Judge/Distt. & Sessions Judge, Aligarh, the respondent No. 1, dated March 27, 1985 awarding wages and the order dated March 28, 1987 passed by the Authority acting under the Payment of Wages Act (contained in Annexures 2 and 4 respectively) in favour of the respondent No. 3, Shashi Kant Chaturvedi and against the F.C.I. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the F.C.I. is neither factory nor industry nor establishment as specified in Section of 2(ii)(a to g) of the Payment Wages Act. Therefore, the application as framed and filed before the authorities claiming wages under the Payment of Wages Act was not maintainable and the respondents 1 to 2 have committed error of law in awarding the payment in favour of respondent No. 3. 3. B...
Mohd. Ismail Vs. Smt. Bilquees Bano
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-08-1997
Reported in: II(1998)DMC68
P.K. Jain, J.1. Heard Mr. Satish Trivedi, learned Counsel for the revisionist. None appears for opposite party-Smt. Bilquees Bano.2. This revision is directed against the judgment and order dated 21.2.1984 passed by Sri. U.C. Dhyani, Ilnd Addl. Munsif Magistrate (First Class), Bareilly allowing maintenance allowance to the opposite party Smt. Bilquees Bano at the rate of Rs. 150/- per month and at the rate of Rs. 100/- per month to her son Mohd. Shaheb Alam from May, 1982.3. The sole question raised in this revision is whether in view of the admitted facts between the parties Smt. Bilquees Bano was entitled or not to the maintenance allowance. It may be made clear at the very outset that so far as Mohd. Shaheb Alam is concerned, admittedly he was born out of the wedlock between the revisionist and opposite party Smt. Bilquees Bano. At the time of moving of the application under Section 125, Cr. P.C. he was around 6 months old. He has not been made party to the present revision nor ther...
Commissioner, Trade Tax Vs. Indian Communication Network Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-08-1997
Reported in: [2003]133STC20(All)
M.C. Agarwal, J.1. These two revision petitions by the Commissioner of Trade Tax under Section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') are directed against a common order dated November 17, 1994, passed by the Trade Tax Tribunal, Ghaziabad, whereby it held that no interest was payable on the demand of additional tax through an order under Section 22 of the Act. The matter relates to assessment years 1989-90 and 1988-89.2. I have heard Sri U.K. Pandey, learned Standing Counsel for the revisionist.3. The dealer-respondent's assessments were framed under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. Thereafter by orders under Section 22 of the Act the assessment was rectified and additional tax in terms of Section 3-E of the Act read with the concerned provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act was levied raising the rate of tax from 12 to 13.2 per cent. On the additional tax thus levied the assessing officer charged interest under Section 8(1) of the Act. The dealer's f...
Commissioner, Trade Tax Vs. Amba Prasad JaIn and Co.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-08-1997
Reported in: [2003]133STC437(All)
M.R. Agarwal, J.1. These two revision petitions by the Commissioner, Trade Tax, U.P., Lucknow under Section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act are directed against a common order dated February 13, 1995 whereby dealer's second appeal has been allowed arid it has been held that the dealer is liable to pay concessional rate of tax in respect of sales made to the U.P. State Sugar Corporation against the declaration in form III-D.2. I have heard Sri U.K. Pande, learned counsel for the Commissioner.3. Under Section 3-G, a concessional rate of sales tax is payable on purchase made by a department of the Central or State Governmentor a Corporation, undertaking, etc., or by a Government company if the dealer furnishes to the assessing authority a certificate obtained from such department, corporation undertaking or company in such form, as may be prescribed. The relevant certificate/declaration is contained in form III-D(1) under the U.P. Trade Tax Rules, 1948.4. Sub-section (2) of Section 3-G, howe...
Commissioner of Trade Tax Vs. Ramput Distillery and Chemicals Co. Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-07-1997
Reported in: [2003]133STC189(All)
M.C. Agarwal, J. 1. By this revision petition under Section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 the Commissioner of Trade Tax challenges an order dated November 15, 1994, passed by the Trade Tax Tribunal, Moradabad, in Second Appeal No. 815 of 1991 for the assessment year 1979-80 under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.2. I have heard Sri U.K. Pandey, learned counsel for the Commissioner, and Sri R.K. Agarwal, learned counsel for the respondent.3. The following question of law is stated to arise from the Tribunal's order :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, is the learned Tribunal legally justified to order the refund of Rs. 44,683 which is the Central sales tax charged by the assessee from the customers, and further to hold that the liability to pay interest, on tax levied on Central sales tax made to Canteen Stores Department will occur only from date March 25, 1983? (sic)'4. As regards the question relating to the refund of Rs. 44,683, the same is covered by the...
Commissioner, Trade Tax Vs. Rampur Distillery and Chemicals Co. Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-07-1997
Reported in: [2003]133STC172(All)
M.C. Agarwal, J.1. These two revision petitions under Section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 are directed against a common order dated November 15, 1994, passed by the Trade Tax Tribunal, Moradabad, disposing of the dealer's second appeals under the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 for the assessment year 1978-79.2. I have heard Sri U.K. Pandey, learned Standing Counsel for the revisionist, and Sri Bharat Ji Agarwal, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Rakesh Kumar Agarwal, for the respondent.3. The following question of law is stated to arise in these two revision petitions :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances stated above is learned Tribunal legally justified to accept the turnover as disclosed by the assessee merely on the ground that there is strict control of excise department and further to order the refund of Rs. 1,18,033.56 which is the Central trade tax charged by the assessee from the customers ?'4. As is evident, the question relates t...
U.P. State Cement Corporation Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-07-1997
Reported in: 1997(95)ELT169(All)
ORDER1. List has been revised. No one appears on behalf of respondents. We have, therefore, heard Sri Dilip Gupta for the petitioner only.2. By this petition, the petitioner - a Government company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 - (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') seeks quashing of the impugned notice dated 17-9-1992, Annexure-11 to the writ petition.3. In the aforesaid impugned notice, it is stated that during the course of stock taking on 25-10-1991, it was noticed that there was shortage of 402.293 MTs. of cement and 6884.793 MTs. of Clinker in the stock. Attention was drawn by the respondents that the petitioner had removed 4025.293 MTs of cement and 6884.793 MTs of clinker. Loss towards Central Excise Duty on cement was assessed at Rs. 95,852.00 at the rate of Rs. 215 P.M.T. and on the clinker it was assessed at Rs. 7,88,454.00. The petitioner was called upon by the impugned notice issued by the Collector, Central Excise, Allahabad, to show cause as to why the afores...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »