Allahabad Court October 1999 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.
Bahadur Singh Mehta Vs. State of U.P. and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-12-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)AWC264; (2000)2UPLBEC1037
M. Katju and D.R. Chaudhary, JJ.1. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the impugned order dated 9.12.98 (Annexure-11 to the petition) passed by respondent No. 1 by meansof which petitioner has been given censure entry and his one annual increment has been withheld for two years,2. The petitioner has also prayed for a mandamus directing that he should be promoted to the post of Deputy Director of Education from the date his juniors were promoted.3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.4. The petitioner is a class one officer and is a member of the U. P. Provincial Education Service Group A. He was posted as District Inspector of Schools, Haridwar for the first time with effect from 24.2.90. Prior to that date, he was functioning as Principal of various Government Intermediate Colleges and it is alleged in para 3 of the petition that his work and conduct had been exemplary, and his record of service has been outstanding. It is further alleged t...
Lallan Prasad Vs. Ram Kishun Prasad and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-12-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)AWC382
G. P. Mathur, J. 1. This is a defendant's appeal against the judgment and decree dated 26.2.1998 of 1st Additional District Judge. Ballia. affirming the judgment and decree dated 24.7.1996 of Civil Judge (Jr. Div.) decreeing the plaintiffs suit for arrears of rent amounting to Rs. 14.800 and for ejectment from the house in dispute. 2. The second appeal was filed in the office on 28.5.1998 but before that the plaintiff-respondents had put in a caveat. After hearing counsel for the parties, a learned single Judge passed an order on 29.5.1998 directing that the appeal be listed for further arguments on 6.7.1998 and till that date the dispossession of the defendant-appellants was stayed. On 6.7.1998 an order was passed to summon the record of the Courts below and the stay order was extended. Subsequently, the appeal was assigned for hearing to me. Asthe plaintiff-respondents were vehemently opposing the continuance of the stay order in favour of the appellants, it was directed on 18.9.1998...
Oriental Bank of Commerce and Others Vs. S.M. Chopra
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-12-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)AWC594
P.K. Jain, J.1. This secondappeal arises out of the judgment and decree passed by the IIIrd Additional District Judge, Ghaziabad dated 3.10.98 dismissing the first appeal of the appellants and affirming the judgment and decree of the trial court in Suit NO. 309 of 1995.2. Plaintiff-respondent S.M. Chopra filed the aforesaid suit for the following substantial reliefs :(a) That by the decree of this Hon'ble Court it may be declared that the resignation of the plaintiff dated 11.3.92 being obtained by the defendants by force, under coercion and without the free consent and will of the plaintiff is illegal and voidable and is not binding on the plaintiff, and the plaintiff is continuing in services of the defendants without any effect of the said resignation letter. (b) That by the decree of mandatory injunction, the defendants be directed to deposit all the dues of the plaintiff including the arrears of salary, emoluments and allowances as well as with the amount relating to the encashmen...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. M.P. Sugar Mills Co. Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-12-1999
Reported in: [2000]246ITR60(All)
M.C. Agarwal, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad, under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, has referred the following question for the opinion of this court :'Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that the relief under Section 80J of the Act. is allowable for the relevant year without any reduction with reference to the actual period of working of the factory during the relevant year ?'2. The aforesaid question is stated to arise out of the Tribunal's order passed in ITA No. 1434(All) of 1976-77 for the assessment year 1971-72.3. We have heard Sri A. N. Mahajan, learned standing counsel for the Commissioner, and Sri. R. S, Agarwal, learned counsel for the respondent.4. From the statement of the case We find that the Commissioner through his application under Section 256(1) of the Act had required the Tribunal to refer the following three questions for the opinion of this court :'1. Whether the Tribunal was correct in directing that the bor...
Pradeep Phosphates Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Trade Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-12-1999
Reported in: [2000]119STC477(All)
P.K. Jain, J.1. The revisionist is a Central Government undertaking. In the assessment year 1992-93 in the month of August, 1992, the return along with admitted amount of tax were not deposited by September 30, 1992. The case of the revisionist is that the draft from the head office was received in his office on October 3, 1992. October 4, 1992 to October 6, 1992 were holidays. The amount along with monthly return was deposited in the office of the assessing authority on October 7, 1992. The assessing authority initiated penalty proceedings under Section 15-A(1)(a) of the Sales Tax Act and imposed penalty of Rs. 7,25,115 by order dated October 8, 1992. The appeals preferred by the revisionist before the Deputy Commissioner, Appeals, Meerut, and the Tribunal were dismissed.2. Aggrieved by the judgment and order, the applicant has filed the present revision.3. Shri Piyush Agrawal, learned counsel for the revisionist and Shri B.K. Pandey, learned Standing Counsel has been heard. Shri Piyu...
Kamala Nehru Memorial Hospital, Allahabad Vs. Presiding Officer, Labou ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-11-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)AWC171
ORDERSudhir Narain, J. 1. This writ petition is directed against the order of Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Allahabad, respondent No. 1, deciding three issues as preliminary issues. 2. Briefly stated the facts are that the petitioner initiated domestic enquiry against respondent No. 2. He filed Suit No. 835 of 1995 before VII Additional Civil Judge. West, Allahabad, challenging the validity of constitution of Enquiry Committee.He also prayed restraining the petitioner from his smooth working. The trial court did not grant any injunction staying the enquiry proceedings. He filed another application for injunction and the Court passed an order that in pursuance of the enquiry report, no further action shall be taken against him. The petitioner filed appeals against the order passed by the trial court before the District Judge. Respondent No. 2 also filed appeals before the District Judge. The appeals filed by the petitioner were allowed and the appeals filed by respondent No. 2 were r...
Sitaram Alias Baba Vs. Deputy Director Consolidation Varanasi and Othe ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-11-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)AWC177
Sudhir Narain, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 22.4.1999 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, respondent No. 1, whereby he recalled the order dated 26.9.1998.2. The dispute relates regarding the allotment of chak and its formation. The parties raised objection in regard to the allotment of chak. The Settlement Officer, Consolidation passed an order on 8.11.1996 whereby he made certain amendments in the chak. The Appeal No. 3841 filed by Mangaru, respondent No. 3. was dismissed but his Appeal No. 187/1547 was partly allowed. The petitioner filed revisions against the order of the Settlement Officer, Consolidation. Respondent No. 3 also filed revision against the orders passed by the Settlement Officer, Consolidation, dismissing his appeal. The Deputy Director of Consolidation allowed the revision filed by the petitioner and dismissed the revision filed by respondent No. 3 by his order dated 26.9.1998. He directed to make certain amendments in the c...
K.K. Misra, Advocate, High Court Vs. Vth Addl. District Judge, Allahab ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-11-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)AWC189
J.C. Gupta, J.1. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 27.9.94 passed by Vth Addl. District Judge. Allahabad-respondent No. 1 whereby revisional court has remanded the case to the Rent Control and Eviction Officer for a fresh decision in accordance with law.2. The dispute relates to a portion of first floor of house No. 91Sadar Bazar, Allahabad. The said portion was in occupation of erstwhile tenant Shri S. K. Jha. Application for allotment was made by the petitioner alleging that the disputed portion had fallen vacant on account of transfer of Shri S. K. Jha to Moradabad and of the same being left in unauthorized occupation of Shri G. N. Jha. After having the report from the Rent Control Inspector and on consideration of evidence, the Rent Control and Eviction Officer by the order dated 12.10,87 declared vacancy. It further appears that after declaration of vacancy, the landlord-respondent No. 3 made an application for the release of the dispute...
Smt. Irfana Begum Vs. Raj Kumar Agarwal and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-11-1999
Reported in: 2000(1)AWC242
R.R.K. Trivedi, J. 1. This appeal is from the order dated 1st May. 1998, passed in Misc. Case No. 28/74 of1995 by the learned VIIth ACMM, Kanpur Nagar, by which the application for setting aside the decree dated 17.1.1995 in Original Suit No. 1247 of 1992 has been rejected.2. The facts in short giving rise to this appeal are that plaintiff-respondent No. 1. Raj Kumar Agarwal filed Original Suit No. 1247 of 1992 for a decree of mandatory injunction for specific performance (by defendant-appellant and defendant-respondent Nos. 2 to 5) of agreement dated 25.1.1988 in respect of premises No. 7/209 measuring 1668 sq. yards situated in Swaroop Nagar, Kanpur Nagar and further to execute the sale deed in favour of plaintiff-respondent No. 1 and deliver possession of the premises in dispute to him and in case of their failure, the Court may execute the sale deed in his favour. It was also prayed that a declaration may be made to the effect that any sale deed in respect of premises in dispute ex...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Noor Handicrafts
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-11-1999
Reported in: [2000]245ITR309(All); [2001]118TAXMAN75(All)
1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'B', Delhi, has, in compliance with the direction of this court, under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, referred the following question stated to be of law and to arise out of the Tribunal's order dated May 1, 1980, passed in I. T. A. No. 1024(Delhi) of 1979, for the assessment year 1977-78, for the opinion of this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in allowing weighted deduction under Section 35B on the expenditure incurred on salaries, stationery, rent and postage ?'2. We have heard Sri Shambhu Chopra, learned counsel for the Commissiorier, and Sri P. K. Misra, advocate, holding brief for Sri Bharat fi Agarwal, learned counsel for the respondent.3. The assessee is an exporter of brassware and claimed export markets development allowance under Section 35B of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in respect of the expenditure to be detailed hereafter. The expenditure in re...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »