Allahabad Court January 2001 Judgments

Mool Chand Vs. Trilok Chand and Others

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2001(1)AWC778

U. S. Tripathi, J.1.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Ashok Kumar, learned counsel for respondent No. 1 and perused the record.2. This writ petition has been filed for issue of a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 12.1.2001 passed by XVth Additional District Judge, Kanpur Nagar in S.C.C. Revision No. 137 of 1999.3. The respondents filed S.C.C. Suit No. 95 of 1991 against the petitioner for his ejectment and recovery of arrears of rent and damages on the ground of subletting and changing the user of the premises. The petitioner contested the suit denying the relationship of landlord and tenant between the parties. The trial court decreed the suit for ejectment as well as arrears of rent and damages. Aggrieved with the above judgment and decree, the petitioner filed S.C.C. Revision No. 137 of 1999 before District Judge, Kanpur Nagar. The revision was transferred to the court of XVth Additional District Judge, Kanpur Nagar, for di...

Shreepal Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Others

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2001(1)AWC810

A. K. Yog, J.1. The petitioner, Shreepal Singh has approached this Court by filing present petition under Article 226, Constitution of India seeking to challenge order dated April 24, 1995, passed by District Basic Education Officer, Band a (Annexure-7 to the Writ Petition), whereby the said Officer decided the representation partly in favour and partly against the petitioner claiming selection grade as Head Master of a Junior High School (owned and managed by 'Basic Education Board, U.P.') with effect from October 21, 1975, when he was given promotion as In-charge Headmaster.2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and the learned standing counsel Shri P. K. Sharma, appearing on behalf of Respondent No. 2.3. Petitioner was initially appointed on September 1, 1957 as Assistant Teacher of a Primary School. He became Headmaster of the Primary School on December 26, 1963. In due course, he was promotedas Assistant Teacher. Senior Basic High School (Junior High School) on July 5, 1969. One...

Hirdai NaraIn Misra Vs. Raj NaraIn Shukla and Another

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2001(1)AWC799

O. P. Garg, J.1. In this petition, the dispute relates to Premises No. 119/216E (new No. 119/468) Om Nagar, Darshanpurwa, Kanpur Nagar (hereinafter referred to as the 'tenanted house') of which respondent No. 1 Ram Narain Shukla is the owner-landlord. The petitioner-Hirdal Narain Misra, it is an indubitable fact, has been the tenant of a portion of ground floor of the said house for the last more than four decades. It is also an admitted fact that the petitioner-tenant was allotted on lease House No. 14-L/2 Daboli, Kanpur Nagar (hereinafter called as 'Daboli House') by the Kanpur Development Authority. The landlord moved an application on 23.4.1999 before the Rent Control and Eviction Officer/Additional City Magistrate-VI Kanpur Nagar for releasing the tenanted accommodation as a'deemed vacancy' has arisen on account of acquisition of Daboli House within the municipal limits of Kanpur nagar in a vacant state by the tenant-petitioner. After obtaining the report of the Rent Control Inspe...

Ram Piyarey Vs. State Bank of India and ors.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: (2001)2UPLBEC1575

U.K. Dhaon, J.1. Heard Sri H.G.S. Parihar appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Sri N. K. Seth, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite parties.2. The petitioner has approached this Court against the orders dated 17.6.1998 and 10.6.1998 by which the application of the petitioner for appointment on compassionate ground was rejected. The father of the petitioner was Cash Coolie in the State Bank of India at the time of his death. The petitioner submitted an application on the prescribed form for appointment on compassionate ground. The petitioner has alleged in the petition that the family possesses 16 biswas irrigated land and the family of the deceased consists of petitioner, widow of the deceased, four sisters and one brother.3. Shri H.G.S. Parihar, learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that after receiving the communication that the application has been rejected, a detailed representation was also filed, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure No. 13 to the ...

Vishwa Nath Agarwal Vs. Asstt. Cit

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: (2001)71TTJ(All)668

ORDERP.M. Parashar, J.M.The assessee has filed ITA No. 2707/All/1991 against the order of Commissioner (Appeals) dated 26-11-1991, for the assessment year 1989-90.2. The department has filed ITA No. 281/All/1992 against the order of Commissioner (Appeals) dated 26-11-1991. The department has also filed ITA No. 915/All/1992 against the order of Commissioner (Appeals) passed under section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, dated 17-12-1991, for the assessment year 1989-90.3. All the three appeals, which relate to the same assessee and in which some common issues are involved, are being decided by the common order.ITA No. 2707/All/19914. Through this appeal, the assessee has objected to the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) sustaining penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on the additions contained in ground No. 1, which is reproduced below :'1. That the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has erred in law and on facts in sustaining the penalty under section 271(1)(c)...

Rajvir Singh and Others Vs. Collector/District Magistrate, Muzaffarnag ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2001(1)AWC806

ORDERBinod Kumar Roy and D. R. Chaudhary, JJ.1. The prayer of the petitioners based on registered sale deed, mutation order and C.H.-23 issued under the Consolidation Act is to quash the order dated 20.11.1998 passed by the Collector/District Magistrate, Muzaffarnagar (respondent No. 1) in Case No. 18 of 1998 as contained in Annexure-6 registered on a miscellaneous application filed by respondent No. 3 Kali Ram as contained in Annexure-5.2. Vide order dated 22.12.1998, the following interim order was passed in this writ petition :'Until further orders, the operation of the order dated 20.11.1998 shall remain stayed. However, the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 will have a right to lodge an F.I.R. against the petitioner, if they so desire.'3. A perusal of the impugned order shows, inter alia, as follows :(i) the question of correctness of the sale deed dated 3.6.1998 executed in favour of the petitioners or the relevant Will executed by Smt. Brahmo Devi widow of Tilak Ram in favour of her four ...

Subhash Kirana Stores Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: [2002]257ITR574(All); [2002]123TAXMAN324(All)

1. This is an application for making reference under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, on the following question of law :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, any penalty under Section 271B is leviable even though the audit report had been obtained within time ?'2. The applicant was given a notice under Section 142(1) dated December 28, 1990. In compliance with it, the assessee has filed its return of income with audit report as required under Section 44AB on March 27, 1991. The Assessing Officer imposed penalty under Section 271B. This provision was amended with effect from 1st July, 1995.3. The order was upheld by the Tribunal. The applicant filed an application to refer the question of law referred to above before the Tribunal. The application has been rejected. Now the application has been filed under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act.4. We have heard Sri Satish Mandhyan, learned counsel for the applicant, and Sri Prakash Krishna, learned counsel...

Mahabir Prasad Rungata (Huf) Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad

1. In this appeal the assessee has objected to the block assessment allegedly framed under Section 158B r/w Section 158BC of the IT Act, 1961, (hereinafter called the Act) and has listed as many as 20 grounds of appeal. Ground Nos. 1 to 4 is against the validity of proceedings for block assessment and read as under : 1. Because the order dt. 23rd Dec., 1997, as passed by the learned Asstt. GIT, Circle-2, Gorakhpur, 'under Section 158BD r/w under Section 158BG' is wholly illegal, as being without jurisdiction. 2. Because in the wake search operation as has commenced on 28th Feb., 1996, under Section 132(1), notice dt. 23rd Dec., 1996, was issued by the Asstt. GIT, Circle-2, Gorakpur, under Section 158BC of the Act and irrespective of the merit of the said notice, the jurisdiction to act upon the said notice had lapsed on 28th Dec., 1997, and no proceedings on the basis of said notice could have been taken up thereafter. 3. Because the learned AO has erred in holding that para 2.2 of th...

Smt. Shakuntala Devi Vs. Executive Engineer, Electricity Transmission ...

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2001(1)AWC791; [2001(88)FLR971]; (2001)ILLJ1503All; (2001)1UPLBEC869

O. P. Garg, J.1. Two rival claimants of the retiral and other service benefits consequent upon the death of their alleged husband late Nand Kishore have filed these petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the prayer that a direction be issued to the Executive Engineer, Electricity Transmission Sub-Division, George Town, Allahabad-respondent No. 1 to release the entire amount in their favour and for offering an appointment under the U. P. Recruitment of Dependents of Government Servant (Dying-in-Harness) Rules, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules').2. Put briefly, the facts governing the two petitions are that Nand Kishore was employed as a class-IV employee in the Electricity Board and at the relevant time, was working in the office of the Executive Engineer, Electricity Sub-Division, Electricity Transmission First, 57-George Town, Allahabad. He met with an accidental death due to electric shock on 12th May, 1990. Consequent upon his death, certain payment...

Bijendra Singh Alias Pintoo (In Jail) Vs. State of U.P.

Court: Allahabad

Reported in: 2001CriLJ1749

ORDERU.S. Tripathi, J.1. The applicant Bijendra Singh alias Pintoo had moved this bail application mainly on the ground that he was arrested in this case and was produced before Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi on 8-9-2000 from where he was granted judicial remand. But the charge sheet in the case was not filed till 12-12-2000 i.e. even after lapse of 95 days and thereafter he was entitled to bail under the mandatory provisions of Section 167(2) Cr.P.C.2. Initially the bail application of the applicant was rejected by the learned Sessions Judge, Ghaziabad on merit on 3-11-2000. Thereafter, the applicant moved this bail application before this Court on 7-12-2000. During pendency of this bail application before this Court he applied for bail under the provisions of Section 167(2) before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad on 12-12-2000. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate rejected the bail application on 14-12-2000 on the ground that the applicant was remanded to judici...