Allahabad Court December 2002 Judgments
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Brij Pal Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-2002
Reported in: I(2003)ACC629; 2003ACJ1274; 2003(1)AWC556
G.P. Mathur, A.C.J.1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act has been preferred against the judgment and award dated 6.1.2002 of Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Additional Judge, Court No. 19, Meerut, by which the claim petition filed by Brij Pal Singh (respondent No. 1) was allowed and the appellant-insurance company was directed to pay Rs. 1,28,400 as compensation along with interest at the rate of 9 per cent from the date of filing of the claim petition till the date of payment.2. The appeal was heard for admission on 15.4.2002 when notice was issued to the respondents and a direction was issued to summon the trial court record. In response to the notice Sri V. P. Singh Charak and Sri D. R. Chowdhary put in appearance on behalf of Pramod Kumar (respondent No. 2). Thereafter with the consent of the parties, the appeal was finally heard at the admission stage.3. Brij Pal Singh, respondent No. 1, filed a claim petition on 18.2.1998 under Sections 140 and 166 of the Mot...
Tag this Judgment!Sandeep Verma and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)AWC474; (2003)IIILLJ164All; (2003)1UPLBEC364
Ashok Bhushan, J.1. Heard Dr. R.G. Padia, senior advocate with Sri Prakash Padia, Sri V.K. Shukla, Sri Ashish Mohan for the petitioners, Sri A.K. Mishra and Sri Y.K. Saxena for the respondents. Pleadings on behalf of both the parties are complete and as agreed by counsel for both the parties, these writ petitions are being finally decided.2. All these writ petitions are based on common facts and questions of law, hence they are being decided together by this common judgment, Writ Petition No. 370 of 2000 is being treated as leading case in which elaborate arguments have been made by both the parties. Since facts and grounds raised in all the writ petitions are common, it is sufficient to refer to the facts of the Writ Petition No. 370 of 2000 for deciding the controversy between the parties.3. Brief facts which emerge from the pleadings of the parties in Writ Petition No. 370 of 2000 are :By this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for a writ of mandamus commanding the responden...
Tag this Judgment!Ashok Kumar Rana Vs. Principal, M.M.M. Engineering College and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)AWC585
Ashok Bhushan, J. 1. Heard Sri Y.S. Saxena, advocate for the appellant and Sri Ramesh Upadhyaya appearing for respondent Nos. 1 to 3.2. By this special appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgment dated 23rd November, 2002 of learned single Judge in Writ Petition No. 49013 of 2002 dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant.3. Facts giving rise to this special appeal, briefly stated, are ; appellant is a student of Bachelor of Engineering final year in Madan Mohan Malviya Engineering College, Gorakhpur. A girl student of Bachelor of Engineering final year (Electronics), Km. Shaifali Gautam, submitted a written complaint against the appellant on 12.10.2002 to the Warden of Hostel. The complaint stated that she is being continuously harassed by appellant for last two months, the appellant had been sending letters, E-Mails and abusive phone calls in past. The girl stated that she is forced to lodge a complaint because of misbehaviour and eve-teasing he has done on that date i...
Tag this Judgment!Praveen Kumar Gupta Vs. District Magistrate/Collector and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)AWC948; (2003)1UPLBEC387
Ashok Bhushan, J. 1. Heard Sri A. K. Mishra, counsel for the petitioner, Sri Anurag Khanna, appearing for respondent No. 3 and learned standing counsel. By this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents not to arrest the petitioner in pursuance of the recovery proceedings initiated against him by Citation No. 072219 dated 30th October, 2002.2. The facts giving rise to this writ petition briefly stated are :'Petitioner is one of the Directors of a Private Limited Company, namely, Allahabad Fertiliser Sales Private Limited. A loan of Rs. 73,00,000 was taken from the respondent No. 3 by the aforesaid company. The company failed to repay the loan as a consequence of which proceedings for recovery was initiated against the Directors. A citation dated 14th October, 1997 for an amount of Rs. 1,46,40,165.98 was issued against which Writ Petition No. 42659 of 1997, was filed. The writ petition was finally decided on 24th April, 1998, by which Dire...
Tag this Judgment!Naveen Gun House and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-2002
Reported in: AIR2003All187; 2003(2)AWC894; (2003)1UPLBEC709
N.K. Mehrotra, J.1. This is writ petition under Article 226 of Constitution of India for a writ of certiorari declaring Indian Stamp (U. P. Second Amendment) Act, 1997 (U. P. Act No. 23 of 1998 passed by the State Legislature as ultra vires and for a mandamus directing the respondents not to realize the stamp duty on the basis of the amendment made in the Indian Stamp Act and further to renew the licence of the petitioners forthwith, without compelling them to deposit stamp duty on renewal of their licence.2. The State Legislature has amended Indian Stamp Act, 1899 in its application to Uttar Pradesh by Indian Stamp Act (Uttar Pradesh 2nd Amendment) Act, 1997 (Act No. 23 of 1998) by inserting a new Article 38A in Schedule 1-B to the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. Article 38A provides for imposition of Stamp Duty on the document evidencing the licence or renewal of licence relating to arms or ammunitions under the provisions of the Arms Act. 1959 (Act No. 54 of 1959) which are as follows :(A)L...
Tag this Judgment!Shafiq Ahmad Vs. Additional District and Sessions Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)AWC1179
S.P. Mehrotra, J.1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner, inter alia, praying for quashing the order dated 21.9,1982 passed by 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bijnor (respondent No. 1) and also partly quashing the order dated 19.3.1982 passed by Judge, Small Cause Court, Bijnor (respondent No. 2) to the extent that the shop was constructed in 1976 and the provision of Section 2 (f) of the U. P. Act No. XIII of 1972 was attracted to the shop in question.2. The disputes relates to a shop situated in Agarwal Dharmshala, Station Road, Nagina, district Bijnor. The said shop is hereinafter referred to as 'the disputed accommodation.'3. The respondent No. 3 filed a suit in the Court of Judge, Small Causes, inter alia, praying for decree of ejectment, arrears of rent and the mesne profits against the petitioner in respect of the disputed accommodation. The said suit was registered as Suit No. 23 of 1981.4. It was alleged...
Tag this Judgment!Tej NaraIn Misra Vs. Central Administrative Tribunal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-2002
Reported in: 2003(3)AWC2237
ORDERM. Katju and Yatindra Singh, JJ.1. Heard counsel for the petitioner and Sri Tarun Verma for the Railway. 2. Petitioner is challenging the impugned order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Annexure-12 to the petition. The petitioner was transferred from Deoria to Siwan in 1990 but for 12 years thereafter he has not yet vacated the official accommodation which was in his possession in Deoria. 3. If a person is transferred or he retires, he must vacate the official accommodation in his possession within a reasonable time, [f that time is mentioned in a rule or G.O. he must vacate within that time. If there is no such rule or G.O. he must vacate the accommodation within three months of transfer or retirement. The petitioner has been staying in the official accommodation for 12 years after transfer and he has still not vacated it. There is no infirmity in the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal. The petition is dismissed. The petitioner is directed to vacate the official ...
Tag this Judgment!Harihar Man Singh Vs. Chairman, U.P. State Electricity Board and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-2002
Reported in: 2003(3)AWC2230; (2003)1UPLBEC487
Vineet Saran, J.1. This is a bunch of writ petitions involving common questions of fact and law and hence they are being decided by a common judgment. In most of the writ petitions, counter and rejoinder-affidavits have been exchanged. The Writ Petition No, 18926 of 1998, Harihar Man Singh v. Chairman, U. P. S. E. B and Anr., is being taken up as the leading petition. 2. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Sri Sudhir Agarwal for the respondent U. P. State Electricity Board (U.P.S.E.B.). 3. U is the case of the petitioners that they operate their tube-well pumps in semi-urban and rural areas and for that purpose, they have taken electricity connections from the respbndent-U.P.S.E.B. It is the contention of the petitioners that since they are running the tube-well pumps for agricultural purposes, i.e., for irrigating their agricultural fields, rate schedule applicable to them should be the schedule for private tube-well pumps in rural areas, as given in schedule ...
Tag this Judgment!Neena Singh (Dr.) Vs. State of U.P. and 3 ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-2002
Reported in: (2003)1UPLBEC574
M. Katju and Yatindra Singh, JJ.1. The petitioner is challenging the suspension order dated 26.11.2002, Annexure-1 to the petition and transfer order dated 14.11.2002, Annexure-13 to the petition.2. As regards the transfer order dated 14.11.2002 it has been challenged earlier in Writ Petition No. 51307 of 2002, Annexure-4 to the present writ petition which is pending. As regards the suspension order a perusal of the F.I.R. dated 13.9.2002, Annexure-2 to the petition reveals that a horrible incident happened in District Women Hospital, Ballia under the nose of the petitioner namely Dr. Neena Singh who was the Chief Medical Superintendent of this hospital.3. It appears that the first informant's wife, who was pregnant, had been admitted in this hospital on 9.9.2002. In the labour room some nurses started pulling the child from her womb due to which she shouted in pain and when some part of the baby came out of the womb it slipped from the hands of a nurse and it remained hanging for some...
Tag this Judgment!Cit Vs. Amar Iron Stores
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-13-2002
Reported in: [2003]131TAXMAN249(All)
Yatindra Singh, J.This is a reference under section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act on the direction of this court in which the following question has been referred to us for opinion :'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in upholding the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) that two assessments should have been made and the income of Rs. 1,14,420 for the period 21-9-1976 to 31-3-1977 as deleted from the hands of the appellant-firm be assessed separately ?'The assessee in this case is a firm and the assessment year involved is 1977-78.2. One of the partners Gulshan Kumar died on 18-9-1976 and there is no mention in the Partnership deed that the partnership will continue after the death of any partner. In view of this and the decision given by the Supreme Court in CIT v. Empire Estate : [1996]218ITR355(SC) , the partnership stood dissolved and as such there should be two assessments.3. In view of this we answer the question in the affir...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »