Allahabad Court August 2002 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.
Satendra Deo Sharma and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-27-2002
Reported in: (2003)1UPLBEC327
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard Counsel for the parties and perused the record.2. Admittedly, the petitioners were working as Casual Labours in the Workshop of Public Works Department, Provincial Division, Azamgarh. Their services have been terminated. They alleged that they have completed continuous services of more than 240 days and pray that order dated 1.6.93 terminating theirs services be quashed and the respondents be directed to regularize their services. In Para 11 of the writ petition it has been alleged that the sole purpose of retrenching the petitioners is to prevent the regularization their services and to recruit new personnel for the purpose as is evident from the directions issued by respondent No. 3 and contained in circular issued by respondent No. 2. In Para 13 of the writ petition it has been alleged that the petitioners have no other efficacious and alternate remedy except by way of this writ petition before this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.3. Th...
Additional Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ram Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-26-2002
Reported in: [2002]258ITR415(All)
S.K. Sen, C.J.1. We have heard Sri Prakash Krishna, learned counsel for the Revenue, and Sri V.K. Rastogi, learned counsel for the respondents. 2. The brief facts of the reference which relate to the assessment years 1969-70 and 1970-71, inter alia, are that Bhagwati Prasad Ram Sarup was a Hindu undivided family, which was assessed as such for and up to the assessment year 1952-53. There was a partition in the joint family on November 9, 1950, and a firm was formed with effect from the assessment year 1952-53. The firm has been assessed to tax from the said assessment year up to date. S/Sri RamSarup and Ram Prasad, who were real brothers, were the two partners of the firm having equal shares in the firm as constituted on the partition of the family. Both S/Shri Ram Prasad and Ram Sarup were assessed to income-tax for the assessment year 1956-57. For and up to the assessment year 1968-69, they were assessed as individuals and with effect from the year 1969-70 they were assessed as a Hin...
Smt. Krishna Kanti Vs. District Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-26-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)AWC3076
Khem Karan, J. 1. An important question of law is involved in this writ petition and the same is as to whether or not delay in filing revision under Sub-section (6) of Section 12C of Uttar Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1947 (for short the Act of 1947), can be condoned under Section 5 read with Section 14 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1963).2. Brief facts giving rise to this writ petition are as under :'In an election held in June, 2000, to the office of Pradhan of Gram Panchayat Mubarakpur, district Shrawasti, Tej Narain (opposite party No. 2) was declared elected. Smt. Krishna Kanti (the petitioner), who was also in the fray, filed an election petition under Section 12C (1) of the Act of 1947. before the prescribed authority (Sub-Divisional Officer), who vide his order .dated 5.3.2001, decided for recounting of the votes and fixed 12.3.2001 for the purpose. TejNarain, challenged the same by filing a Writ Petition No. 659 (M/S) of 2001, wherein ...
KalidIn Vs. Mata Prasad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-26-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)AWC3055
Kamal Kishore, J.1. This is the second civil appeal against the Judgment and decree dated 25.3.1992 passed by the then District Judge, Pratapgarh in First Appeal No. 186 of 1989 allowing the appeal and setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the then learned Civil Judge, Pratapgarh in Original Suit No. 19 of 1987.2. I have heard the arguments and have gone through the record.3. Admittedly, the defendant is recorded tenure holder of chak plot No. 97 area 2-10-4 of village Purey Nanau P/o Agai, Pargana Rampur, Tehsil Kunda, district Pratapgarh. The plaintiff claimed that the defendant had agreed to sell the said land to them, on a price of Rs. 30,000 ; that he having received a sum of Rs. 20.000 had executed the agreement to sell dated 8th October, 1985 ; that they were throughout ready andwilling to perform their part of obligations and that the defendant refused to execute the sale-deed on 26th November, 1985. Consequently, they instituted their suit initially in the Court of M...
Vageesha Nand Alias Vachaspati Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-26-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)AWC3056
I.M. Quddusi, J.1. Heard Shri Rajiv Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the State.2. The brief facts of the case are that the notice under Section 10 (2) of the U. P. Imposition of Ceiling on LandHoldings Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was issued against the tenure-holder, namely, Narayan Swami Ji Maharaj, President, Parashar Nath Rishikul Brahmacharya Ashram and Sanskrit Maha Vldyalaya and Goshala, Naya Goan, Madhiya Ghat, Pargana-Aurangabad, Tehsil-Mohammadi, District Lakhimpur-Kheri calling upon him to show cause as to why the statement showing surplus land may not be taken as correct. Against that notice, the objections were filed by the then tenure-holder. Thereafter Narayan Swami Ji Maharaj died on 8.8.1998 and after his death, no counsel on his behalf had put in appearance before the prescribed authority. Thereafter the prescribed authority decided the matter vide its impugned order dated 7.7.2000 declaring some land as ...
Flex Engineering Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-26-2002
Reported in: 2002(84)ECC516; 2003(161)ELT4(All)
S.K. Sen, C.J.1.Brief facts of the case, inter alia, are that the applicant M/s. Flex Engineering Limited manufactures packaging machines of various types of classifiable under Chapter 84 of the Central Excise Tariff. It is the case of the applicant that it was availing the benefit of Modvat credit oh laminated plastic films and poly papers. Show cause notices were issued to the applicant with regard to denying the benefit on the above inputs on the ground that they are used for the purpose of testing of their final product 'packaging machines' and is not an input as defined under Rule 52A of the Central Excise Rules. The adjudicating authority denied the benefit or Modvat credit. The applicant preferred an appeal, which too was rejected. The applicant filed appeals before the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal. Following the earlier order in the case of the same applicant the Tribunal, on 17th April, 1998 [1998 (102) E.L.T. 387 (Tri.)], upheld the order passed by th...
Rajendra and ors. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-26-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ1821
Imtiyaz Murtaza, J.1. Both criminal appeals are against the judgment and order dated 1-3-2000 passed by Sri H. S. Yadav IV Addl. Sessions Judge, Etah in Session Trial No. 516 of 1994 whereby the appellants, Rajendra, Pati Ram and Bhudeo Singh were convicted and sentenced to death under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC. They are further sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 3000/- each and they are further convicted under Section 436 IPC and sentenced to 10 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs 2000/- each and they are further convicted under Section 148 IPC and sentenced to one year rigorous imprisonment and a default of payment of fine they are further sentenced to six months rigorous imprisonment. The remaining appellants have been convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 3000/- each under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC. They are further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- ...
Ompal Singh (In Jail) Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-26-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ1829
V.N. Singh, J. 1. This appeal has been filed against the order dated 21-3-1980 passed by the then Vth District and Sessions Judge, Budaun, by which, he convicted and sentenced appellant Ompal Singh to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life under Section 302, I.P.C. in Sessions Trial-No. 444 of 1978.2. Brief facts of the case are that, Ram Prakash lodged a report on 11-6-1978 at 18.10 p.m. at police station Bisauli District Budaun which was registered at crime No. 215 of 1978 under Section 307, I.P.C. that today on 11-6-1978 he had gone to F.C.I. Godown in village Ehroli in connection with the purchase of food grains. He was coming from F.C.I. godown along with Rishipal, Ravindra Pal Singh and Rambir Singh. At about 3.30 p.m. when they reached near culvert of the southern Tube Well of Laluwa Nagla, accused Ompal Singh armed with double barrel gun came by Yezdi Motor Cycle and stopped the Motor Cycle and fired on Rishipal with intention to kill him. Rishipal fell down after receiving the...
Raj Nath Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-26-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ2056
M.A. Khan, J. 1. This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 11-3-1987 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Barabanki, in S. T. No. 306 of 1985, thereby convicting the appellant of the offence punishable under Section 376, I.P.C. and sentencing him for six years R. I.2. The facts leading to the prosecution of the appellant are that Smt. Manjula Misra, wife of Sri Vishwanath Misra, had lodged a report at the Police Station, Fatehpur at 8.35 p.m. on 9-5-1985 that her husband Vishwanath Misra was posted as Sub-Inspector at Police Station, Fatehpur and some time before the present-occurrence, he was transferred to Police Station, Patranga in the same district. Since the examination of his children were to take place shortly he had left his family at the Police Station, Fatehpur. The family of Vishwanath Misra was living in a quarter in the premises of the Police Station, Fatehpur. At the relevant time P.W. 2 Desh Raj was working as a servant with the Misra family for the last 7...
Addl. Cit Vs. Ram Prasad
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-26-2002
Reported in: (2002)176CTR(All)577
Counsels: Prakash Krishna, for the Revenue V.K. Rastogi, for the AssesseeIn the Allahabad High Court S.K. Sen, C.J. & Ashok Bhushan, J.Judgment S.K. Sen, C.J.We have heard Sri Prakash Krishna, learned counsel for the revenue, and Sri V.K. Rastogi, learned counsel for the respondents.2. Brief facts of the reference which relate to assessment years 1969-70 and 1970-71, inter alia, are that M/s Bhagwati Prasad Ram Sarup was an Hindu undivided family, which was assessed as such for and up to the assessment year 1952-53. There was a partition in the joint family on 9-11-1950, and a firm was formed with effect from the assessment year 1952-53. The firm has been assessed to tax from the said assessment year upto date. S/Sri Ram Sarup and Ram Prasad, who were real brothers, were the two partners of the firm having equal shares in the firm as constituted, on the partition of the family. Both S/Shri Ram Prasad and Ram Sarup were assessed to income-tax for their assessment year 1956-57. For and u...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »