Allahabad Court January 2003 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.
Udai Veer Singh Yadav and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-16-2003
Reported in: 2003(1)AWC836
ORDERM. Katju, J.1. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.2. The petitioners held certificates from Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Prayag, and they claim that they have the right to practice as medical practitioners on the strength of those certificates. They have prayed for a mandamus directing the respondents not to interfere with their peaceful practice as medical practitioners.3. In Delhi Pradesh Registered Medical Practitioners v. Director of Health, 1997 (11) SCC 687, it was held that the certificate of Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Prayag, is not recognised after 1967. Hence, the petitioners have no right to do medical practice on the basis of the said certificate.4. Following the aforesaid decision of the Supreme Court, this petition is dismissed....
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Jayana Cold Storage and Ice Factory
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-16-2003
Reported in: [2003]260ITR430(All)
1. This is a reference under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. At the instance of the Revenue, the following two questions have been referred for the opinion of this court : '(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the depreciation allowed at the rate of 15 per cent. on generator in the original assessment could not be said to have been wrongly allowed ? (2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the subsidy amounting to Rs. 37,670 receivable by the assessee from the U. P. Finance Corporation was not deductible from the cost of the generator amounting to Rs. 1,72,770 for working out the depreciation admissible on the generator ?' 2. The assessee is a registered firm. It ran a cold storage and also manufactured ice. The assessment years 1975-76 and 1976-77 are involved. The Income-tax Officer in t...
Dr. Gaur Hari Singhania (individual) Vs. Commissioner of Wealth-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-16-2003
Reported in: (2004)187CTR(All)346; [2003]263ITR8(All)
1. The following question has been referred to this court at the instance of the assessee under Section 27(1) :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the reopening of the assessment under Section 17(1)(a) was valid in law ?'2. The dispute relates to the two assessment years, namely, 1969-70 and 1971-72.3. The original assessment of the assessee, who is an individual, was reopened under Section 17(1)(a) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, on the ground that in the net wealth earlier assessed, the wealth of Rs. 20,500 escaped assessment. The facts lie in a narrow compass :The assessee took a loan of Rs. 20,500 from the Life Insurance Corporation on the security of a life policy on March 23, 1966, which was deposited in the fixed deposit with Hindustan Commercial Bank. He claimed exemption on the said amount in his wealth-tax return, which was allowed by the Wealth-tax Officer. However, the said assessment was reopened an...
Ramesh Deo Pandey Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-16-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ98
S.K. Agarwal, J.1. This appeal was filed against the order of conviction of the appellant dated 3-2-1994. He was sentenced to undergo 5 years' R.I. under Section 306, I.P.C. and was also directed to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-. In default of payment of fine he was directed to undergo R.I. for a period of two years.2. The prosecution case as disclosed from the FIR is that Smt. Lalti Devi deceased was married to the appellant some 11 years ago. Gauna ceremony (second marriage) took place three years after the marriage. At the time of Gauna the appellant and his other family members demanded a motor cycle it dowry. Father of the deceased showed his inability to meet the said demand. Due to financial stringency he could not manage the demand till the death of the deceased. This was cause on account of which the deceased Smt. Lalti Devi was treated cruelly by her- in-laws and the husband. She was abandoned for sometime. Time and again she was taken to their house by the accused persons. Lastly ...
Nagar Nigam Vs. Smt. Uma Mishra and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-16-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)AWC1324; (2003)1UPLBEC686
ORDERB.K. Rathi, J.1. This is an application for review of my judgment dated 25.1.2002 passed in Second Appeal No. 1324 of 2000. The facts giving rise to the review application are as under : The suit was filed by the applicants-respondents against the appellant for restraining him from interfering in the peaceful possession of the applicants-respondents over Plot No. 96/1, area 0.065 hqt. and also restraining the appellant from interfering in raising boundary wall over it by the applicants-respondents. The suit was decreed by both the courts below, against which, the Nagar Nigam filed Second Appeal No. 1324 of 2000 which was allowed by me on 25.1.2002. The merits of the case were not considered in the second appeal and it was allowed only on the ground that the suit was bad for want of notices under Clause (1) of Section 571 of U. P. Nagar Mahapalika Adhiniyam, 1959. Request has been made for the review of the said judgment. 2. 1 have heard Sri J. Nagar, learned counsel for the applic...
incan Employees Welfare Association Vs. Incan Group of Companies
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-15-2003
Reported in: III(2003)BC407; [2006]129CompCas962(All); [2003]43SCL130(All)
ORDERBhanwar Singh, J. 1. These company petitions have been filed under Section 433(b), (d), (e) and (f) of the Companies Act, 1956 for winding up of the company known as M/s. Incan Mutual Fund Benefit Limited and Incan Group of Companies (Incan Fertilizers and Chemicals Limited; Ratan Micronutrients Limited; Vinayak Trading Pvt. Limited; Incan Construction Limited; Incan Consultancy Services Limited; Deva Investment & Leasing Limited; Incan Mutual Benefit Limited; and Incan International Limited) having their registered office at Incan Bhawan, B-1/37, Sector F, Kapoorthala, Aliganj, Lucknow.2. The petitioners' case is that the petitioner No. 1, namely, Incan Employees Welfare Association, is the Registered Association duly registered with the Registrar of Firms and Societies at Punjab, Chandigarh and the other petitioners are either office bearers of the association or the individual investors. The members of the association deposited different amounts of money with M/s. Incan Mutual ...
Madan Lal Jalan and ors. Vs. Astt. Cit
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-15-2003
Reported in: (2004)87TTJ(All)596
ORDERBy The BenchAll the above appeals by different assessees are directed against different orders of Assistant Commissioner, Investment Circle, Allahabad. Since common questions are involved in all these appeals, therefore, all were heard together and we dispose of the same by this common consolidated order.2. The brief facts in ITA Nos. 1031, 1032, 1033, 1035 & 1045/All/1997 are that there was a search and seizure operation under section 132(1) conducted in the premises of M/s Jalan Oil Distributors on 9-11-1995. During the said search it was found that the assessees and their family members of this group had made deposits in their Bank accounts claiming their source out of loans and gifts from different persons. Therefore, all the evidence of loans and gifts were seized and notices under section 158BC/BD were issued to the assessees and after completion of the proceedings block assessments were framed and respective additions have been made.3. In ITA No. 1039/All/1997 the search wa...
U.P. State Electricity Board and ors. Vs. Presiding Officer, Industria ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-14-2003
Reported in: 2003(1)AWC533; [2003(96)FLR707]
Anjani Kumar, J.1. Thepetitioners-employers-U. P. State Electricity Board, by means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, have challenged the award of the Industrial Tribunal (I). U. P., at Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal') dated 9th August, 1985, copy whereof has been annexed as Annexure-1 to the writ petition.2. The facts leading to the filing of present writ petition are that the contesting respondent-workman, namely? Mohd. Jameel was employed with the employers, as would be clear from the narration of fact and the written statement filed by the parties and referred to by the Tribunal in theaward, which reveals that 'the workman concerned Mohd. Jameel was employed as Pump Operator-cum-Electrician with the employers w.e.f. 1st June, 1977. The services of the workman concerned were wrongfully terminated by the employers on 1st February, 1979. The workman through the respective union raised an industrial dispute, which was referred ...
Mahesh Chandra Sharma Vs. Director General of Police and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-14-2003
Reported in: 2003(1)AWC797
ORDERAnjani Kumar, J.1. The petitioner, by means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenges the order passed by the respondent No. 2, dated 7th October, 2002, copy whereof has been annexed as Annexure-4 to the writ petition.2. The facts in brief are that the petitioner, who has been appointed as Sub-Inspector of Police in February, 1982, according to the allegations made in the writ petition, since then is performing his duties with hard labour, great honesty and to the satisfaction of the higher authorities. The petitioner thereafter was working on deputation with the U. P. Power Corporation and according to him he ought to have been considered for promotion to the post of Inspector in terms of the relevant G.O. and Police Regulations. Petitioner has made representation to the higher authority when his name was not forwarded for consideration to the post of Inspector, but the same was rejected by the order dated 7th October, 2002, which is impu...
Achchan Miyan Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-14-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)AWC2021
Bhanwar Singh, J.1. Thepetitioner has filed this petition praying for a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the Promotion Order No. 5539 (Annexure-1), dated March 8, 1989 passed by the opposite party No. 2 and for another writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to promote him to the post of Sales Tax Officer, Grade-11.2. The petitioner was appointed on 1.8.1975 as Stenographer in the Sales Tax Department in the pay scale of Rs. 300-500 which was later revised as Rs. 570-1, 100 (i.e., in the year of this petition being filed). The petitioner was confirmed on 1.10.1979 and since then, he has been holding the said post. As pleaded further, the petitioner's work and conduct have always been commended by the higher authorities. Neither there was any complaint against him nor he had ever been awarded an adverse entry. According to the statutory provisions contained in Rule 5 of the U. P. (Sales-tax Officer Grade-II) Service Rules, 1983, (to be hereinafter referre...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »