Allahabad Court October 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.
Anil Kumar Agarwal and anr. Vs. U.P. Stock Exchange Association Ltd. a ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-30-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)AWC280; [2004]53SCL119(All)
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the orders dated 8.10.2003 and 15.10.2003 (Annexures-5 and 7) passed by the respondents imposing a penalty of Rs. 1 lakh and not to hear the appeal till the said amount is deposited.2. Facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the petitioners are registered members and share-brokers of the U.P. Stock Exchange Association Ltd., Kanpur, respondent No. 1, hereinafter called the 'Association'. The Board of the Association stood superseded as per the orders of the Securities and Exchange Board of India, respondent No. 3, hereinafter called the 'SEBI' vide order dated 12.5.2002. Association issued show cause notices dated 18.12.2002 to the petitioners as to why they should not be suspended for unauthorised carry forward transactions. They submitted the replies, which were considered and the matter was referred to the Disciplinary Committee of the Association, respondent No. 2. Petitioners were heard in person. ...
Smt. Madhuri Vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-30-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)AWC251
ORDERS.N. Srivastava, J. 1. Dispute relates to property of Sharda Nand. Against entry made by Consolidator in records mentioning Smt. Poonam Devi as heir of Sharda Nand, petitioner approached Deputy Director of Consolidation by filing revision which was dismissed by Deputy Director of Consolidation on the ground of alternative remedy that if she was aggrieved by entry made by Consolidator she may approach Consolidation Officer and then Settlement Officer of Consolidation. Deputy Director of Consolidation held revision preferred before Deputy Director of Consolidation as not maintainable.2. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and learned standing counsel.3. Learned counsel for petitioner urged that in view of the latest amendment in Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings (Second Amendment) Ordinance, 2002 by which Explanation (3) was added and by virtue of which now power to examine any findings, whether of fact or law, recorded by any subordinate authority, and which also includes th...
Prem Kumar Vs. Mahendra Kumar Singh, D.i.O.S. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-30-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)AWC262; (2004)1UPLBEC95
D.P. Singh, J.1. This contempt petition has been filed with the allegation that the opposite parties have deliberately and wilfully violated interim orders dated 15.2.2001 and 7.5.2001 passed by the writ court in Writ Petition No. 5525 of 2001.2. The contempt court issued notices on 20.7.2001, asking the opposite parties why contempt proceedings be not initiated against them. In response to the notice, affidavits have been exchanged between the parties.3. Father of applicant late Rajpal Singh while working as Paricharak in the Kisan Inter College, Mohiuddinpur, Meerut, died in-harness on 6.4.1999, The applicant was also given appointment as Paricharak which was affirmed by the District Inspector of Schools, Meerut, vide order dated 16.11.1999. The applicant joined and subsequently he also became a contributory to G.P.F. of the college. However, the District Inspector of Schools vide order dated 2.2.2001, directed the applicant to join as Paricharak against a substantive vacancy at Kisa...
Jag Mohan Pandey Vs. U.P. Co-operative Tribunal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-30-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)AWC440
M. Katju and Umeshwar Pandey, JJ. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri. P. N. Ojha has appeared for the respondent No. 4.2. The petitioner has challenged the impugned appellate order dated 17.7.2003 Annexure-7 to the writ petition.3. The petitioner was posted as Cadre Secretary of Sadhan Sahkari Samiti Limited, Hathouj. He retired on 30.6.1995.4. It is alleged in paragraph 12 of the writ petition that the audit of the co-operative society in which the petitioner was working was conducted by the auditors and they have submitted a special report for the years 1994-95 and 1995-96 wherein several employees of the society including the petitioner were held responsible for misappropriation of the funds of the society. Thereafter an enquiry was held. True copy of the report of the enquiry officer dated5.12.1999 is Annexure-II to the writ petition. In that report charges Nos. 2. 4 and 5 were held proved against the petitioner. The petitioner was given a show cause notice vide lette...
Prima Impex International and One anr. Vs. Super House Leather Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-30-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)AWC927
N.K. Mehrotra, J.1. This is a revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the order dated 4.9.2003 passed by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Unnao in Misc. Case No. 83/2003, Prima Impex International and Ors. v. Super House Leather Limited.2. It appears that the respondent Super House Leather Limited filed a suit against the revisionist for a decree of mandatory injunction against the defendant directing the defendants to comply the terms of contract and make payment as per schedule annexed to the plaint along with pendente lite and future interest @ 24% per annum with quarterly, rest, The suit was decreed ex parte for making the payment of Rs. 6,68,710. The revisionist moved an application under Order IX. Rule 13 of Civil Procedure Code for setting aside the ex parte decree dated 21.8.2002 and along with that application, moved another application 7C for staying the execution of the decree which was being executed in Execution Case No. 218/03 in the Mumbai Cour...
Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Satyawati and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-30-2003
Reported in: 3(2005)ACC889
Pradeep Kant, J.1. Since the common question of law is involved in all these four appeals, the same are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. These are the four appeals filed by Union of India challenging the award passed by Railway Claims Tribunal, Lucknow allowing interest to the claimants from the date of filing of the claim petition. The limited question which has been urged is that under the provisions of Railways Act, 1989, the Tribunal was having no power to award interest to the claimants from the date of application. The interest can be awarded from the date of determination of the amount of compensation i.e., the date of the award. Section 127 of the Act has been pressed into service in support of the submission that the rate of compensation payable in respect of any injury has to be determined by the Claims Tribunal. The argument is that unless such determination is made, no liability could be fastened for payment to the claimant nor any interest could be awarded on s...
Ashwani Dhingra Vs. Chief Cit and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-29-2003
Reported in: [2005]277ITR98(All); [2004]141TAXMAN651(All)
R.K. Agrawal, J.By means of the present writ petition filed under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, Ashwani Dhingra, seeks a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the notices issued by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1, Noida, respondent No. 4, on 20-11-2003 under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the Act, for the assessment years 1989-90 to 1994-95, collectively filed as Annex. 8 to the writ petition and other consequential reliefs.2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are as follows :According to the petitioner, he was initially residing in the State of Punjab. His land, which was in Fazilka, district Ferozepur, was acquired by the Government of Punjab on 20-8-1973 under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The compensation was awarded to him on 12-9-1990 and 29-5-1993 under the orders passed by the Punjab & Haryana High Court. He was paid interest only on 21-8-2001 fro...
Ashwani Dhingra Vs. Ccit
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-29-2003
Reported in: [2004]140TAXMAN84(All)
Sri Pankaj Awasthhi appeared for the department.2. Petitoners waiver application under section 273A of the Income Tax Act has been dismissed as premature, vide order dated 23-7-2003 (Annexure-3 to the writ petition). That order is under challenge before us.3. It appears that subsequently the petitioner filed another application before Commissioner of Income Tax dated 4-9-2003, copy of which is Annexure CA-2 to the counter affidavit which is said to be pending. This application dated 4-9-2003 can be treated to be a fresh waiver application and hence we direct the authority concerned to decide the same and any other application preferably within 2 months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order.4. If petitioner files certified copy of this order before the concerned authority within ten days from today, the same shall be decided on merits, and till the decision the impugned recovery shall remain stayed. Petition disposed of....
Dr. H.P. Singh (D) Through L.Rs. Vs. Committee of Management, Balwant ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-28-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)AWC441
ORDERM. Katju and Umeshwar Pandey, JJ.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner was Principal of an institute and he retired on 9.2.1988. He claimed certain amounts which were under dispute.3. Admittedly now the Chancellor by order dated 15.1.2003 has decided in favour of the petitioner and we are informed that that order has not been challenged and has become final. Since the petitioner has died we direct that the payment should be made to his widow in accordance with the aforesaid order of the Chancellor dated 15.1.2003 within two months from today after computation.4. If the petitioner's widow is entitled to family pension, she should also be paid the same.5. We further direct that interest at 10% per annum shall be paid to the petitioner's widow from the date on which the amounts in question were due till the date of payment which must be made within two months from today.6. We think it necessary to issue such a direction in this case because often there is a misco...
Suresh and anr. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-28-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ1883
U.S. Tripathi, J. 1. This appeal has been directed against the judgment and order dated 9-7-1981 passed by Sessions Judge, Kanpur (Non Metropolitan Area) in Sessions Trial No. 119 of 1979 convicting appellants Suresh and Prakash under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and sentencing each of them to undergo imprisonment for life.2. The prosecution story, briefly stated, was as under :--The appellants Suresh and Prakash were residents of villages Gabadahawa and Dariaganj respectively within P. S. Sheorajpur. Indrapal deceased had his sasural at village Ghanshyampur, P. S. Sheorajpur. He had got landed property in his sasural and therefore was residing in said village for last 10 years from before the occurrence of this case. In the month of February, 1978, a dacoity had taken place in the house of Indirapal deceased at village Ghanshyampur. Indrapal deceased had lodged report of said dacoity naming appellants Suresh and Prakash as accused and had cited Vishnudutta (co-accused) as witn...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »