Allahabad Court February 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.
Jitendra Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-04-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)AWC1002
ORDERS.K. Singh, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel. 2. In view of the facts and circumstances, submissions as made and the relief as is being claimed in this petition, it appears that no useful purpose will be served by keeping this petition pending and thus after hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and standing counsel, this petition is being finally disposed of. 3. Challenge before this Court is the order dated 2.9.1998 passed by the Settlement Officer, Consolidation which was found to be farzi and has been ordered to be cancelled. The petitioner moved an application for getting copy of that order which was also not given. Petitioner appears to have approached the District Magistrate, Bulandshahr by filing an application, copy of which has been annexed as Annexure-2 to the writ petition by which the petitioner has prayed that he was allotted the land and he was in possession but the Settlement Officer, Consolidation, without giving an ...
Deena Nath Vs. Sreedhar Dayal Pathak and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-04-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)AWC1002b
V.N. Singh, J.1. The second appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 5.5.1992 and 20.7.1992 passed by Sri R.R. Jatav, the then District Judge, Jalaun at Orai, in Civil Appeal No. 33 of 1991 arising out of Original Suit No. 87 of 1986 by which he allowed the said appeal.2. Brief facts of the case is that Original Suit No. 87 of 1986 was filed by Deena Nath plaintiff-appellant for permanent injunction.3. The contention of the appellant was that the disputed land which is a part of plot No. 1 of Mohal Zia Jal Patti situated in Mauza Ikhlaspura, within limits of Municipal Board, Orai and plaintiff-appellant is the owner and in possession.4. The suit was decreed and defendant was restrained from interference by the judgment dated 15.5.1991.5. Aggrieved by that judgment, Civil Appeal No. 33 of 1991, Shreedhar Dayal and Anr. v. Deena Nath, was filed, which was decided by the then District Judge, Jalaun at Orai, Sri R.R. Jatav by which he allowed the appeal and set aside the...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Laxmi Dutt
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-04-2003
Reported in: [2003]263ITR225(All)
M. Katju, J.1. This is a reference under Section 27 of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, in which the following question has been referred to us for our opinion : 'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in allowing deduction under Section 5(1)(iv) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957 ?'2. The assessee is an individual who is a partner in the firm, Laxmi Dutt Roop Chand, along with another partner, Roop Chand.3. The relevant assessment years are 1974-75 and 1975-76. In his return of net wealth as well as during the assessment proceedings, the assessee claimed deduction under Section 5(1)(iv) of the Wealth-tax Act in respect of the house property owned by the firm. The Wealth-tax Officer rejected the assessee's claim but the appeal was allowed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and his order was upheld in further appeal by the Tribunal.4. In our opinion, there is no merit in the submission of learned counsel for the Department. Section 5(1)(iv) o...
Om Prakash Singh Vs. Nagar Pramukh (Mahapaur) Nagar Nigam and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-04-2003
Reported in: AIR2003All309; (2003)2UPLBEC1087
ORDER1. Heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record of the case.2. Om Prakash Singh, the petitioner be-fore us has approached this Court through present writ petition Under Article 226, Constitution of India for following reliefs -'It is, therefore, Most Respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to: 1. Issue, a writ, order or direction in the nature of prohibition to the respondents restraining them from removing the petitioner from the post of Vice-Chairman of Executive Committee.2. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to remove the petitioner from the office of Vice-Chairman of Executive Committee.3. Issue any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.4. Award costs to petitioner.' As also agreed at the bar, the decision of the present petition depends upon interpretation of Section 51 of the Act.We may repro...
Smt. Shahana Alias Shanti Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-04-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ3438
1. The petitioner has filed this petition for issue of a writ, order or direction in the nature of habeas corpus commanding the respondents to set her at liberty immediately and a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent No. 2 to produce her before this Court,2. It is alleged by the petitioner that she is the wife of Damodar Das with whom she married in the month of February, 2002 with her own free will and she changed her name as Shanti and started living with her husband. After her marriage with Damodar Das she conceived and is in a family way. The petitioner went to her parental place in the month of May, 2002 where she was beaten and threatened with dire consequences for marrying a Hindu boy. She was asked to severe all her relations with Damodar Das. When she refused to do so, she was assaulted and threatened that her husband would be sent to jail. However, the petitioner escaped from her parental house and reached her in-laws place on 18-8-2002...
Major Surendra Singh Sajwan Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-03-2003
Reported in: 2003(2)AWC1006
ORDERM. Katju, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.' 2. The petitioner is a Major in the Indian Army and is challenging the impugned order dated 10.6.1999 Annexure-20 to the writ petition and also the communication to the petitioner that he has not been approved for promotion to the rank of Acting Lt. Col. vide letter dated 7.9.1999 Annexure-18 to the writ petition. The petitioner has prayed that he should be promoted as Acting Lt. Col. 3. We have carefully perused the petition and the counter-affidavit and we have also perused the Service Dossier of the petitioner and Selection Board proceedings, which were produced before us. The petitioner appears to have a misapprehension that he has been passed over for promotion because there is adverse material against him on his dossier. We have perused the dossier and we find nothing against him. However, it often happens in the Army that even good Officers cannot be promoted because there is no vacancy on the higher post. The Army Org...
Brij Lal Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-03-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ1873
Vishnu Sahai, J.1. Through this appeal, the appellant challenges the judgment and order dated 8-10-1980 passed by the III Additional Sessions Judge, Lucknow, in Sessions Trial No. 21/1980, convicting and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence punishable under Section 302 I. P. C.It is pertinent to mention that along with the appellant was tried his real brother Sadhu, who has been acquitted vide the impugned judgment and the State of U. P. has not impugned his acquittal by preferring an appeal under Section 378(1) Cr. P.C.2. Shortly stated the prosecution case runs as under :--The informant Umrao (PW-1) was the brother of the deceased Newaji. At the time of the incident the informant, deceased, the informant's wife Smt. Kamla (PW-3), the informant's sister-in-law Smt. Madhu Rani (CW-1), the appellant and the acquitted accused Sadhu were living in different portions of the same house in village Babapurwa, hamlet of Shivpuri within the limits of Police Station, I...
Dan Behari Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-03-2003
Reported in: 2003CriLJ4959
K.N. Ojha, J.1. This appeal has been preferred against order of conviction and sentence dated 16-7-1980, passed by 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Mathura, in Sessions Trial No. 164 of 1979, State v. Dan Behari, by which Dari Behari, appellant has been convicted under Sections 301/302, I.P.C. with life imprisonment.2. None appeared for the appellant to advance argument, although he is represented by Sri Tej Pal and Sri G. S. Chaturvedi, Advocates. Arguments of learned A.G.A. were heard and the judgment is being delivered. The appeal is being decided on merits.3. One Than Singh lodged F.I.R. against Dan Behari on 19-2-19.79 at 10.30 a.m. under Section 307, I.P.C. bearing crime No. 85 at police station Vrindavan, district Mathura that Dan Behari had caused firearm injury to his son Budha on 19-2-1979 at 9.00 a.m. The occurrence is said to have taken place near Pattarpura Tonga stand; which is at the distance of one mile from the outpost Mathura Gate, Police Station, Vrindavan.4. According...
i.C. No. 39255 W. Major Surendrasingh Sajwan Vs. Union of India (Uoi) ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-03-2003
Reported in: (2003)1UPLBEC684
M. Katju, J.1. Heard learned Counsel For the parties. The petitioner is a Major in the Indian Army.2. The petitioner is challenging the impugned order dated 10.6.99, Annexure- 20 to the writ petition and also the communication to the petitioner that he has not been approved for promotion to the rank of Acting Lt. Col. vide letter dated 7.9.99, Annexure 18 to the writ petition. The petitioner has prayed that he should be promoted as Acting Lt. Col.3. We have carefully perused the petition and the counter-affidavit and we have also perused the Service Dossier of the petitioner and Selection Board proceedings, which were produced before us. The petitioner appears to have a misapprehension that he has been passed over for promotion because there is adverse material against him on his dossier. We have perused the dossier and we find nothing against him. However, it often happens in the Army that even good officers cannot be promoted because there is no vacancy on the higher post. The Army O...
Parry and Company Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-03-2003
Reported in: [2004]138STC437(All)
Rajes Kumar, J.1. The present revision Under Section 11 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred as 'the Act') filed against the order of Tribunal dated September 13, 1990 relating to the assessment year 1989-90 by which Tribunal has confirmed the penalty levied Under Section 15A(1)(o).2. The brief facts of the case for the purposes of deciding the issue are the dealer was public limited company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act and was selling agent of M/s. Citurgia Bio Chemicals Ltd., Pandesara, Surat dealing in Chemicals. Applicant did not have any establishment in the State of U.P. Applicant had received an order from M/s. Kisan Products Ltd., Bareilly, a registered dealer in the State of U.P. for supply of citric acid. For the supply of citric acid to M/s. Kishan Products Ltd., Bareilly, applicant had booked order to M/s. Citurgia Bio Chemicals Ltd., Surat, and for import of the goods M/s. Kisan Product Ltd., Bareilly, had provided one form XXXI No. FT-1988-...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›