Allahabad Court July 2003 Judgments
HussaIn Ali Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-29-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ1340
U.S. Tripathi, J.1. This appeal from Jail has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 18-10-1997 passed by VIth Additional Sessions Judge, Meerut in Sessions Trial No. 1096 of 1994 convicting the appellant Hussain Ali under Sections 302, 376 and 201, IPC and sentencing him to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 3,000/-under Section 302, IPC, and R.I. for a period of 10 years and fine of Rs. 2,000/- under Section 376, IPC and R.I. for a period of three years and fine of Rs. 1,000/- under Section 201, IPC. In default of payment of fine he further sentenced the appellant to undergo R.I. for a period of two years, one year and six months respectively on each count.2. The prosecution story, briefly stated, was as under :--The appellant and Ved Prakash (P.W. 2) were residents of village Abdullahpur, P.S. Bhawanpur, district Meerut. Ved Prakash (P.W. 2) had a daughter Km. Sarvesh aged about 8 years. Bhimsen (C.W. 1) aged about 10 years was his younger brother. Bharat Singh (P.W....
Tag this Judgment!Hetram and ors. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-29-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ3564
1. Criminal Appeal No. 1311 of 1980 was filed by appellants Hetram, Bhagwan, Lok Pal, Tota Ram, Talebar Ramveer and Jagdish. The other Criminal Appeal No. 1312 of 1980 was filed by appellant Ajuddhi. Appellants Hetram, Ajuddhi, Bhagwan and Totaram were convicted under Sections 148, 307/149 and 302/149, IPC and sentenced to R.I. for 2 years, R.I. for 5 years and imprisonment for life respectively. Appellants Lokpal, Talewar, Ramvir and Jagdish were convicted under Sections 147, 307/149 and 302/149, IPC and sentenced to R.I. for one year, R.I. for 5 years and imprisonment for life respectively.2. Aggrieved by the said conviction, these appellants have preferred the aforesaid appeals in this Court.3. The brief story of the prosecution, as laid in the F.I.R., is as under :Bharat Singh, resident of village Dulha, claimed that he was suspected behind the arrest of Jayant, son of Genda, by the police under Section 25 of the Arms Act. As a consequence of that the appellants were nursing seriou...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Agrahari Rope Stores
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-29-2003
Reported in: [2006]146STC596(All)
Prakash Krishna, J.1. The only question involved in the present revision is as to whether State Legislature is competent or not to impose trade tax on old newspapers.2. The factual scenario is almost undisputed. For the assessment year 1989-90 the Trade Tax Department on the basis of information received levied trade tax on the import of old newspapers. The levy of trade tax has been justified by the department on the basis of Notification No. 5785 dated September 7, 1981. However this order has been set aside by the Tribunal on the short ground that the State Legislature has no legislative competence to impose any such tax on old newspapers.To appreciate the controversy it is relevant to quote Notification No. 5785 dated September 7, 1981. Entry No. 33 of the said notification has been relied upon by the learned Standing Counsel, which reads as follows:33 Old newspapers, raddi including Sale to 6 per cent.paper bags, paper buntings, consumerpaper flags, posters and banners.Section 4(a...
Tag this Judgment!Rajiv Nagar Sahkari Awas Samiti Ltd. Vs. Chief Controlling Revenue Aut ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-28-2003
Reported in: (2003)3UPLBEC2589
M. Katju, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner is challenging the impugned order dated 4.6.2002, Annexure-4 to the writ petition, order dated 25.8.2001, Annexure 4-A to the writ petition and order dated 3.2.2003 Anncxure-5 to the writ petition. The petitioner has also prayed for a declaration that Section 13 of U.P. Act No. 22 of 1998, in so far as it seeks to amendClause (b-1) of Article 5 of Schedule 1-B of the Indian Stamp Act, be declared unconstitutional.3. The petitioner is a Co-operative Society registered under the U.P. Co-operative Societies Act. It is alleged in Paragraph 3 of the writ petition that it entered into an agreement dated 16.7.1999 to purchase a bhumidhari Plot No. 395 measuring 1.345 acres belonging to one Matru alias Matrumal situate at village Asadpur, Pargana and Tahsil Koil, District Aligarh. True copy of the registered agreement to sell dated 16.7.1999 is Annexure 1 to the writ petition. A sum of Rs. 100/- was paid as stamp duty on th...
Tag this Judgment!income Tax Officer Vs. MatadIn Snehlata (Huf)
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-25-2003
Reported in: (2003)81TTJ(All.)995
1. This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of the CIT(A), Varanasi, dt. 2 March, 1995 for the asst. yr. 1993-94 on the following grounds : "1. That the learned CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,10,000 being the alleged gifts received by the assessee from 10 persons at Rs. 21,000 each. The learned CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that the gifts were made suddenly and without there being any occasion from as many as 10 persons. He has failed to appreciate that the story or so called gifts represented merely a make-belief and an arrangement for capital build up on the part of the assessee. 2. That the learned CIT(A) has failed to appreciate that though the gifts were stated to have been made without any consideration and therefore out of natural love and affection, none of the alleged donors was a close relation of the assessee and all of them reside at Calcutta, whereas the assessee is a resident of Varanasi. 3. That the learned CIT(A) has not appreciate...
Tag this Judgment!Riasat Ali Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-25-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)AWC3046
A.K. Yog, J.1. Writ Petition No. 23570 of 1987, Riasat Ali v. State of U.P. through Home Secretary, Civil Secretariat. Lucknow and Ors., was heard by learned single Judge (A.K. Yog. J.) and vide judgment and order, dated May 11, 1999, this petition was connected with Writ Petition No. 5816 of 1995. Raghvendra Singh v. District Commandant, Home Guards Mainpuri and Anr. Record of the case was directed to be placed before Hon'ble the Chief Justice for nomination of a larger Bench for hearing the cases in view of conflicting decisions of this Court in the case of Bibhuti Narayan Singh v. State and Ors., 1986 UPLBEC 1130, (A.N. Verma, J.), holding post of Home Guard to be a civil post and in the case of Abdul Hameed and Anr. v. State of U.P. and Anr. Writ Petition No. 9028 of 1990 and other connected 42 writ petitions decided vide judgment and order dated 28.10.1991 (S.C. Mathur, J.) holding said post not to be a civil post.2. The Chief Justice, vide order dated 3.8.1999, directed the prese...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Rani Agrawal and ors. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax an ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-25-2003
Reported in: (2004)187CTR(All)340; [2004]265ITR22(All)
PRAKASH KRISHNA J. 1. This writ petition has been pressed for a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated November 30, 1999, passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Agra.The Commissioner of Income-tax by a common order has disposed of five revisions filed under Section 264 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. These revisions were filed against the assessment order passed on March 12, 1997, for the assessment year 1988-89. The petitioners entered into a partnership agreement on March 1, 1988. The capital in cash was raised by them for the newly constituted firm. The said cash was seized by the police on March 23, 1988, and was handed over to the Income-tax Department. The cash, thus, seized was assessed in the hands of Shri Ramesh Kumar (owner of the car) on substantive basis and protective assessments have been made in the case of the petitioners.2. All the five revisions were heard and decided ex parte in the absence of the petitioners or their counse...
Tag this Judgment!Dil Pasand Bidi Company and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-25-2003
Reported in: (2004)ILLJ727All
M. Katju, J.1. This writ petition has been filed against the impugned notification dated November 21, 1989 (Annexure A-III to the writ petition).2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.The petitioners are manufacturers of Bidis. They engage labour for rolling the Bidis. It is alleged in para 2 to the writ petition that the Central Government created various Zones in India for regulating the wages of Bidi Rollers. It is alleged in para 3 that a settlement was arrived between the State Government, representatives of the Labour Unions, and the employers in 1982 and the State Government by notification dated May 21, 1982 fixed the minimum wage at Rs. 7.50 per thousand Bidis (vide Annexure A-I to the writ petition) which has been issued under Section 3(b) of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.3. It is alleged in para 4 of the petition that in 1987 the prices of the commodities rose up and hence the State Government of Madhya Pradesh raised the minimum wages of Bidi Rollers to R...
Tag this Judgment!Swadeshi Cotton Mills Vs. Prescribed Authority, (Payment of Wages Act) ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-25-2003
Reported in: (2004)ILLJ4All
Anjani Kumar, J. 1. In view of the office report dated July 17, 2003 service of notice on opposite party No. 3, is held sufficient. The matter is heard with the consent of the parties and being decided.2. Heard learned counsel for the parties. By means of this writ petition, petitioner has challenged the order passed by the Prescribed Authority under the provisions of Payment of Wages Act and the order passed by the Appellate Authority whereby the Appellate Authority confirmed the order passed by the Prescribed Authority. Prescribed Authority has allowed the payment of subsistence allowance amounting to Rs. 4,130.50 holding it to be unwarranted deduction from the wages of the concerned workman. The Prescribed Authority has also allowed the damages for inaction of the employer and granted fine equivalent to Rs. 4,130.50 and cost of Rs. 50/-. It is this order, which is challenged by the employer-petitioner.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the amount of subsistence allowa...
Tag this Judgment!Abha Agarwal (Dr.) (Mrs.) Vs. Vice-chancellor, Allahabad University an ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-25-2003
Reported in: (2003)3UPLBEC2259
A.K. Yog and Umeshwar Panday, JJ.1. Dr. (Mrs.) Abha Agarwal/Petitioner............................represented by Sri R.B. Singhal; Vice-Chancellor, Allahabad University/Respondent No. 1; Registrar, Allahabad University/Respondent No. 2; Accounts Officer/Internal Auditor, Allahabad University/Respondent No. 3..................represented by Sri Prakash Padia; Treasury Officer, Treasury, Allahabad/Respondent No. 4......represented by learned StandingCounsel.Petitioner before us, Dr. (Mrs.) Abha Agarwal, has filed this petition under Article 226, Constitution of India claiming following reliefs :-(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to pay on Family Pension to the petitioner payable on the basis of death of her husband, Dr. D.C. Agarwal, including DA and other adhoc reliefs w.e.f, 7.7.1992;(ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to refund Rs. 44,824.55 deducted from the Bank Account of th...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »