Allahabad Court August 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.
Commissioner of Wealth Tax Vs. Surendra Nath Gupta
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-07-2003
Reported in: (2004)189CTR(All)50
1. In this WT reference following questions have been framed for our opinion :'1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in view of the provisions of Rule 2B(2) of WT Rules, 1958, the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the value of the closing stock as per balance sheet, maintained by the firm on cost basis should be taken to be the value for the purposes of the WT Act?2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the activity of the firm M/s Jai Prakash Nath & Co., in which the assessee is a partner amounted to processing of goods?3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the firm M/s Jai Prakash Nath & Co., was an industrial undertaking within the meaning of Explanation to Section 5(1)(xxxii)?'2. The Tribunal, while deciding this case, has relied upon a judgment in the case of one of other partners in CWT v. B.N. Gupta...
Radhey Lal Vs. the State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-07-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ975
ORDERK.N. Sinha, J.1. The present revision has been filed against the judgment and order dated 1-2-2003 whereby 9th Addl. Sessions Judge Mathura dismissed in default Criminal Appeal No. 71 of 1998, Radhey Lal v. State of U. P., under Sections 406 and 420 I. P. C., Police Station Kotwali Mathura.2. Brief facts giving rise to this revision are that revisionist Radhey Lal was tried by R. S. Gangwar, Judicial Magistrate, Mathura and was convicted to undergo imprisonment for three months for the offence under Section 419 I.P.C. and six months R. I. for the offence under Section 468 I.P.C. along with fine of Rs. 2000/-. The revisionist preferred an appeal to the Court of Session which was transferred to the Court of 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Mathura who dismissed the appeal in the absence of the appellant.3. Being aggrieved by the said order the present revision has been filed.4. I have heard learned counsel for the revisionist and the learned A. G. A.5. Learned counsel for the revision...
U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Vs. Nagar Mahapalika Tribunal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-07-2003
Reported in: (2003)3UPLBEC1951
R.K. Agrawal, J.1. By means of the present writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad, Lucknow seeks a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order/award dated 5.6.1987 passed by the U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Tribunal, Agra, respondent No. I as Annexure-1 to the writ petition.2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present writ petition are as follows:A notification was issued under Section 357 of the Nagar Mahapalika Adhiniyam on 23.4. 1960 for acquiring a huge track of land of village Ghatwasan in the district of Agra for the purposes of a scheme knows as Ghatwasan Grahsthan Evam Sarak Yojna, Agra. The said notification was followed by another notification issued under Section 363 of the Nagar Mahapalika Adhiniyam on 26.9.1964. Under an agreement dated 31.5.1968 the execution of the aforementioned scheme was transferred to the U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad herein after ref...
Dr. (Smt.) Brij Lata Arora and anr. Vs. Regional Inspectress of Girls ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-06-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)AWC3307
S.U. Khan, J.1. First writ petition has been filed by Dr. Brij Lata and Smt. Gargi. Second writ petition has been filed by Kumari Poornima Rajvanshi, third writ petition has been filed by all the three lady teachers.2. In the first writ petition stay order was passed on 8.8.1986 'till further orders of the Court the services of the petitioners shall not be deemed to have come to an end only because 30th June, 1986 has intervened they shall continue' and in the second petition on 23.8.1986 'till further orders of the Court services of the petitioner shall not be deemed to have come to an end only because 30th June, 1986 has intervened she shall continue'. By virtue of the aforesaid stay orders which are still continuing all the three aforesaid lady teachers claim to be working in institution in question.3. The main question to be decided in these writ petitions is as to whether services of the petitioners should be dispensed with on the basis of the law laid down by the Full Bench of th...
Ajay Singh (In Jail) Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-06-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)AWC3340
N.K. Mehrotra, J.1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the State.2. With the consent of both the parties, this petition is being disposed of finally at admission stage.3. It appears that the petitioner was bailed out by this Court in Crime No. 184 of 2003, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 427, 302, 504, 336, I.P.C. and Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act and 3/4 of Prevention of Public Property and Damages Act. After a period of four months, a new Section 3 (1) of U. P. Gangster Act was added in the same crime. In the Gangster chart only two cases were shown ; one in Crime No. 184 of 2003 and another in Crime No. 183 of 2003 and in both the offences the petitioner is on bail. The petitioner instead of moving for his bail on the basis of the earlier order of this Court has preferred the instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The correct procedure would have been that the petitioner must hav...
Brij Kishore Pachauri Vs. District Inspector of Schools and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-06-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)AWC3366; (2003)3UPLBEC2251
S.U. Khan, J.1. Through this writ petition-petitioner has challenged the order of D.I.O.S. dated 12.5.1995, holding that petitioner voluntarily resigned from the post of teacher in Janta Uchchattar Madhyamik Vidyalay, Mursan, Aligarh on 19.9.1994. The said order of D.I.O.S. was passed in pursuance of order passed in earlier similar writ petition filed by the petitioner (Writ Petition No. 35963 of 1994, decided on 11.11.1994).2. From the perusal of averments in the writ petition, it is clear that instead of concentrating on teaching work, petitioner devoted much of his time and energy in exposing the alleged misappropriation of funds by the Principal probably in order to shield his own misdeeds. Petitioner filed complaints to different authorities including District Magistrate, F.I.R. and application before the Magistrate concerned under Section 156(3), Cr. P.C. In this background, the case set up by the petitioner that the Principal invited him over a cup of tea at his residence on 18....
Raja Abhushan Brahma Shah and anr. Vs. State of U.P. Through Collector ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-06-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)AWC3097
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the records.2. That present writ petition has been preferred by the petitioners against the order dated 3.5.1999 passed by the Compensation Officer, Robertsganj, Sonebhadra, Annexure-1 to the writ petition, rejecting the application made by the petitioners as contemplated under Section 29 of the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act (hereinafter referred to as the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act) read with relevant rules framed under the Act.3. The case is brief is that father of the petitioners, namely, late Raja Anand Brahma Shah was superior proprietor of 119 villages in Paragana Agori situated in south of the Kaimur Range in district Sonebhadra, previously in district Mirzapur covering about 713 sq. miles.4. The State of U.P. brought in by legislation the U.P.Z.A. and L.R. Act, 1950. The said Act did not apply to Paragana Agori at the initial stage, but subsequently, the Act was made applicable by notification dated 30th J...
Ghaziabad Development Authority and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-06-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)AWC3078b
M. Katju, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel.2. The petitioner has challenged the constitutional validity of Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.3. The petitioner, Ghaziabad Development Authority, is a statutory body constituted under the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973. The petitioner No. 2 is Secretary of the Ghaziabad Development Authority and he is aggrieved by the orders dated 28.2.2001 passed by the District Consumer Forum, Ghaziabad convicting and sentencing him to six months imprisonment, vide Annexures 1 and 2 to the writ petition.4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that Section 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is unconstitutional as it has not provided for any procedure for the trial. Learned counsel relied on a Division Bench decision of the Karnataka High Court in Paramjit Singh v. Union of India, 1999 CTJ 570, in which it was held that the proviso to Section 27 of the Consumer Protection A...
Shobha Ram Yadav Vs. Vishnu Shyam Dwivedi and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-06-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ977
ORDERRakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard counsel for the applicant, the standing counsel for the respondents and perused the record.2. This contempt petition has been filed alleging non-compliance of the order of this Court dated 21-2-2000 passed in Writ Petition No. 8062 of 1994 Shobha Ram Yadav v. State of U.P. and another,3. It is submitted that the opposite parties have not considered the case of the petitioner for appointment although copy of the order was served on 10-3-2000 and 6-5-2000.4. The brief facts of the case are that the date of birth of the petitioner is 1-7-1942. He has completed 60 years of age on 1-7-2001. An advertisement for appointment of Assistant Teacher was published by the District Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Varanasi on 31-12-1991. The petitioner had applied for the post of Assistant Teacher. It is alleged that his application was rejected by the District. Basic Shiksha Adhikari, Varanasi on the ground of over age by counting 1st July, 1942 and 1st July 1992 both dated in...
U.P. Public Service Commission Vs. Surendra Kumar Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-05-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)AWC2819
M. Katju, J.1. This special appeal has been filed against the judgment of the learned single Judge of this Court dated 12.4.2002 in Writ Petition No. 53701 of 2000. In that decision the learned single Judge has followed his own judgment in Writ Petition No. 55771 of 2000, Sushil Kumar Srivastava v. U. P. Public Service Commission, decided on 12.4.2002.2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.3. The facts of this case are that the U. P. Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as the Commission) issued an advertisement in the newspaper 'Rashtriya Sahara' dated 3.7.1999 inviting applications for the post of Regional Inspector (Technical) and Assistant Regional Inspector (Technical). Copy of the advertisement is Annexure-1 to the writ petition. The writ petitioner applied against that advertisement. His application was rejected on the ground that he was overage, and hence he filed Writ Petition No. 30063 of 1999 in this Court in which an interim order dated 26.7.1999 was...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »