Allahabad Court September 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.
National thermal Power Corporation Ltd. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-11-2003
Reported in: (2003)3UPLBEC2649
1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking issue of a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the awards dated 26th July, 1990, and 31st March, 1990 contained in Annexures 16 and 17 to the writ petition.2. The brief facts of the case are that certain land measuring the area of 11.92 acres had been acquired in the year 1986 by the State ofU.P. in pursuance of the notification under Sections 4 and 6 read with Section 17(1) of the Land Acquisition Act which shall in brevity hereinafter be referred to as the Act and in pursuance to that some awards were made for fixing the compensation to the landowners. The land had been acquired for the benefit of thepetitioner National Thermal Power Corporation.3. The main ground of attack is that the petitioner had neither been issued any notice nor offered any opportunity of adducing the evidence as required under the mandatory provisions contained in Section 52(2) of the said Act. The non-compliance of the aforesaid section make...
Hari Ram Seth Khandsari Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-11-2003
Reported in: [2005]139STC358(All)
Prakash Krishna, J.1. These two revisions are founded on the common order of the Tribunal dated December 20, 1991 passed in two connected Second Appeals Nos. 329 of 1990 (1979-80) and 330 of 1990 (1980-81).2. The applicant is a registered partnership firm and these two revisions relate to the assessment years 1979-80 (U.P.) and 1980-81 (U.P.). The question involved in these revisions is about the imposition of interest under Section 8(1) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948.3. The applicant for the assessment year 1978-79 deposited the tax on the turnover of khandsari. The said commodity was taxable at the rate of two per cent. Due to the mistake in the fourth quarter of the assessment year 1978-79 the applicant deposited the tax at the rate of four per cent amounting to Rs. 20,396.45. The rate of tax being two per cent, it deposited Rs. 10,198.22 in excess of the amount due under the Sales Tax Act. The mistake was detected by the applicant subsequently and it adjusted the part of the exces...
Cit Vs. Tableware Craft Cottage
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-11-2003
Reported in: [2005]142TAXMAN88(All)
1. This is an Income Tax Reference under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, 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 Income Tax Officer was under a duty to allow the deduction under section 35B even though there was no such claim before him ?'2. A perusal of the order of the Tribunal shows that the Tribunal has only remanded the case to the Income Tax Officer to examine the petitioners claim for weighted deduction under section 35B of the Income Tax Act, 1961.3. In our opinion, no question of law arises out of the order of the Tribunal. Hence, the question is returned unanswered....
Bal Kishan Vs. Ivth A.D.J. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-10-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)AWC3183
S.U. Khan, J. 1. This writ petition has been filed by tenant which arises out of release proceedings under Section 21 of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972. Release application filed by landlady/respondent No. 3 numbered as P.A. Case No. 31 of 1988 was allowed by IVth Additional C.J.M./ Prescribed Authority, Etawah through judgment and order dated 27.5.1993, Annexure-1 to the writ petition. Tenant/petitioner's appeal being P.A. Appeal No. 17 of 1993 was dismissed by IVth Additional District Judge, Etawah through judgment and order dated 2.5.1996. Landlady pleaded that she purchased the house in dispute on 13.5.1985 from its previous landlord, that petitioner was tenant in the house in dispute since before its purchase, that the tenant illegally started using one room of the house in dispute for business purpose. It was further pleaded by the landlady that she along with her family resided in a tenanted house belonging to a trust. Tenant petitioner pleaded that the house in which landlady was resi...
Manager, Saraswati Vidhya Mandir Senior Secondary School and ors. Vs. ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-10-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)ARBLR653(All); (2003)3UPLBEC2577
Prakash Krishna, J.1. On the joint request of learned counsel for the parties-this appeal itself was heard finally at the admission stage. Counsel for the parties have filed copies of the documents along with affidavits, which have been taken on record. 2. The respondent No. 1 was appointed as Librarian on 18.07.1994 by the Committee of Management of Saraswati Vidhya Mandir. In the contract of service there is an Arbitration clause. Clause 19 of the contract of the service, which contains Arbitration clause, is quoted below : '(19) The Committee of the party No. 1 will agree that any dispute arising out of or relating to this contract including any disciplinary action leading to the dismissal or removal from service or reduction in rank etc. shall be referred for Arbitration of any person to be nominated by the Chairman of society running the school and if the Arbitrator fails or neglects to act or becomes incapacitated the Chairman of the society shall nominate any other person to fil...
Priya Kant Chaube Vs. Vice Chancellor, Kashi Vidyapeeth and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-10-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)AWC3378
Umeshwar Pandey, J.1. The petitioner. Dr. Priya Kant Chaube has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the following prayers :(a) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to comply with the order dated 7.7.1994 (Annexure-8) passed by Vice-Chancellor and report of Sub-committee dated 19.6.1994 (Annexure 6 and 7), which has become final and binding upon the respondents.(b) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No. 2 to issue No Dues Certificate to the petitioner in pursuance of order dated 7.7.1994.(c) To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to pay the arrears of salary, gratuity, pension and all benefits arising thereof since 4.9.1967 to the petitioner.2. Brief facts of the case as disclosed in the petition are that the petitioner obtained degree of Ayurvedic Bachelor of Medicine and Surgery (A.B.M.S.) from Ban...
Laxmi Talkies and ors. Vs. Rent Control and Eviction Officer and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-10-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)AWC3117
S.U. Khan, J.1. This writ petition filed by the tenants arises out of the proceedings under Section 29A of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972, initiated by landlord respondent No. 2 for enhancement of rent. The application was filed on 29.11.1988. The lease deed in between the parties was executed on 2.6.1970. Prior to execution of the lease deed building in the form of cinema hall was existing over the lease land. The building had been constructed by the previous tenant and sold by him to the petitioners to whom the land over which the building was constructed was also let out through the aforesaid lease deed of 1970! The monthly rent provided for under the lease deed was Rs. 70 per month. The lease was initially for a period of 7 years with the clause for renewal/continuance after 7 years also on enhancement of rent. There is no dispute that after 7 years, i.e., from June, 1977 rent was enhanced from Rs. 70 to Rs. 105 per month. In the application for enhancement of rent it was alleged that th...
Sant Prasad Pandey Vs. U.P. State Public Services Tribunal (5) and 4 o ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-10-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)AWC3394
Umeshwar Pandcy, J. 1. The petitioner, Sant Prasad Pandey, has challenged the impugned judgment and order of U. P. Public Services Tribunal (Annexure-1 to the writ petition) dated 5.9.1981 and order of the appellate authority (D.I.G.) dated 22.1.1979 (Annexure-3 to the writ petition) and the order of punishing authority, S.S.P., dated 23.12.1977 (Annexure-2 to the writ petition) and has prayed for quashing the same by issuing a writ of certiorari. He has also prayed for a direction in the nature of writ of mandamus to reinstate him in the service as constable in U. P. Civil Police.2. As the brief facts of the case, disclosed in the petition, the petitioner while posted as civil police constable in District Lucknow, U.P., was placed under suspension vide order dated 22/27.4.1977 by respondent No. 4, S.S.P., Lucknow. The following three fold of charges were framed against him :(1) That he was keeping one Sita Devi D/o Smt. Kamla Devi as his wife having illicit connection with her in the ...
Kailash Nath Chaturvedi Vs. Additional District Judge (Court No. 12) a ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-10-2003
Reported in: 2004(2)AWC1020
N.K. Mehrotra, J.1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the opposite parties No. 3 and 4.2. This is a petition for issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the judgment dated 29.7.2003 passed by the opposite party No. 1 and the judgment and order dated 8.9.1997 passed by the opposite party No. 2 contained in Annexure-9 and for a writ of mandamus commanding the opposite parties No. 1 and 2 not to enforce the illegal impugned orders.3. Since the opposite parties No. 2 and 3 have appeared by filing a caveat and both the parties agreed to argue the writ petition on merit at the time of admission, I have heard both the learned counsel for the parties.4. The petitioner is the tenant in the ground floor of House No. 133/335, Aminabad Road, Naka Hindola, Lucknow and the opposite parties No. 3 and 4 are the landlords. The opposite parties No. 3 and 4 moved an application under Section 21 (1) (a) of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Evicti...
Ram Darash Pandey Vs. U.P. Public Service Tribunal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-10-2003
Reported in: (2004)1UPLBEC113
Umeshwar Pandey, J.1. The petitioner, Ram Darash Pandey, whose services as Class IV employee (Notice Server/Chaukidar) with respondent No. 5, Development Authority, Gorakhpur have been terminated, has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the following prayer :--(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the termination order dated 23.3.81 (Annexures 3/A and 3/B) and order and judgment of the Tribunal dated 9.1.83 and 19.12.85 (Annexures 5 and 6);(b) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent No. 4, Gorakhpur Development Authority to treat the petitioner in its regular service as Notice Server and to pay his requisite salary and all other allowances as and when it becomes due; and(c) Issue any writ, order, direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.2. The facts as disclosed in the writ petition are that the petitioner, vide Annexure-1 to the writ petition, was appo...
- ‹ Prev
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- Next ›
- Last »