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.
Bitana Vs. Collector and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-03-2003
Reported in: 2004(2)AWC1023
A.N. Varma, J.1. Through the instant writ petition, the petitioner who is a Pradhan, has prayed for quashing of the order dated 1.7.2003 passed by opposite party No. 1 whereby her financial and administrative powers have been withdrawn and the same has been directed to be exercised and performed by a Committee consisting of 3 members of the Gram Panchayat. The members of the said committee have been impleaded as opposite parties No. 3 to 5 on behalf of whom a counter-affidavit has been filed by Sri Nirmal Tiwari.2. The contention of the petitioner is that the order impugned is manifestly illegal and suffers from an error apparent on the face of the record inasmuch as prior to the passing of the said order, no opportunity was afforded to the petitioner nor any explanation was called for from her. His submission thus is that the same is in utter violation of principles of natural justice. He next submitted that the action of the opposite party No. 1 is illegal and arbitrary as the enquir...
Ram Anek and 2 ors. Vs. Smt. Raj Pati and 4 ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-03-2003
Reported in: 2004(2)AWC1685
ORDERKamal Kishore, J.1. This is the second civil appeal against the judgment and decree dated 24.11.1982 passed by the then learned IInd Additional District Judge, Sultanpur allowing the appeal and setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the then learned Ist Additional Munsif, Sultanpur in Regular Suit No. 255 of 1976, which was a suit for permanent injunction,2. The following question of lawhas been formulated :'Whether the judgment of the First Appellate Court is perverse and illegal?'3. I have heard arguments and have gone through the record.4. Admittedly, defendants-appellants are the heirs of Ram Bux. The defendants-appellants claim title through the sale deed executed by Smt. Sundara the widow of Bindra, who was the real brother of the aforesaid Ram Bux. The plaintiffs-respondents claim themselves to be the exclusive owner of the property in suit by adverse possession.5. It has been held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in 2001 (19) LCD 1082 ; that the person claiming title by a...
Surendra Nath Rai Vs. Basic Shiksha Adhikari and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-03-2003
Reported in: (2004)1UPLBEC85
Vineet Saran, J.1. Vishwa Nath Rai, father of the petitioner, was Headmaster in Panchayat Junior High School, Mithaura Bazar, District Maharajganj, which was a recognised Government aided Junior High School. He died-in-harness on 20.4.1990. The petitioner applied under the Dying-in-Harness Rules, 1974 for appointment as an Assistant Clerk or Assistant Teacher on compassionate ground claiming that he was duly qualified for being so appointed. Several reminders were sent to the respondents and since no orders were passed by the respondents, the petitioner filed this writ petition praying for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to give appointment to the petitioner.2. I have heard Sri Vashistha Tiwari, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Sri R.C. Dwivedi, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent-School and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.3. The contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that even though the father of the pet...
Neelam Sanjiva Reddy and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-03-2003
Reported in: I(2004)DMC130
K.N. Ojha, J.1. This revision has been preferred against the order dated 13.2.2001 passed by VII Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi in Case No. 1474/2000, Rekha Devi v. Nilam Sanjiva Reddy and Ors., by which the revisionists Nilam Sanjiva Reddy, Phulgen Patel, Smt. Chinta Devi, Urmila Devi, Madhuri Patel, Mansha Patel and Ramesh Patel were summoned to face the trial under Sections 494 and 109, I.P.C.2. Heard Mr. A.N. Tiwari, learned Counsel for the revisionists, Mr. Vimal Prasad, learned Counsel for the opposite parties and learned A.G.A.3. Smt. Rekha Devi, respondent No. 2 filed complaint bearing No. 2273/ 2000, Smt. Rekha Devi v. Nedam Sanjiva Reddy and Ors., under Sections 494 and 109, I.P.C. in the Court of 3rd Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi containing the fact that she was married with Neelam Sanjiva Reddy, revisionist on 20.5.1996 at her father's residence village Gahani, Police Station Cholapur, District Varanasi. She went to the residence of her husband but dem...
Smt. Leela Gupta and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-03-2003
Reported in: 2005ACJ1739
A.K. Yog, J.1. Both F.A.F.O. No. 385 of 1987 and F.A.F.O. No. 403 of 1987 arise from common impugned judgment and decree dated 24.2.1987, passed in Claim Petition No. 4 of 1985, Smt. Leela Gupta and Ors. v. State of U. P. and Ors., passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Mirzapur, whereby Claims Tribunal decreed the claim petition for recovery of Rs. 2,51,800 with costs and pendente lite and future interest at the rate of 9% per annum subject to the directions given in the said impugned judgment and decree.2. Claim petition was filed by Smt. Leela Gupta (wife of the deceased motor accident victim, Ganga Prasad Gupta) and three minor children under the guardianship of their mother, claiming a sum of Rs. 7 lacs as compensation.3. It is not disputed, in the instant case, that Ganga Prasad Gupta was working as officiating Executive Engineer in the Department of irrigation, Government of U. P. at the relevant time and while he was on official duty and going through Government vehicle (Jee...
Cit Vs. Fertilizer Agencies
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-03-2003
Reported in: [2005]142TAXMAN84(All)
1. In this case Sri R.K. Gulati appeared for the assessee who was elevated to the Bench. Notice was issued on 7-1-2003 to the assessee to engage another counsel, but none has appeared and the notice has not returned after delivery. Hence we treat service as sufficient under the Explanation (II) to Chapter 8 rule 12 of the High Court Rules.2. This is a reference under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in which the following question has been referred to us for our opinion.1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the amount of Rs. 30,925 on account of the difference between the enhanced and old prices of fertilizer in respect of the stocks as on 31-5-1974 during the previous year did not accrue to the assessee in this year and, therefore, could not be treated as its income for the assessment year 1976-77 ?The facts are covered by the Division Bench decision of this court in CIT v. Govind Prasad Prabhu Nath...
Abbas Wazir (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-02-2003
Reported in: (2003)185CTR(All)152
1. This is an IT reference under Section 256(1) of the IT Act in which the following question has been referred to us for our opinion :'Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally justified to disallow Rs. 19,000 out of remuneration payable to Abdul Qayum Ansari and Abdul Quddus Ansari ?'2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.3. The assessee is a company registered under Indian Companies Act which is engaged in manufacture and export of carpets. The relevant assessment year is 1978-79. The dispute in this case is about the increase of salary of two of the directors, Sri Abdul Qayum Ansari and Abdul Quddus Ansari, who were earlier paid salary of Rs. 1,595 per month each, but this salary was increased to Rs. 2,987 per month each w.e.f. 1st Jan., 1976. This increase in the salary of the two directors of the assessee-company was disallowed, in respect of which this present reference has been made. The IAC disallowed the claim of the assessee in r...
Devendra Kumar Gaur Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-02-2003
Reported in: 2003(4)AWC3074; (2004)1UPLBEC105
Vineet Saran, J.1. This writ petition has been filed with a prayer for quashing the order of the respondent No. 2 dated 6.9.1990, whereby the services of the petitioner have been terminated. A further prayer has been made for a direction to the respondents to regularize the ad hoc appointment of the petitioner and treat him as a regular employee of the Rural Engineering Service Department.2. The brief facts relevant for the adjudication of this case are that the petitioner was appointed as a junior clerk on ad hoc basis by letter dated 31.7.1987 issued by the respondent No. 2, Superintending Engineer, Rural Engineering Service, Agra Circle, Agra. It was categorically specified in the said appointment letter that the appointment of the petitioner was purely temporary and could be terminated without any notice ; and also that the petitioner Devendra Kumar Gaur shall not be entitled to any claim for appointment on regular basis. On the basis of the said appointment letter, the petitioner ...
Chandra Singh Vs. Ist Additional District Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-02-2003
Reported in: 2004(1)AWC731
ORDERV.M. Sahai, J.1. The short question that arises for consideration in this petition is whether an appeal would lie under Section 9(1) of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 (in brief Act) against an order rejecting the application for setting aside an ex parte order passed by the prescribed authority?2. The petitioner purchased plot No. 219 area 3.5 acres situate in village Bawli district Bijnor from Inder Raj Singh through a registered sale deed dated 17.3.1972. The petitioner was also put in possession by his vendor. The lekhpal of the village made a complaint to the prescribed authority that the petitioner is in unauthorised occupation over the land in dispute. On the basis of this complaint, notices were issued to the petitioner. It was claimed by him that the notices were not served on him and an ex parte order was passed on 9.4.1984 directing eviction of the petitioner from the land in dispute and damages of Rs. 4,966 was imposed on him. The pet...
Dhirendra Nath Awasthi (Dr.) Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-02-2003
Reported in: (2004)1UPLBEC185
M. Katju, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated 24.6.2003. (Annexure-l to the petition) by which respondent No. 2 has been given charge as officiating Principal of the M.L.N. Medical College, Allahabad. The petitioner has also prayed for a direction to respondent No. 1. State of U.P., to handover charge of officiating Principal of M.L.N. Medical College, Allahabad to the petitioner being senior most Professor in the College.3. Admittedly, at present there is no permanent Principal in the Medical College, since the selection has to be done by the U.P. Public Service Commissioner. The question, therefore, arises as to who should be appointed ad-hoc Principal when there is no permanent Principal in the Medical College. It appears that there is no statutory provision or Rule which mentions as to who should be appointed ad hoc Principal in the absence of the permanent Principal. Thus, there appears to be a legal...
- ‹ Prev
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 20
- 21
- Next ›
- Last »