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.
Sudha Singh and ors. Vs. State Transport Appellate Tribunal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-19-2003
Reported in: 2004(2)AWC1676
N.K. Mehrotra, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel on behalf of the opposite parties.2. The petitioners are holders of Regular Stage Carriage Permits for the route known as Muzaffar Nagar-Budhana-Kandala-Issopurteet and allied route. They are plying their vehicles on the basis of the permits. Under the direction of the State Transport Tribunal dated 8.12.1992 their applications for renewal of permits were kept pending for a long period. On 28.8.2002 the said applications were considered by the Regional Transport Authority, Saharanpur. The petitioners along with sixtynine permit holders moved the representations before the concerned authority for getting the renewal applications decided. On 19.4.2003 the Assistant Regional Transport Officer, Muzaffar Nagar directed the petitioners to stop plying on the ground that the Regional Transport Authority had refused to renew their permits. The petitioners came to know about the rejection of the renewal ap...
Hazari Lal Vs. Ist Additional District Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-19-2003
Reported in: 2004(2)AWC1774
N.K. Mehrotra, J.1. This writ petition has been filed for issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 22.11.2001 allowing the application for condonation of delay passed in S.C.C. Suit No. 2 of 1981 by the 1st Additional District Judge, Bahraich, as contained in Annexure No. 1 and for issuing a writ of mandamus directing the respondent-1 not to give effect to the impugned order on 22.11.2001 passed by the opposite party No. 1.2. It appears that the opposite parties Nos. 2 and 3 filed a suit for ejectment and arrears of rent and ejectment and mesne profit against Hazari Lal and deceased Mewa Lal. During the pendency of the suit, Mewa Lal died on 16.6.1988. He left behind his wife Smt. Ram Janki who also died on 25.10.1996. A writ petition between the parties was pending in this Court and the proceedings for substitution of the legal heirs of deceased defendant Mewa Lal could not be taken in time. The plaintiff-opposite parties moved application under Order XXII, ...
Kodu Singh and ors. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-19-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ1348
U.S. Tripathi, J. 1. This appeal has been directed against the judgment and order dated 21-4-1981 passed by Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Banda in Sessions Trial No. 115 of 1980 convicting appellants Kodu Singh (since dead), Ranjeet Singh and Jagjeet Singh (since dead) under Section 148 IPC and 302 read with 149 IPC and sentencing each of them to undergo R. I. for a period of one year under Section 148 IPC and imprisonment for life under Sections 302 read with 149 IPC, convicting appellant Chhatra Pal singh, (since dead) under Section 148 IPC and sentencing him to undergo R. I. for a period of one year and convicting appellants Bhabhuti Singh, Vijai Raj Singh, Raghuraj Singh (since dead), Maidan Singh, Turti Singh @ Narvada Singh and Genda Singh (since dead) under Sections 147 IPC and 325 read with 149 IPC and sentencing each of them to undergo R. I. for a period of six months under Section 147 I. P. C. and R. I. for a period 21/2 years under Sections 325/149 I. P. C. All the sentence...
Chhatrapal Singh Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-19-2003
Reported in: (2003)3UPLBEC2634
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the impugned notice dated 3.9.2003 (Annexure-4), issued by the respondent No. 2, to convene the meeting for considering no-confidence motion against the petitioner on 22.9.2003.2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that petitioner was elected on 8.3.2001, as a Kshettra Pramukh of Block, Hasiyan, District Mahamaya Nagar. Members, more than required for the purpose of the said Kshetra Panchayat gave notice to the District Collector (Respondent No. 2) of no-confidence motion against the petitioner on 30.6.2003. The notice was issuing to all the members for holding the meeting on 21.7.2003. However, for some reason the meeting was not held and has been scheduled to be held on 22.9.2003, which is being challenged on the ground that it was mandatory for the Respondent No. 2 to hold the meeting within 30 days from the date of receipt of the notice, i.e., from 30.6.2003, and as the notice has lapsed, the me...
Gulab Singh Vs. Labour Court and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-19-2003
Reported in: (2003)3UPLBEC2822
Anjani Kumar, J.1. The petitioner-workman by means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, approached this Court with the prayer to quash the impugned award of the Labour Court, Varanasi dated 25th August, 1995, passed in Adjudication Case No. 5 of 1991, copy whereof is annexed as Annexure -'8' to the writ petition.2. The following dispute was refereed to the Labour Court for adjudication:-^^D;k lsok;kstdksa }kjk vius Jfedxqykc flag iq= Jh jke dju flag] in [email protected] lgk;d dh lsok;sa fnukad 14-11-1986 ls lekIr fd;k tkuk vuqfpr rFkk@vFkok voS/kkfud gS ;fn gk] rks lEcfU/kr Jfed D;k ykHk ikus dk vf/kdkjh gS] rFkk vU;fdl fooj.k lfgr ** 3. Heard learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.4. After receiving notices by the Labour Court, the parties have exchanged their pleadings and adduced evidence. In short, the workman has set up the case that he was appointed on 21st November, 1983 at Mandi Samiti, Rath in the district of Hamirpur. Subsequently, the...
Madhya Bharat Transport Carrier Vs. Commissioner of Trade Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-19-2003
Reported in: [2006]143STC493(All)
Rajes Kumar, J. 1. The present revision under Section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') is directed against the order of the Trade Tax Tribunal, Agra, dated May 28, 2003.2. Brief facts of the case borne out from the record are that the applicant is a transport-company and engaged in the business of transportation of goods. The applicant had booked the goods of various parties against 21 goods receipts (Gil's) for transportation from New Delhi to Akola (State of Maharashtra). The said goods were being transported in a truck No. UP-80/K-9674. At the time of entry in the State of U.P. at Kotwan Check-Post, applicant applied for transit pass in form XXXIV in respect of the goods relating to 21 GR's for transportation to Akola through State of U.P. The officer of Kotwan check-post issued form XXXIV No. 4135/5309 dated November 23, 2002. The said form was required to be surrendered at the exit check-post, Sainya by November 24, 2002. A perusal of form ...
Commissioner, Sales Tax Vs. Central Finance Accounts and Budget Organi ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-19-2003
Reported in: (2008)11VST665(All)
Rajes Kumar, J.1. This revision is directed against the order of Tribunal dated July 6,1991 for assessment year 1984-85 arising from the proceeding under Section 21 of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948.2. The brief facts of the case are that during the assessment year 1984-85, the respondent had purchased machines worth Rs. 1,60,90,505 from BHEL, Hardwar and issued form III-D. The proceeding under Section 21 was initiated on the ground that the machines, which were purchased against form III-D were used for the purposes of producing electrical energy while the benefit was not available under Section 3G of the Sales Tax Act for the year under consideration. Tribunal found that the plant was commissioned and came into function in the year 1986-87 for producing the electrical energy. Therefore, the purchase against form III-D was legal. Against the said order, Commissioner of Sales Tax filed the present revision.3. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.Issue involved in the present revision is...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. U.P. Paschimi Kshetriya Vikas Nigam Ltd ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-18-2003
Reported in: (2004)188CTR(All)40; [2003]264ITR273(All)
M. Katju J. 1. This is an income-tax reference under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in which the following questions have been referred to us for our opinion : '1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the tractor was not a road transport vehicle 2. Whether the Tribunal was legally correct in directing the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax (Asst.) that the investment allowance should be allowed to the assessee according to the provisions of Section 32A ?' 2. The assessee is a U.P. Government undertaking which had been established for industrial and agricultural development of Western U.P. The previous year for the relevant assessment year 1978-79 ended on June 30, 1977. 3. The assessee gave tractors on hire. These tractors were fitted with trolleys and they were exclusively used for hiring purpose by the assessee. The assessee claimed investment allowance on these tractors.4. The Inspecting ...
Jit and Pal X-rays (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-18-2003
Reported in: (2004)186CTR(All)541; [2004]267ITR370(All)
M. Katju, J.1. This is an IT Reference under Section 256(1) of the IT Act in which the following questions have been referred to us for our opinion :'(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that a sum of Rs. 9,812 is not admissible deduction for the purpose of computing the total income of the assessee for the asst. yr. 1979-80?(ii) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessee is an 'industrial company' under Section 2(7) of the Finance Act, 1979 ?'2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.The relevant asst. yr, is 1979-80. The assessee is a private limited company which was incorporated on 6th Oct., 1977. By a sale deed dt. 12th Nov., 1977, the assessee took over the running business of M/s Jit & Pal X-Ray Bhuri Wave & Diagnostic Laboratory, which was being run under the sole proprietorship of Dr. Harnam Singh. The consideration fixed was Rs. 96,192 which is mentioned in the sale deed. The previous year for ...
Jaswant Lal Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-18-2003
Reported in: 2004(2)AWC1680; (2004)3UPLBEC2294
N.K. Mehrotra, J.1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned standing counsel trial No. 1 and Shri H.K. Mishra learned counsel for the other opposite parties.2. The petitioner is an employee of Zila Panchayat, Unnao. He was working as Sectional Head Clerk on the basis of the order dated 10.5.1999. There is a post of prashasnik Adhikari, which was to be filled up by promotion from the feeding cadre of Sectional Head Clerk. On 21.4.2003, the post of Prashasnik Adhikari was vacant and the petitioner was given additional charge of the said post. A copy of the order dated 21.4.2003 is Annexure-4. It is alleged that on 27.6.2003 the selection committee constituted under Section 45 of U. P. Kshetra Panchayat and Zila Parishads Adhiniyam, 1961 (hereinafter to be referred, as 'Adhiniyam'), selected the petitioner for promotion on the post of Prashasnik Adhikari. The petitioner was promoted on the post of Prashasnik Adhikari on the basis of the appointment letter dated 28.8.2003...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »