Allahabad Court November 2004 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.
Committee of Management, Sri Bajrani Uchchattar Madhyamik Vidyalaya an ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-01-2004
Reported in: (2005)2UPLBEC1374
V.K. Shukla, J. 1. Committee of Management of the institution as well as Senior most teacher of the institution have approached this Court questioning the validity of selection and appointment of Devendra Kumar Tripathi as headmaster of Sri Bajranj Uchchattar Madhyamaik Vidyalaya, Azamgarh.2. In both the writ petitions, principal ground on which selection and appointment of headmaster has been questioned is that incumbent in question does not fulfill requisite minimum eligibility criteria as is provided under Rules 4 and 5 of Recognized Basic School (Junior High School) (Recruitment and Condition of Services of Teachers) Rules, 1978, as Devendra Kumar Tripathi does not have to his credit any one of the training qualification as in envisaged Rules 4 and 5 of the aforesaid Rules and rather he has to his credit B.Ed. degree, which is not one of the recognized training qualification.3. In Order to appreciate respective contention of the patties Rules 4 and 5 of Recognized Basic School (Jun...
Brijendra Pratap Singh (Deceased by Lr) and anr. Vs. Smt. Prem Lata Si ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-01-2004
Reported in: AIR2005All113; 2005(3)AWC2277
ORDERJanardan Sahai, J.1. This appeal is about a house No. C-7/67 situate in Mohalla Senpura, at Varanasi. A dispute arose between two brothers Surendra Pratap Singh and Brijendra Pratap Singh. Surendra Pratap Singh brought a suit for partition claiming a half share in the house against his brother Brijendra Pratap Singh. His case was that Prabhu Nath Singh was the grandfather of the two brothers while Shyambadan was their father. It was alleged that Raj Kumari Devi was the daughter of Jai Dev Singh brother of Prabhunath Singh and she wanted to give this property to Shyam Badan but Brijendra Pratap played foul and fraudulently got a will executed in his favour. When this fact came to the knowledge of their father, Shyam Badan, he intervented. The result was a family settlement between the two brothers Surendra Pratap Singh and Brijendra Pratap Singh dated 23-9-1971. As the rights of the parties depend upon of this deed it is necessary to refer to its material terms. It bears a recital ...
Mohd. Aslam and ors. Vs. Xth Additional District Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-01-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC392
Vikram Nath, J.1. This petition has been filed by the landlord for quashing the judgment and order dated 2.2.1991 passed by Xth Additional District Judge, Moradabad in Rent Control Appeal No. 50 of 1990, Sri Zafar Jalil and Ors. v. Mohd. Aslam and Ors., whereby the appeal was allowed and the judgment and order of the Prescribed Authority dated 8.8.1990 was set aside and released application of the petitioner under Section 21 (1) (a) of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 was rejected.2. The petitioner is the landlord and owner of premises situate in Mohalla Kaya Ki Berian Machhali Bazar, Moradabad, Hakik Khalil Ahmad father of respondent Nos. 2 to 4 had died on 16/17.10.1986 and thereafter the Respondents 2 to 4 were continuing as tenant of the petitioner. The house in question is a double storey house, on the ground floor the petitioner was in occupation and on the first floor there were two tenants. Municipal Board, Moradabad, was tenant of one party of the first floor and the remaining part of ...
Shiv Kumar Jatia Vs. S.R.G.P. Industries Ltd., Through Its Managing Di ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-01-2004
Reported in: AIR2005All215; 2005(1)ARC431; 2005(2)AWC1457
1. Learned Counsel for the parties agreed and have made a statement that this F.A.F.O. may be decided on the basis of the documents filed with the affidavit (sworn by Yogesh Kumar Garg on behalf of the Appellant) in support of the Stay Application in the present First Appeal From Order and hereinafter called 'the Affidavit'. None of the parties have referred to any papers in the Respondent's Paper Book.2. The salient and relevant factual details, necessary for appreciating the contentions of the parties in the present First Appeal From Order are as hereunder:3. One Shiv Kumar Jatia (plaintiff-appellant) filed Original Suit No. 496 of 2001 primarily on the ground that disputed property is Municipal No. 365, Harris Ganj, Kanpur Cantt, Kanpur, (referred to as premises No. 4927 Cawnpur Cantt. Board in the lease-deed dated 1.1.1895 (Exbt-I on the record of the Trial Court), and pleaded, inter alia amongst others, that plaintiff is the successor in interest of the Lessor whereas the defendan...
Naraini Devi (Smt.) Vs. Iind Additional District Judge
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-01-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC468
Vikram Nath, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by the landlord for quashing the judgment dated 28.7.1984 passed by the IInd Additional District Judge, Agra where by the revision has been allowed and judgment and decree of the Judge Small Causes Court dated 30.7.1983 decreeing the suit of the landlord petitioner for recovery of arrears of rent and ejectment has been set aside and suit has been dismissed.2. The dispute relates to house No. 34/Naubasta Loha Mandi, Agra of which the petitioner is the owner and landlady and in a part of the said building respondent No. 2 was tenant on monthly rent at Rs. 50/- per month. As there was default in payment of rent since 1.11.1976, the petitioner after terminating the tenancy filed a suit for recovery of arrears of rent and ejectment which was registered as SCC Suit No. 1179 of 1981, Narayani Devi v. Sitaram. The tenant contested the suit and filed written statement and claimed to be the owner of the disputed premises on account of adverse p...
Anis Ahmad Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-01-2004
Reported in: [2005]277ITR270(All)
1. The appellant claims itself to be acting as commission agent of hides and skins for the assessment year 1984-85. The Income-tax Officer treated the appellant as a trader and not a commission agent. In appeal, the matter was remanded by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) with certain directions. On remand the Income-tax Officer, asked the appellant to establish that it was acting as a commission agent and not as a trader. The appellant supplied the list of parties for whom it had acted as a commission agent. Summons under Section 131 of the Income-tax Act, hereafter referred to as 'the Act', was issued. Five persons appeared and the remaining five for reasons best known did not appear. On the basis of the statement recorded in respect of the persons who had appeared before the Income-tax Officer had accepted the plea of the appellant acting as commission agent in respect of these persons, whereas in respect of the remaining five persons who did not appear the Income-tax Officer...
Ajai Pal Singh and anr. Vs. Shitla Bux Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-01-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)AWC2001
N.K. Mehrotra, J.1. This is second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure against the judgment and decree dated 5.4.1983, passed by the IVth Additional District Judge, Unnao in Civil Appeal No. 160 of 1982, arising out in Regular Suit No. 15 of 1982, decided by the Munsif Purwa, Unnao, by judgment and decree dated 30.8.1982.2. I have heard Shri U.S. Sahai, holding brief of Shri H.S. Sahai, the learned counsel for the appellants and Shri P. K. Trivedi, the learned counsel for the respondents on the substantial questions of law formulated in the memo of the appeal.3. It appears that the plaintiff-appellants filed a suit for permanent injunction on the ground that the parties of the suit belonged to one family and their houses were adjacent to each other. It is alleged that the old wall of the defendant's house towards east had fallen down in the rain which was being reconstructed by the defendants but the defendants were trying to open the door towards east in the said w...
Ahsan Ali Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-01-2004
Reported in: 2005(3)ESC1650
Dilip Gupta, J.1. As to who should have been promoted to the newly created post of Lecturer in Biology is the controversy involved in all these three petitions and, therefore, they are being decided by a common judgment.2. Writ Petition No. 19230 of 1999 has been filed by Ahsan Ali for quashing the order dated 10.12.1998 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Etawah by which the promotion of Shyam Babu Mishra (respondent No. 6) as a Lecturer in Biology w.e.f. 1.9.1975 has been recognised.3. Writ Petition No. 29412 of 2000 has been filed by Shyam Babu Mishra for quashing the order dated 24.5.2000 passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Etawah by which it has been directed that the petitioner shall be paid the salary of Assistant Teacher in the L.T. grade. Ahsan Ali has been arrayed as respondent No. 5 in this petition and a direction has also been sought upon the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to restrain respondent No. 5 Ahsan Ali from working as ad hoc Lecturer in Civics.4. Writ Pe...
Cwt Vs. Ram Saran Kejriwal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-01-2004
Reported in: [2005]145TAXMAN528(All)
1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad has referred following two questions of law under section 27(1) of the Wealth Tax Act, 1957, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act), for opinion to this court :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the additional wealth-tax is not chargeable on the value of the interest of the assessee partner in the firm M/s. Cownpore Flour Mills, the assets of which include urban assets?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that the issue being debatable was beyond the ambit of section 35 of the Wealth Tax Act completely?'We have heard Sri A.N. Mahajan, learned standing counsel for the revenue. Nobody has appeared for the respondent.2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present Reference are as follows:The respondent is the co-owner of the property situated at 24/7...
Cit Vs. Marble Emporium
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-01-2004
Reported in: [2005]146TAXMAN70(All)
1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi has referred the following question of law under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961,( hereinafter ref erred to as 'the Act'), for opinion to this Court.'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the sales effected in India to foreign buyers against foreign currency and also received in India should be considered as export sales for the purpose of allowing deduction under section 35B of the Income-Tax Act, 1961?'The Reference relates to assessment years 1977-78, 1980-81 to 1983-84.2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows:The respondent is a firm and its main business is export of marble goods, some of which are manufactured by it while others are acquired from other manufacturers. In the course of its export business certain expenses were incurred by the respondent and weighted deduction under section 35B of the Act was claimed in respect...
- ‹ Prev
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 23
- Next ›
- Last »