Allahabad Court September 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.
Ram Kumar Pathak Vs. Krishna NaraIn Pathak and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-09-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)AWC718
Anjani Kumar, J. 1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against an order passed by the District Judge, Kanpur Nagar, dated 21st April, 2004 in Civil Revision No. 116 of 2003, copy whereof is annexed as Annexure-11 to the writ petition, whereby the revision filed by the petitioner has been dismissed and the order passed by the trial court is maintained.2. The facts leading to the filing of the revision out of which the present writ petition has arisen are that Krishna Narain Pathak filed an application purported to be an application under Order IX. Rule 13, read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure with the prayer that the award of the arbitrator in Case No. 104/70 of 1998 dated 15th April, 1999. He has also filed an application that the award which has been obtained by practicing fraud and concealment of fact out of which the so called dispute was got referred to the Arbitrator, which ultimately resulted into award, which has subsequ...
Santosh Kumar Agnihotri Vs. Smt. Sundari Devi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-09-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)AWC601
Prakash Krishna, J.1. This appeal is under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The court below by the order dated 10th February, 2004, has rejected the objections filed by the present appellant against the award of the Arbitral Tribunal holding that the same is barred by limitation. The controversy involved in the present appeal is short one. The objector/appellant has claimed the condonation of delay in filing objections both under Sections 5 and 14 of the Limitation Act. The factual scenario of the case is that the Arbitral Tribunal gave an award on 11th April, 1996. The present appellant filed objections to the said award on 13th May, 1996 but before the Civil Judge and not before the District Judge. An objection was raised by the respondent regarding correct Forum. The Civil Judge by the order dated 11th October, 2001. ordered for the return of the objections for presentation before the appropriate court. It appears that objectio...
Vishwa Nath Singh and ors. Vs. Jogendra Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-09-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)AWC2014
Kamal Kishore, J.1. This is the second civil appeal against the judgment and decree dated 2.2.1987, passed by Sri Ajijurrahman, the then learned IInd Additional District Judge, Gonda, allowing the appeal and upsetting the findings recorded by Sri Udai Chandra Dixit the then learned Civil Judge, Gonda in Regular Suit No. 46 of 1980, which was a suit for specific performance of contract as well as the suit for cancellation of sale deed executed in favour of the defendants-respondents No. 2 and 3.2. The following substantial question has been formulated in this appeal :'Whether in respect of land regarding which the agreement to sell had taken place was a bit increased of deceased in consolidation proceeding amounts to change in property and hence the said agreement can be enforced by suit for specific performance of contract?'3. The facts giving rise to this second appeal are that the plaintiffs-appellants have filed the suit for specific performance of registered contract to sell dated ...
Jugal Kishore Baldeo Sahai Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-08-2004
Reported in: (2004)191CTR(All)455; [2005]276ITR210(All)
R.K. Agrawal, J. 1. The Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following question of law under Section 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), for opinion to this Court :'Whether, in the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was entitled to and justified in fixing the annual letting value of the property at Rs. 1,20,000?'2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows :The applicant is a HUF which, along with the legal heirs of late Lalloomal, was the half owner of the property known as Hind Cinema. This property was leased under a lease deed dt. 11th Dec., 1947, to Shri Sukh Nandan Prasad Varma w.e.f. 1st Jan., 1948, on a lease rent of Rs. 3,000 per month for a period of five years, i.e., upto 31st Dec., 1952. However, before the expiry of the lease, there was a further agreement in November, 1952, whereby the tenancy of the property was to be continued with the change, among others, that the rent was reduce...
Smt. Uma Devi Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-08-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)AWC124
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.2. The petitioner was appointed as Anganbari Karyakarti in village and post office Harhamaphi, P. S. Badausa, Tehsil Atarra, district Banda. The election of the members of the Zila Panchayat, Banda was held in which the petitioner contested and was declared successful.3. The President Zila Panchayat, Banda wrote a letter to the District Magistrate, Banda stating that the petitioner is not relinquishing the post of Anganbari Karyakarti even after her election as Member of Zila Panchayat and requested for action against the petitioner. In enquiry made by the Commissioner, Chitrakoot Dham Division, Banda, respondent No. 3, the petitioner informed that under the Government order referred in the letter dated 21.1.2004 of respondent No. 7 Anganbari Karyakarti does not enjoy the post of profit and is paid honorarium only. She also informed that as member of the Zila Panchayat she does not receive any remuneration or hono...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Associated Contractors Corporation
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-08-2004
Reported in: (2005)198CTR(All)593; [2005]275ITR123(All)
R.K. Agrawal, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following question of law under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), for the opinion to this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the Commissioner of Income-tax had no jurisdiction to direct the Income-tax Officer to initiate the penalty proceedings under Section 273(b) and under Section 140A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows : 3. The present reference relates to the assessment year 1980-81. The relevant previous year ended on September 30, 1979. For the assessment year in question, the Income-tax Officer assessed the income of the respondent at Rs. 3,78,900. He also allowed the depreciation as per annexure to the assessment order. The Commissioner of Income-tax called for and examine...
Rama Shanker Gupta Vs. Commissioner of Wealth Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-07-2004
Reported in: (2004)191CTR(All)460; [2005]275ITR628(All)
R.K. Agrawal, J.1. The Tribunal, Allahabad has referred the following questions of law under Section 27(1) of the WT 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 Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the provisions of Section 17 and not the provisions of Section 35 of the WT Act, 1957 were applicable to the case ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the assets other than jewellery could be revalued in the course of the respondent assessee-assessment proceedings under Section 17 of the WT Act, 1957?'2. The reference relates to., the asst. yr. 1970-71, for which the relevant valuation date was 31st March, 1970. The respondent is an individual. In the assessment originally made on 16th Dec., 1970, he claimed exemption on the value of the jewellery under Section 5(1)(viii) of the Act, which was accepted by the W...
Commissioner of Wealth-tax Vs. Smt. Shanti Meattle
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-07-2004
Reported in: [2005]276ITR201(All)
R.K. Agrawal, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi, has referred the following two questions of law under Section 27(3) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', for the opinion to this court :'1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the hon'ble Tribunal was correct in law in its finding that the assessment order of the Wealth-tax Officer for year under consideration passed on March 27, 1979, after the receipt of the Valuation Officer's report was not erroneous insofar as it was prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue ?2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the hon'ble Tribunal has not misdirected itself in basing its finding that the Valuation Officer's report under Section 16A not being in respect of the year under consideration, the Commissioner was not correct in considering the value of the immovable properties as on March 31, 1971, worked out therein as the basis for holding that the value adopted b...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Gordhan Das Mahender Kumar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-07-2004
Reported in: (2005)196CTR(All)227
R.K. Agrawal, J.1. The Tribunal, New Delhi, has referred the following two questions of law under Section 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the Act, for opinion to this Court :'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally justified in upholding the order of the learned CIT(A) deleting the disallowance under Section 40(b) of the IT Act, 1961, in respect of interest paid to Shyam Lal (HUF) of Rs. 16,565 and to Mahender Kumar (HUF) of Rs. 20,076 ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally justified in upholding the order of the learned CIT(A) regarding disallowance under Section 40(b) of the IT Act, 1961 in respect of interest paid to Shyam Lal Private Trust of Rs. 2,466 and to Mahender Kumar Private Trust of Rs. 2,474 ?'2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows :The respondent No. 3 is a registered firm deriving income from commission agency (...
Syed Ahmed Jawwad Vs. Smt. Qudesiya Said Ullah and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-07-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)AWC2253
Prakash Krishna, J.1. This revision is under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Causes Courts Act, at the instance of the plaintiff of O.S. No. 96 of 1970.2. The plaintiff applicant filed a suit for recovery of arrears of rent and damages for use and occupation and for the ejectment of the defendants from the Bungalow No. 29, Kanpur Road, Allahabad. The plaint was instituted on the allegations that the house No. 29, Kanpur Road, Allahabad is a waqf property known as Waqf Mohd. Husain and plaintiff thereof is mutwalli. The waqf was created by waqf deed dated 9.11.1966 by Smt. Mahmood Jahan Begum widow of late Syed Mohd. Husain, barrister at law. Smt. Mahmood Jahan Begum expired on 29th March, 1968. The said Bungalow No. 29 consists of several parts and number of tenants are living therein. The disputed portion of the accommodation consists of two verandah, two bath rooms and latrine, one big courtyard and platform and six rooms, garage etc. The defendant respondent No. 1 is daughter of ...
- ‹ Prev
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- Next ›
- Last »