Allahabad Court January 2005 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.
Achhey Lal Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-27-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)AWC1153
S.U. Khan, J.1. From perusal of counter-affidavit of Sri C. P. Singh, Deputy Collector, photostat copies of various orders filed by the learned standing counsel and file of Division Bench Writ Petition No. 36966 .of 2004 (pending) it is clear that petitioner is guilty of material concealment in this writ petition. There is no mention in the writ petition of several orders which are quite material for deciding the controversy involved in this writ petition. The petitioner is warned to be careful in future otherwise stern action may be taken against him.2. Dispute in the instant writ petition relates to grant of fisheries lease in respect of pond comprised in plot No. 978 area 7.762 hectares situate in village Khairada Tehsil Sadar district Banda. The petitioner was granted fisheries lease in respect of pond in dispute for five years, w.e.f. 8.11.96 to 7.11.2001. On 15.10.2001 petitioner filed application for renewal of lease till June 2002. Thereafter he filed Writ Petition No. 37287 of...
Khalil Ahmed Son of Hazi Chhotey Bux Vs. Revisional Authority/Dupty Su ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-27-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)AWC1401
Rajes Kumar, J.1. Present writ petition is under Article 226 of the Constitution of India quashing of the order dated 21.06.2002 passed by Deputy Sugar Commissioner (Administration), Revising Authority, Bareilly.2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was running a khandsari unit having licence under the provisions of U.P. Khandsari Sugar Manufacturer Licensing Order, 1967. Petitioner was liable to pay sugar cane purchase tax under the provisions of 3 of U.P. Sugar-cane (Purchase Tax Act) 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act'). Under the provisions of Section 3 of the Act, two modes were prescribed regarding the payment of purchase tax firstly, the tax was payable on the quantity of sugarcane actually purchased and secondly, at the option of the owner of the unit on the quantity of the sugarcane assessed in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The option referred in the provisions Sub-clause (1) of Section 3 of the Act should be exercised by the owner of the as may be...
Somwati (Smt.) Vs. Hasta Nirmit Kagaj Udyog Sahakari Samiti Limited Th ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-27-2005
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC566; 2005(2)AWC1809
S.N. Srivastava, J.1. The applicant, Smt. Somwati, has preferred two revision applications one against the impugned judgment and order dated 15.1.2005/ 20.1.2005 in Application filed under Section 47, C.P.C. filed in Misc. Case No. 23 of 2004 which stems from O.S. No. 47 of 1981 and the other against the judgment and order 15.1.2005/20.1.2005 passed in application under Order XXI, Rules 12 and 14 of the C.P.C. filed in Misc. Case No. 23 of 2004 arising out of O.S. No. 47 of 1981 attended with the prayer to call on the respondent to produce evidence about Gopal Singh Kushwaha being authorized as Manager of the respondent-Kagaz Udyog.2. The dispute in the matter before this Court pertains to property owned by plaintiff namely, Hast Nirmit Kagaz Udyog Sahkari Samiti Limited Godha Wazirganj District Badaun. The plaintiff instituted suit No. 47 of 1981 for the relief of dispossession of the respondents and also for mandatory injunction to remove construction situated on the land in question...
Durdana Alias Chanda (Smt.) Vs. Smt. Mehraj
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-27-2005
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC544
S.N. Srivastava, J.1. This Civil Revision has been preferred the order dated 14.10.2004, passed by Additional District Judge, Court No. 3, Aligarh rejecting application for amendment.2. Plaintiff/Opp. Party filed a suit for possession after eviction of the Defendant and for recovery of rent, taxes and damages for use and occupation for a sum of Rs. 78,120/- and further recovery of damages for use and occupation at the rate of Rs. 2,000/- per month along with all taxes for future till the date of actual possession on the ground, interalia, that Plaintiff is exclusive owner and land-lady of the front portion of first floor of the building popularly known as 'Ghani Mansion' situated at Dodhpur, Civil Lines, Aligarh, Defendant occupied the disputed premises at the rate of monthly rent of Rs. 2000/- per month, tenancy starts from 1st day of each English Calender month and expires on the last day of month, a sum of Rs. 78,120/- is due against Defendant on account of rent and damages for use ...
Abhai Raj Singh Vs. Bank of Baroda and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-27-2005
Reported in: 2005(1)ESC781; [2005(105)FLR121]; (2005)IILLJ931All; (2005)2UPLBEC1427
Tarun Agarwala, J.1. The petitioner is working as a Head Cashier in Bank of Baroda and is posted in Tanda Shahabad Branch, in District Rampur. It transpires that an account holder in the bank filed a complaint against the petitioner and two others for committing a fraud in his account. Based on the F.I.R., an investigation was made and a report was submitted to the competent Court. The Court took cognizance of the said report and a case was registered as case Crime No. 1402 of 2003 under Sections 218, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 409, I.P.C. which is pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Rampur. The respondent bank also, made an in house inquiry and the disciplinary authority by an order dated 8.10.2003 issued a charge-sheet. The petitioner alleges that subject matter Of the charge-sheet in the domestic inquiry proceedings and that pending before the Criminal Court is one and the same and further contended that the evidence in both the proceedings would be the same and if the departme...
Swadesh Singh Vs. Basic Shiksha Parishad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-27-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ESC888; (2005)2UPLBEC1594
Tarun Agarwala, J.1. The petitioner alleges that he was appointed as an Assistant Teacher, and the Up Basic Shiksha Adhikari by an Order, dated 31.3.1983, placed the petitioner under suspension for being continuously absent for one month. By the said Order the petitioner was attached and was directed to give his attendance at Central Junior High School, Aligarh during the suspension period.2. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid Order, the petitioner filed Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 14085 of 2001, alleging that inspite of the lapse of 18 years he was still under suspension and that no charge-sheet or enquiry had been issued against him till date. The petitioner further alleged that he had also not been paid the subsistence allowance. The petitioner alleged that he made several efforts and approached the respondents to pay the subsistence allowance and to get the suspension Order revoked, but the authorities paid no heed to his submissions. The petitioner further alleged that by an Order...
Dr. Mrs. Archana Gupta Vs. Lucknow Development Authority and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-27-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)AWC446; 2005(2)ESC994
1. Heard Sri Abhinav N. Trivedi, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri N.C. Mehrotra, appearing on behalf of opposite-parties.2. The petitioner has alleged that a Scheme, known as 'Sharda Nagar Scheme' was launched by opposite-party No. 2 on 20th June, 1988, which was valid from 20th June, 1988 to 31st August, 1988, and the petitioner in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Brochure, deposited a sum of Rs. 20,000/- as registration fee, for purchase of 'A' type plot on hire purchase basis. The petitioner has also alleged that in pursuance of the allotment letter, dated 22.10.1990, plot No. 1/109, Sector Rashmi Khand, Sharda Nagar Scheme, was allotted to the petitioner on the basis of a lottery, which was drawn on 27th July, 1990. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the rate of Rs. 370/- per sq. meter was mentioned in the Brochure, but in the allotment letter, dated 22.10.1990, the rate was revised by the opposite-parties from Rs. 370/- per sq. meter to Rs. 53...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Braj Bhushan Cold Storage
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-27-2005
Reported in: (2005)197CTR(All)490; [2005]275ITR360(All)
1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following questions 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 the Tribunal was right in holding that under the facts and circumstances of the case the Commissioner of Income-tax cannot revise under Section 263 the order under Section A 271 (1)(c) passed by the Income-tax Officer because he had dropped the penalty proceedings?Whether the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that penalty under Section 271 (1)(c) to be passed as a result of the impugned order under Section 263 will be barred by time ?"2. The reference relates to the assessment year 1977-78 relating to the penalty proceeding under Section 271(1) (c) of the Act.3. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present reference are as under :4. The respondent-assessee is a registered firm. For the assessment year 1977-78 it had filed a return of loss o...
O.P.S. Malik and anr. Vs. Naresh Chandra Kapoor
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-27-2005
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC855
S. Rafat Alam, A.C.J. and Vikram Nath, J.1. This contempt appeal is preferred against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 27.1.2004 (reported in 2004 (1) ARC 450) rejecting the application of the appellants for recalling of the order dated 14.5.2002.2. We have heard Sri U.N. Sharma, learned Counsel appearing for the appellants and Sri S.C. Dwivedi, learned Counsel for the sole respondent.3. It appears that a contempt proceeding was initiated against the appellants alongwith others and by order dated 14.5.2002 the appellants were directed to appear in person. Being aggrieved with that order an application was moved on behalf of the appellants to recall the same on the ground, inter alia, that the proceeding is time barred and, therefore, no cognizance can be taken of the alleged contempt. The learned Single Judge vide order dated 27.1.2004 rejected the application to recall the order dated 14.5.2002 which is impugned in this appeal.4. Learned Counsel for the appellants submits t...
Committee of Management, Phoolwati Devi Kanya Inter College and anr. V ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-27-2005
Reported in: (2005)2UPLBEC1872
V.K. Shukla, J.1. At Katghar in District Moradabad, there is a Society registered under Societies Registration Act, 1860 which runs and manages an Educational Institution in the name and style of Phoolwati Devi Kanya Inter College. Said institution is governed as per the provisions as contained under U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921. Affairs of the aforementioned institution is to be run and managed strictly as per provisions as contained under the Scheme of Administration framed in exercise of power vested under Section 16-A of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921. Provision of U.P. High School and Intermediate Colleges (Payment of Salary to Teachers and Other Employees) Act, 1971 are also applicable to the aforementioned institution. On 13.12.1983 amendment was proposed in the Scheme of Administration after introduction of Section 16-CCC of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921. Said amendment was subject matter of challenge before this Court wherein said proposed amendment was...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »