Allahabad Court January 2006 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.
In Re: Shree Dhruve Flour and Food Products Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-20-2006
Reported in: [2006]133CompCas331(All); [2007]78SCL141(All)
Sunil Ambwani, J.1. Heard Shri N. K. Srivastava, learned Counsel for the respondent-company and Shri Raj Nath N. Shukla appearing for the official liquidator, U.P. at Allahabad. Shri S. K. Saxena, official liquidator is present in the court.2. On the recommendation of the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction the respondent-company M/s. Shree Dhruve Flour and Food Products Ltd., was wound up by this court on August 22, 2005. The respondent-company filed an application to recall the winding up order on the ground that it has settled the entire dues to be paid to the secured creditors namely State Bank of India and PICUP from the financial resources generated by the ex-directors, who have filed their affidavit stating that they will not claim this amount from the company. Sri Srivastava further submits that the respondent-company has no further liabilities towards any other secured or unsecured creditors and thus the winding up order deserves to be recalled.3. In the official...
Commissioner, Trade Tax Vs. Mewalal Dhrup Chandra
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-20-2006
Reported in: (2007)6VST668(All)
Rajes Kumar, J.1. These three revisions under Section 11 of the U. P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') are directed against the order of the Tribunal dated January 29,1999 for the assessment year 1985-86, under the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 and Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and 1986-87 under Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, respectively.2. The dealer/opposite party (hereinafter referred to as 'the dealer') claimed to have made the purchases for and on behalf of ex-U.P. principal and after purchasing the goods on the basis of the order of the ex-U.P. principal, same had been despatched to the destination of the ex-U.P. principal outside the State of U.P. It was contended that the purchases were made in the course of inter-State purchases and the movement of goods outside the State of U.P. was otherwise than in the course of inter-State purchases. It appears that the assessing authority had not accepted the plea of the dealer. Matter went in appeal. The first appellate...
Smt. Kanchan Upadhyay W/O Sri Manoj Upadhyay Vs. State of U.P. Through ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-19-2006
Reported in: AIR2006All148
Vikram Nath, J.1. The petitioner is the wife. She claims that she has been dispossessed from the house in which she was residing by the respondents (particularly the respondent No. 7). Through this writ petition she prays for restitution of possession. As drafted and argued, the writ petitioner tried to give the impression that this is a case of house grabbing.2. The facts show a totally different picture. Admittedly the house never belonged to the petitioner. It belonged to her husband (respondent No. 5). It transpires from the record that the husband has sold the house to the respondent No. 7.3. The petitioner relies upon an interim injunction order dated 24-12-2005 obtained by her from the Family Court, Allahabad, restraining the husband from selling the house. For obtaining such an injunction two things are necessary. First, that the person seeking injunction should have a right to that effect. In this case, we do not see how the petitioner, merely on account of being wife, can cla...
Reva Enviro Systems (P) Limited Vs. State of U.P. Through Its Institut ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-19-2006
Reported in: [2006]148STC279(All)
A.K. Yog and Prakash Krishna, JJ.1. The, main grievance of the petitioner is that although it has ultimately succeeded in its contention that there is no liability to pay any trade tax in respect of the Bio Gas Plant supplied and installed by the petitioner at Kesar Sugar Works and Indian Turpentine and Rosin Co. Bareily for the assessment years 1987-88, 1990-91 and 1991-92, but the trade tax, which it deposited at the insistence of the respondents wrongly treating the said Bio Gas Plant as unclassified item, is not being refunded.2. The petitioner, a private limited company, having its registered office at Nagpur entered into a tripartite agreement with Indian Turpentine and Rosin Company and Industrial Finance Corporation of India for installation of Bio Gas Generating Plant at the premises of Indian Turpentine and Rosin Company Bareily. Similar agreement was entered into for supplying and installation of Bio Gas at Kesar Sugar Mills Baheri (District Bareilly). The Assistant Commissi...
Gorakh Rai Son of Sahabal Rai Vs. the Civil Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-19-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)AWC2494
Bharati Sapru, J.1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner against an order dated 10.8.84 filed in Civil Appeal No. 69 of 1982 on an application moved by the petitioner- the defendant appellant for abatement of the appeal under Section 5(2)(a) of the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953.2. The facts of the case are that the plaintiff respondents filed original suit No. 148 of 1976 seeking a permanent injunction to restrain the defendant- the present petitioner from raising any construction in bhumidhari plot No. 720 and 721 situated in village Muzaffarpur, District Azamgarh. 3. During the pendency of the suit, the present petitioner raised some constructions in the land in suit and the plaintiff, i.e., the respondents in the present case, amended the plaint and prayed for relief of demolition as well as construction and also claimed damages.4. At that stage, the petitioners in the present case, also admitted this fact that in fact, the plaintiff respondents were cosharers o...
Commissioner, Trade Tax Vs. Samar Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-19-2006
Reported in: (2007)8VST26(All)
Rajes Kumar, J.1. 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 Tribunal dated April 26,1999 for the assessment year 1994-95.2. Dealer/opposite party (hereinafter referred to as 'dealer') is a civil contractor and admittedly executed the civil nature of contract during the year under consideration. The value of the goods involved in the execution of the works contract was liable in to tax under section3-F of the Act. Dealer had not maintained any books of account. During the year under consideration, dealer had received total payment to the extent of Rs. 6,53,419 against the work executed. In the absence of any books of account, assessing authority after allowing the benefit of 30 per cent labour charges, estimated the value of the goods used in the execution of works contract at Rs. 4,57,393.65. Dealer had furnished the details of the tax-paid goods to the extent of Rs. 1,01,018. Benefit of suc...
Union Bank of India Vs. Associated Food Products Pvt.
Court: DRAT Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-18-2006
Reported in: 3(2006)BC115
1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment/order dated 17th July, 2002 passed by the D.R.T., Jabalpur in Original Application No.6/98, whereby satisfaction of the claims of the Bank have been recorded on the basis of earlier compromise being arrived at between the appellant Bank and the respondent. Before entering into merit of the appeal, there is a preliminary objection regarding limitation of the appeal. The appeal was filed in the year 2002 and notices were issued to the respondents and they also put in appearance but then amendment petition was filed by the appellant to the effect that in the memo of appeal relief portion had not been inserted inadvertently. That amendment petition came up for hearing and amendment was allowed by order dated 15th July, 2004 but then objection was raised from the side of the respondents that as the amendment was made belatedly in the year 2004, such amendment cannot be construed to be inserted in the memo of appeal which was filed in t...
State Bank of India Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and anr.
Court: DRAT Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-18-2006
Reported in: I(2006)BC200
1. This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 14.9.2004 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, DRT, Jabalpur in Review Application No. 5/04, whereby and whereunder the review application filed by the appellant Bank under Section 22(2)(e) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 to review the order dated 14.1.2004 passed in M.A. No. 114/2001 has been rejected.2. The respondents had filed an application for setting aside ex parte judgment passed in T.A. No. 53/98 dated 16.5.2000 and the said restoration petition filed under Section 22(2)(g) of the DRT Act was allowed by order dated 14.1.2004 mainly on the reference of an order of Hon'ble Single Judge of M.P. High Court in a writ petition No.6378/2000 (State of M.P. v. DRT and Ors.). The ground of review is that the judgment of M.P. High Court on the basis of which restoration petition namely M.A. No. 114/2001 was allowed has already been challenged before the Division Bench of the M.P. Hig...
State Bank of Indore Vs. Paliwal Hotels (P) Ltd. and ors.
Court: DRAT Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-18-2006
Reported in: I(2006)BC269
1. This appeal has been preferred against the final judgment and order passed in T.A. No. 941 by the then Presiding Officer, DRT, Jabalpur allowing the appellant-Bank's claim on reduced rate on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the parties earlier and that some amount on the basis of the compromise was already obtained/admitted from the side of the Bank.2. A very short point is involved in present appeal as to whether the learned Tribunal committed error in accepting the compromise amount for the purpose of grant of recovery certificate was legal, proper and justified, Admittedly the appellant Bank granted loan to the respondents for the purpose of Hotel business, But when the loan account became sticky then a suit was filed in the Civil Court for recovery of Rs. 1,00 crore and odd against the respondents. When the Tribunal was set up, then suit was transferred to the DRT, Jabalpur and was registered as T.A, No. 941/98. While proceeding was going on before the Tribunal, t...
State Bank of India Vs. Sudha Atta Mills Pvt. Ltd. and ors.
Court: DRAT Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-18-2006
Reported in: I(2006)BC203
1. This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 29.9,2004 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, DRT, Jabalpur in Misc.Application No. 9/03, whereby and whereunder the application filed by respondents under Section 22(2)(g) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter shall be referred to as the Act) has been allowed by setting aside the ex pane judgment passed on 21.11.2002 in O.A. No. 145/02. The appellant Bank had filed the above mentioned original application i.e. O.A. No. 145/02 before the DRT, Jabalpur in recovery of Rs. 18,82,854.57 against the applicants as far as non-payment of loan by the respondents is concerned. Notices in the O.A. were sent by registered post fixing the case on 1.10.2002 but notices were received back unserved with the postal peon's remark that the appellant Nos. 2 and 3 were on pilgrimage. Then on the plea of the appellant Bank that the respondents were evading the service of notice, order was passed...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »