Allahabad Court August 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.
Sattan Vs. Xith A.D.J. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-24-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)AWC3819
S.U. Khan, J.1. Xth Munsif, Varanasi, decreed O.S No. 850 of 1983 ex parte on 16.5.1986. The said suit had been filed by Hari Nath respondent No. 2 against respondent Nos. 5, 3, 4 and petitioner under Section 6 of Specific Relief Act claiming possession on the basis of dispossession within six months before institution of the suit. Thereafter petitioner filed restoration application. The restoration application was allowed by learned Munsif on 12.2.1988. Against the said restoration order Hari Nath plaintiff respondent filed Civil Revision No. 98 of 1988. XIth A.D.J. Varanasi, through judgment and order dated 12.1.1989, allowed the revision and set aside the restoration order, hence this writ petition.2. Petitioner in his restoration application stated that he was not aware of pendency of the suit and no summon was served upon him. Trial court clearly held that summon was sufficiently served upon the petitioner and he had also filed the written statement. However, trial court held that...
Shri Pateshwari Electrical and Associated Industries (P) Ltd. Vs. Comm ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-24-2006
Reported in: (2006)206CTR(All)420
1. The Tribunal, Allahabad has referred the following questions of law under Section 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for opinion of this Court:1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the bank interest on fixed deposits representing the particular amount received against the bank guarantee furnished by the assessee from the UP State Electricity Board was taxable for the asst. yrs. 1983-84, 1984-85 and 1985-86 and specially in view of the circumstances of this particular case ?2. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the income from Nainital property and from furniture and fixtures therein as leased out to the State Bank of India for use of the training centre was income from house property and not income from business or income from other sources, as alleged by the assessee ?2. The reference relates to the asst. yrs. 1983-84, 1984-85 and 1985-86.Briefly stated, the facts...
Jalal-uddIn Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-24-2006
Reported in: I(2007)DMC280
Vinod Prasad, J.1. The applicant Jalal-Uddin has filed this application for his release on bail in Crime No. 466 of 2005 under Sections 302/201, IPC, Police Station Jahanabad, District Pilibhit.2. The prosecution allegations are that Aslam son of Itwari lodged a report at Police Station Jahanabad on 13.6.2005 at 8.30 a.m. with the allegations that his Bhabhi Smt. Rehana Begum @ Sultari (deceased), wife of applicant Jalal-Uddin had gone to attend the call of nature at 2 a.m. in the night but she did not return back. She was searched but could not be traced out. Next morning villagers informed that a dead body of a lady is lying in the Chari field which was identified to be that of the deceased. The autopsy of the deceased revealed that there was Sari ligature mark around her neck and the blood was oozing out from her vagina which was swollen and she had abrasion and multiple abrasions on her body. The investigation revealed that it was the applicant who had strangulated to death his own...
Smt. Kesar Devi and ors. Vs. A.D.J. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-24-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)AWC452
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that Ram Narayan, husband of petitioner No. 1, Smt. Kesar Devi was the tenant in the shop in House No. 50/267, Halsi Road, Kanpur, in which he carried on the business of sale of white-washing materials etc. Respondent No. 2, Smt. Phool Kunwar and respondent No. 3, Shyam Charan filed Release Application No. 69 of 1987 against the tenant Ram Narayan under Section 21(1) (a) of the U. P. Act No. XIII of 1972, on the ground that respondent No. 3, Shyama Charan, landlord is a heart patient and has been medically advised by the doctors to avoid climbing up the stairs.3. Sri Ram Narayan filed objection to the Application No. 69/87 on 29.8.1988 stating that he was the tenant of the previous landlord Rajab Baksh in the disputed shop, through allotment dated 17.7.1958, which is not a residential accommodation.4. A commission was issued by the prescribed authority on the applica...
Commissioner, Trade Tax Vs. Diamond Sales Corporation
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-24-2006
Reported in: (2009)24VST146(All)
Rajes Kumar, J.1. The present three revisions under Section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') are directed against the orders of the Tribunal dated April 1, 2004 relating to the assessment years 1996-97 and 1997-98 both under the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 and Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.2. At the instance of the Revenue, the following questions have been raised:(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is legally justified in holding that CCF sold by the assessee, were not taxable. Since the CCF has been held to be not taxable in the case of Commissioner, Sales Tax, U.P. v. Arora Material Store [1982] 51 STC 235 : [1982] UPTC 50 although this case has been distinguished by the Division Bench of this honourable court in the case of AMC Coated Fabrics Pvt. Ltd. v. State of U.P. reported in [1992] UPTC 896 and when the assessee has imported the goods under consideration against form XXXI on 25 occasions without ment...
Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Ishar International
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-23-2006
Reported in: (2007)110TTJ(All.)882
1. In this case, revenue has raised two grounds - one is about deleting the addition of Rs. 6,19,058/- as extra profit made by the A.O. and the other is against directing the A.O. not to include in the total turnover the amount of sale proceeds not brought into India while computing deduction Under Section 80 HHC.2. Regarding first ground the facts are that the assessee is a manufacturer and exporter of carpets, the A.O. noticed that manufacturing process involved weavers he payment to whom is not verifiable. He rejected the books of account and applied gross profit rate of 18.5% as against 18.1% declared by the assessee. Ld. CIT (A) found that the assessee has maintained proper details and, therefore, there was no justification in making addition.3. We have heard ld. A.R. and ld. D.R. So far as applicability of provisions of Section 145 was concerned, we are of the view that it is applicable on the facts of the case as payments made to weavers/Karigars are not verifiable and there is...
Rajiv Kumar Srivastava S/o Shri Akshaywar Lal and Ors. Vs. State of U. ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-23-2006
Reported in: 2007ACJ469
Barkat Ali Zaidi, J.1. HeardSri Pankaj Kumar Shukla, learned Counsel for the applicants, Sri D.P. Singh, learned Counsel for the Opp. party No. 2 and the learned A.G.A. for the State.2. On prayer of the counsel for the applicant, earlier Misc. application No. 5059 of 2005 filed earlier by the applicants stands withdrawn.3. As will appear from the record, there is a dispute on a piece of agricultural land pending between the applicant and the Opp. party No. 2.4. On an application filed by the Opp. party No. 2 before the Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Allahabad alleging that the applicant accused had forcibly carried away crop of wheat and mustered of Opp. Party No. 2 lying on the land in question, the Magistrate under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. ordered the police to register a criminal case and to investigate the same. The police filed a final report, which Opp.party No. 2 protested and the Magistrate after rejecting the final report andtreating it as a complaint case ordered to issue p...
Anil Kumar Jaiswal S/O Sri Kishori Lal Jaiswal Vs. the State and Ashok ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-23-2006
Reported in: III(2007)BC240
Barkat Ali Zaidi, J.1. This is an application for relief under Section 482 Cr.P.C.2. In this application the grouse of the complainant is that Complaint Case No. 171 of 1998 Ashoka Kumar Bhargawa v. Anil Kumar Jaiswal under Section 138, The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (here-in-after called the Act) against the applicant pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate VI, Allahabad filed on basis the of 6 cheques, one of which is only in the name of complainant and the rests in the name of different payees, is not maintainable. The reasons being the complainant cannot be said to be the 'payee or holder in due Course' of those 5 cheques which are in the name of different payees and the trial Court was therefore not competent to take cognizance under Section 142 of the 'Act on basis of those 5 cheques. The order of the trial Magistrate passed on the application of the applicant given in this behalf, on 15.3.1999 is, therefore, not sustainable.3. I have heard Sri Sharad M...
Mohd. Ibrahim Alias Munna Vs. Mohd. Ahmed
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-23-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)AWC368
Prakash Krishna, J.1. This revision is under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Causes Court Act, at the in stance of the tenant of a shop situate at MainBazar Qasba Amariya, Pergana Jahanabad, Tehsil and district Pilibhit, as described at the foot of the plaint on a monthly rent of Rs. 500.2. The plaintiff opposite party, hereinafter described as 'landlord' instituted a S.C.C. Suit No. 4 of 1998 against the present applicant hereinafter described as tenant on the pleas inter alia that the disputed shop was let out on a monthly rent of Rs. 500 and has failed to pay the rent since April, 1995, in spite of the repeated demand, the tenancy has been determined by means of a registered notice dated 31.3.1998, which was served by refusal, determining the arrears of rent since April, 1995 and asking the tenant to vacate the disputed shop after expiry of 30 days from the date of receipt of the notice and hand over its vacant possession to the landlord alongwith the arrears of rent. It was furt...
Anil Kumar Jaiswal Vs. State and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-23-2006
Reported in: 2007CriLJ377
ORDERBarkat Ali Zaidi, J.1. This is an application for relief under Section 482, Cr. P.C.2. In this application the grouse of the complainant is that Complaint Case No. 171 of 1998 Ashoka Kumar Bhargawa v. Anil Kumar Jaiswal under Section 138, the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter called the Act) against the applicant pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate VI, Allahabad filed on basis of the 6 cheques, one of which is only in the name of complainant and the rest in the name of different payees, is not maintainable. The reason being the complainant cannot be said to be the 'payee or holder in due course' of those 5 cheques which are in the name of different payees and the trial Court was therefore not competent to take cognizance under Section 142 of the 'Act' on basis of those 5 cheques. The order of the trial Magistrate passed on the application of the applicant given in this behalf, on 15-3-1999 is, therefore, not sustainable.3. I have heard Sri Shar...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »