Allahabad Court November 2007 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.
Commissioner, Trade Tax Vs. Kala Plastic
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-19-2007
Reported in: (2009)19VST277(All)
Bharati Sapru, J.1. Heard learned Standing Counsel for the revisionist-State and Shri Piyush Agarwal for the respondent-assessee.2. This revision has been filed at the instance of the State against an order of the Tribunal dated September 9, 2007 by which the Tribunal has accepted the account books of the assessee and has also held that the plastic boxes-sold by the dealer are taxable at the rate of 2.5 per cent as jewellery boxes while giving the benefit of the provisions of Section 3AB of the U. P. Trade Tax Act, 1948. Two questions have been referred to in the present revision.(1) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Trade Tax Tribunal is legally justified to hold that the plastic boxes sold by the dealer are taxable at the rate of 2.5 per cent as jewellery boxes ?(2) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Trade Tax Tribunal is legally justified to accept the account books of the dealer despite the adverse material found at the tim...
Vijay Kumar Sharma Vs. Devesh Behari Saxena
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-16-2007
Reported in: AIR2008All66; 2008(1)AWC664
Vijay Kumar Verma, J.1. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgement and decree dated 18.04.1998, passed by 3rd Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) Ghaziabad, in O.S. No. 436 of 1995 (Devesh Behari Saxena v. Vijay Kumar Sharma), whereby the suit has been decreed for mandatory injunction directing the defendant to get the agreement to sell dated 22.01.1993 registered before registering authority within one month and then to execute sale deed in favour of the plaintiff in terms of this agreement after receiving balance sale consideration of Rs. 13,21,000/- (Rupees Thirteen lac Twenty One Thousand only) and hand over possession of the disputed plot to the plaintiff after getting the sale deed registered. It is further held in the impugned decree that if due to pendency of appeal in Hon'ble Supreme Court or non- availability of no objection certificate from the competent authority, specific performance of the said agreement becomes impossible, then the plaintiff would be entitled to g...
Secretary, Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour C ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-16-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)AWC920; [2008(116)FLR852]
Janardan Sahai, J.1. The Krishi Mandi Utapadan Samiti has filed this petition challenging the award of the labour court dated 3.2.07 reinstating the respondent No. 2 who was a Mandi Asstt. The question referred for adjudication to the labour court was whether the termination of the services of the respondent No. 2 was valid. According to the respondent No. 2 he was given appointment on 19.2.96 as Mandi Asstt. on daily wage basis for a period of 89 days after advertisement of vacancies and due selection and that he worked continuously till 30.11.97 when his services were illegally terminated without complying with the provisions of Section 6 N of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act. He claimed that he had worked for more than 240 days in a calendar year having thus been in continuous service. The case of the Mandi Samity was that the respondent was a workman on daily wages and that the provisions of Section 6N of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act were not applicable to the case as the termi...
Sri Ram Pathak Son of Sri Salik Ram Pathak, Presently Posted as Lectur ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-16-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)AWC2153
Ashok Bhushan, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Gajendra Pratap, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 3.Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged between the parties. With the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, the writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage itself.2. By this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 17.8.2007, passed by the Manager of the Committee of Management by which the petitioners' services as Part Time Teacher have been terminated.3. The petitioners' case is that the petitioner No. 1 was appointed as Part Time Lecturer in Commerce on 1.2.1999, the petitioner No. 2 was appointed as Part Time Lecturer in Mathematics on 8.10.1999 and the petitioner No. 3 was appointed as Assistant Part Time Teacher, Science on 3.9.2003 under Section 7AA of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921. The petitioners' case is that the new Committee of Management came into power in May, 2007 and a dec...
Smt. Kaniz Fatma and ors. Vs. Additional District Judge, Court No. 15 ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-16-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)AWC680
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.2. This second review/ modification application has been preferred by the petitioners against the judgment and order dated 7.9.2006, passed in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 52933 of 2002, as well as the judgment and order dated 20.3.2007, passed in Review Application No. 273173 of 2006.3. The ground of review is that the judgments and orders dated 7.9.2006 and 20.3.2007 had been passed on the undertaking given by the counsel for the petitioners before the Court without any instruction on the subject matter by his client the petitioner.4. Sri Khalil Ahmad, counsel engaged subsequently for the petitioners submits that the undertaking was given by the earlier counsel for the petitioners under the impression that the petitioners would not be having any hardship in vacating the disputed shop and is not willing to contest the writ petition. He has placed reliance upon paragraph 3 of the review application which is as un...
Virendra Giri S/O Late Shanker Giri and Vs. State of U.P. Through Its ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-16-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)AWC678
V.M. Sahai and R.N. Misra, JJ.1. By way of this writ petition the petitioners have prayed for a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned orders dated 31.8.2007 and 4.10.2007 passed by respondent no, which is filed as Annexure-2 to the writ petition, by which the respondents have demanded royalty from the petitioner son the supply of Stones and similar relief in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to with-hold payment of the petitioners in pursuance of the said letters.2. We have heard Sri I.P. Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Smt. Sarita Singh, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondents.3. From the contents of the writ petition, it appears that the petitioners are registered Contractor in District Budaun. The Executive' Engineer Flood Division), Irrigation Department invited tenders for supply of the stone holders for the construction of 'Chandanpur Husainpur Tatbandh'. The tender of the petitioners were accepted ...
Smt. Ramkali Vs. Kuldeep Chand and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-16-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)AWC403
Tarun Agarwala, J.1. Before giving the facts arising out of the present second appeal, it is essential to give a brief background of the facts which led to the filing of the present suit and, consequently, the present appeal.2. In 1932. Abdul Hai executed a mortgage in favour of Hazari Lal for a sum of Rs. 10,000 repayable with interest in respect of certain properties which included a grove and a shop. Hajari Lal instituted a Suit No. 21 of 1946 for the recovery of Rs. 14,987.50 due to him on the mortgage. In this suit, Hajari Lal prayed that 1 /4 share of Abdul Hai be partitioned and a decree for the recovery of the amount be passed. The parties entered into a compromise which was recorded by the trial court on 23.3.1948 and, on 1.7.1948, the suit was decreed and the decree holder, namely, Hajari Lal became entitled to recover a sum of Rs. 10,000 alongwith interest @ 3% per annum. The Court also appointed a Commissioner for the purposes of charging the property as specified in the pl...
Virendra Pal Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-16-2007
Reported in: 2008CriLJ1984
ORDERSaroj Bala, J.1. This Criminal revision is directed against the order dated 19-6-2001 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 10, Azamgarh in Case Crime No. 155 of 2001 under Section 420 I.P.C. and Section 3/7 of the Essential Commodities Act, Police station Deo Gaon, District Azamgarh whereby declining to release the Tanker and solvent loaded therein.2. Heard Sri V. Singh, learned Counsel for the revisionist, learned A.G.A. and have perused the record.3. The facts giving rise to this revision put briefly are these:On 27-5-2001 the applicant and co-accused were found selling solvent adulterated petrol. The applicant was driver on Tanker No. U.P.65-D/0375 in which 12000 litres solvent was loaded. The Tanker carrying solvent was seized.4. An application for release of the Tanker was moved under Section 457 Cr.P.C. by the applicant on the grounds that challan for offences under the Essential Commodities Act and prosecution were stopped with immediate effect by G...
Karan Singh Son of Shri Madho Singh Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Cour ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-15-2007
Reported in: [2008(116)FLR596]
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. This petition has been filed by the workman challenging the award dated 13.1.1999 passed by the Labour Court, Agra, in Adjudication No. 234/1997, which was published on the notice board on 25.8.1999.By the impugned award the reference has been decided by the labour court against the workman holding that the order of reference was bad and that his services have been terminated and for an unsatisfactory work by the employer for loosing confidence upon him.3. The facts of the case are that the workman was engaged as Pathology Lab Assistant in Nauyhil Integrated Rural Project for Health and Development (hereinafter referred to as NIRPHAD) on 16.5.1979. It is claimed by the workman that his service were orally terminated with effect from 29.5.1995 pursuant to letter dated 27.5.1995 issued by the employer. A show-cause notice dated 26.7.1995 was issued to him directing him to be present at the Headquarters on 29.7.1995. It is alleg...
Mohd. Haneef S/O Sri Abdul Rahman and Smt. Parveen Ansari W/O Mohd. Ha ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-15-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)AWC1652
Ashok Bhushan, J.1. These two writ petitions have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgement. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged in writ petition No. 46269 of 2007 and learned Counsel for the parties have agreed that both the writ petitions be finally decided. The writ petition No. 46271 of 2007 has been connected with writ petition No. 46269 of 2007 vide order dated 24.9.2007 passed in writ petition No. 46271 of 2007.2. Heard Sri A. D. Saunders learned Counsel for the petitioners in both the writ petitions and Sri S.N. Jaiswal has appeared for the respondent No. 3 in writ petition No. 46269 of 2007. Sri M.P. Dubey has accepted notice for respondent No. 3 in rhw qp No. 46271 of 2007. These two writ petitions have been filed by the two petitioners whose grant of permit of a known route as 'Meerut- Parikashat Garh-Asifabad- Lalyana and allied routes' which was granted by the Regional Transport Authority, Meerut on 2.9.2004 has beep set aside ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »