Allahabad Court April 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.
U.P.S.R.T.C. Through the Regional Manager Vs. Smt. Pratibha Singh and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)AWC2765
ORDERAmitava Lala, J.1. This appeal arising out of an award of compensation granted by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal under Section 110D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as the Act, 1939). The application for compensation under Act, 1939 is to be made under Section 110A of the Act, wherein certain options are to be given under Section 110AA of the Act, however, the award of the Tribunal is to be given under Section 11OB of the Act. The method of compensation is to be adopted in accordance with said Sections unlike the new Act, i.e., Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, where a formula has been adopted under the schedule of the relevant section being 163A of the said Act. We have to go by the old Act in the present case. The only point which has been raised by the appellant is the application of multiplier. According to the appellant higher side of income has been shown as Rs. 1,500 where dependency has been shown as Rs. 1,000. Further deduction has been made of 1/3rd a...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. A.M.L. Price
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-2007
Reported in: (2007)211CTR(All)15
R.K. Agrawal, J.1. The Tribunal has referred the following 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 correct to hold that the share of income from the estate of the deceased was not includible in the hands of the assessee especially when the Will has not been administered and probate application stands rejected by the competent Court?2. Whether the Tribunal was legally correct to hold that the will still holds the field even when the probate was not granted?3. Whether the Tribunal was legally correct to hold that provisions of Section 213 of the Indian Succession Act were not applicable in proceedings before the IT authorities?2. The reference relates to the asst. yrs. 1984-85 to 1986-87.Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows:The assessee along with his two brothers, namely Sarvasri...
Balli and ors. Vs. Smt. Shanti Devi and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-2007
Reported in: AIR2007All177; 2007(3)AWC3032
ORDERS.U. Khan, J.1. Revision is withdrawn /treated to be withdrawn to this Court under Section 24, C.P.C.2. Heard learned Counsel for the applicants.3. Smt. Shanti Devi and another opposite parties filed O.S. No. 681 of 1986 against the applicants before Munsif, Azamgarh. Valuation of the suit as shown in the plaint was Rs. 1,000 and requisite court fees was paid thereupon. Thereafter, on the objection of the defendants applicants valuation was enhanced to Rs. 26,000. Thereafter, plaintiffs filed application before Munsif for return of plaint for filing before it appropriate court as Munsif had no Jurisdiction to try the suits of valuation of Rs. 26,000. Application was rejected on 17.1.1989. On the same date another application had been given by the plaintiffs for permission to sue an indigent persons. Application was rejected as not maintainable by the same order dated 17.1.1989. Nothing was said on merit of the said application. Thereafter Munsif, Azamgarh, passed another order on ...
Union of India (Uoi) Through General Manager and anr. Vs. Smt. Deomani ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-2007
Reported in: 2008ACJ1924; AIR2007All178
Amitava Lala, J.1. Although the appeal has been place under the heading 'for orders' but on the joint prayer of the learned Counsel for the parties it has been taken up on merit by treating the same as 'for hearing. We have gone through the judgment delivered by Railway Claims Tribunal dated 1 13th August. 2002 and perused the record. ; We find that the sole cause under the appeal is that under Section 124A of the Railway Act, 1989 (hereinafter in short called as 'Act') no compensation can be awarded to the claimants in case the accident takes place in the manner which are exemptions under Section 124A of the act, as follows:(f) Suicide or attempted suicide by him;(g) Self-inflicted injury;(h) His own criminal act;(i) Any act committed by him in a state of intoxication or insanity;(j) Any natural cause or disease or medical or surgical treatment unless such treatment becomes necessary due to injury caused 'by the said untoward incident.2. Learned Counsel appearing for the respondent ci...
Mahalaxmi Gramodyog Sansthan Vs. Commissioner, Trade Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-2007
Reported in: (2009)20VST148(All)
Arun Tandon, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. Revisionist, M/s. Mahalaxmi Gramodyog Sansthan, Behat Road, Saha-ranpur has filed this trade tax revision challenging the order of the Trade Tax Tribunal, Saharanpur Bench, Saharanpur dated January 31, 2006 whereby the second appeal filed by the Trade Tax Department has been allowed and the order of the first appellate authority dated September 21, 2000 has been set aside.3. The facts giving rise to the present trade tax revision are that the assessee is a society registered with U.P. Khadi Gramodyog Board and is engaged in the business of sale of spices after grinding the whole spices.4. For the assessment year 1997-98, the total turnover as disclosed from the sale effected by the assessee was Rs. 74,16,997.25. According to the assessee, the said turnover in respect of two categories of goods sold by the assessee. The first category of goods was manufactured after purchasing the whole spices (ungrinded spices), i.e., Khada mas...
Nand Kishor Bajpai (Since Deceased) Represented by Ashok Bajpai and or ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-20-2007
Reported in: AIR2007All167
Sunil Ambwani, J.1. Late Nand Kishore Bajpai filed a Testamentary Case No. 23 of 1998 for 'Letters of Administration' of the estate and credit of his father late Shri Shiv Kumar Bajpai (the deceased) son of Bandideen Bajpai, resident of 312 Shahganj, Allahabad attached with registered 'Will' dated 13.2.1991. The application was directed to be advertised and is contested by caveator Smt. Munni Devi wife of Shri Ram Manohar Tripathi, one of the daughter of the deceased, resident of 560/561 Mill Road Kurla, Bombay-70, stating that the deceased died intestate and denying the execution of the alleged 'will' bated 13.2.1991.2. On the contest put by the defendant, the Testamentary Case was converted to Testamentary Suit No. 14 of 1999.3. During the pendency of the suit, Shri Nand Kishore Bajpai-the applicant died on 2.2.2006. Shri Nand Kishore Bajpai (since deceased) was substituted through his heirs:1. Shri Ashok Bajpai (son)2. Smt. Gayatri Devi (wife)3. Smt. Anita Misra (daughter)4. Smt. Me...
Starlinger and Co. Ges.M.B.H. Vs. Lohia Starlinger Limited and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-20-2007
Reported in: [2008]1444CompCas642(All)
Sunil Ambwani, J.1. Heard Shri P.V. Kapoor, Sr. Advocate assisted by Shri Dhruv Wahi, Shri Saral Srivastava and Ms. Namrata Kapoor for STARLINGER & Co. Ges.m.b.H, Sonnenuhrgasse 4, A-1060 Vienna, Austria, the appellant and Shri Ravi Kant, Sr. Advocate assisted by Ms. Bindu Saxena, Shri Yatindra Shukla and Shri Saurabh Srivastava for M/s Lohia Starlinger Limited, D-3/A, Panki Industrial Estate, Kanpur and other respondents.2. This appeal under Section 10F of the Companies Act, 1956 arises out of an order dated 12.12.2006 passed by the Company Law Board (CLB), Principal Bench, New Delhi in the Company Petition No. 62 of 2005, on a Company Application Nos. 365 & 324 of 2006 by which the CLB held that the issues raised by the application filed by the appellant are the matters to be decided on conclusion of main proceedings and permitted the respondent company to implement the decision taken in AGM dated 30.9.2006 relating to amendment of the objects clause of the Memorandum of Association ...
General Manager, National thermal Power Corporation Ltd. (Ntpc)/Nation ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-20-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)AWC2551
Sudhir Agarwal, J.1. These two appeals arise out of the same judgment dated 28.1.2004 passed by Hon'ble Single Judge in writ petition No. 55148 of 2002 and, therefore, as requested by the learned Counsel for the parties, have been heard together and are being decided by this common judgment.2. Special Appeal No. 184 of 2004 has been filed by the National Thermal Power Corporation--respondents in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 55148 of 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the appellant/ NTPC) aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment, insofar as the writ petition has been allowed and the order of dismissal passed against the petitioner respondent has been set aside. Special Appeal No. 305 of 2004 has been filed by Gurucharan Singh-- petitioner of writ petition No. 55148 of 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the petitioner/employee) against the aforesaid judgment of Hon'ble Single Judge and is confined to the extent the Hon'ble Single Judge has relegated the matter to the disciplinary authority for h...
Gorakhnath Pradhan Son of Sri Raj NaraIn Pradhan Vs. the Union of Indi ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-20-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)AWC4204
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1.Heard learned Counsel for me parties and perused me record.2. The petitioner has filed this petition against his termination from service vide impugned order dated 28.10.1996 passed by the Commandant, First Battalion Indo Tibetan Border Police Force (respondent No. 2) and for a direction to the respondents to allow him to participate in Commando training.3. A perusal of the record reveals that the petitioner was selected for the post of Constable in Indo Tibetan Border Police Force in 1995 after going through several physical tests and other formalities. After selection the petitioner was directed by the Head Constable to fill up a recruitment form including Character and Antecedents Verification Roll (Form No. ITBP-25) bearing column 12 (Ka) and (Kha) relating to character and antecedents. The petitioner alleges to have filled up and signed the form on 15.12.1995. The petitioner was thereafter appointed as a Constable in Indo Tibetan Border Police Force and was sent...
Bechan Singh and anr. Vs. Prescribed Authority and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-20-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)AWC2931
Prakash Krishna, J.1. The present writ petition is directed against the order dated 4.4.1997, passed by the prescribed authority whereby It has set aside the ex parte release order passed under Section 21 (1) (a) of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 and directed the restitution of possession to the contesting respondent No. 5, Smt. Uma Sengar. It is not In dispute that the petitioners had obtained the possession of the disputed accommodation on 22.9.1996 In pursuance of the ex parte release order dated 1.4.1995, obtained by them in P.A. Case No. 39 of 1994. An application under Section 21 (1) (a) of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 was filed by the petitioners' against three persons, namely, Rajesh Rat, Sanjai Shukla and Ajai Shukla, which was numbered as P.A. Case No. 39 of 1994, on the allegations that the applicant No. 2 (Bechan Singh who is petitioner No. 1 herein) is the owner and landlord of the accommodation in question which consists of two rooms, courtyard, kitchen, verandah, bath room, latrin...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »