Allahabad Court May 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.
Ram Prakash Vs. Baddal Husain
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-04-2007
Reported in: AIR2007All212
ORDERDilip Gupta, J.1. This Second Appeal has been filed by defendant No. 2 for setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the learned Vth Additional District Judge, Shahjahanpur whereby the Civil Appeal, that had been filed for setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the learned IIIrd Additional Munsif, Shahjahanpur dismissing the Suit of the plaintiff for specific performance, has been allowed.2. The Original Suit had been filed for decree of specific performance with the allegation that the agreement for sale was made between the plaintiff and defendant No. 1 Imami on 22-3-1975 for transfer of 3/ 4th share in the house for a sum of Rs. 1000/-; that the defendant No. 1 received the entire amount and the sale-deed was to be executed by 22-3-1976; that possession was also handed over to the plaintiff and even though the plaintiff has always been ready and willing to execute the sale-deed but defendant No. 1 evaded the execution and ultimately a Registered notice was sent b...
Naresh Spiners Limited and anr. Vs. State Bank of India and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-03-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)AWC981
S.N. Srivastava and S.S. Chauhan, JJ.1. Challenge in this petition and connected petition is directed against the sale proclamation dated 22.11.2006 issued by respondent No. 2 contained in Annexure-8 to the writ petition.2. The petitioners, M/s. Naresh Spinners Limited, a company registered under the Companies Act and engaged in the business of manufacturing of cotton yarn was initially established with the appellation Amausi Textiles Mills Ltd. and subsequently, it was christened as M/s. Naresh Spinners Ltd. For its effective working, the company opened a cash credit limit account for Rs. 50 lac under an agreement with the State Bank of India Main Branch Lucknow, which was subsequently enhanced, to 75 lacs and thereafter to Rs. 95 lac with interest at the rate of 17% per annum. The company it would appear ran into rough weather and outstanding in the account overshot the said limit. Subsequently, the said limit was further enhanced. Again outstanding against the company overshot the l...
Ashu Nandan Singh Son of Sri Sheo Pujan Singh, Nagar Abhiyanta/Assista ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-02-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)AWC3615; [2007(114)FLR248]
Anjani Kumar and Sudhir Agarwal, JJ.1. The petitioner, by means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has challenged the order passed by respondent No. 1 dated 30th July, 2002, whereby the respondent No. 1 has passed an order directing that during the period of suspension, the petitioner shall not be entitled to any payment of salary, except what has already been paid to him, as he has been awarded punishment of warning.2. We have heard learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for respondent No. 1 as well as Sri C.K. Parekh, learned Counsel for respondents 2 to 4.3. The petitioner, who is a member of the U.P. Palika Centralised Engineering Services was subjected to a disciplinary proceedings by its employer, which has ultimately resulted into punishment of warning and thereafter disciplinary enquiry has come to an end.4. During the pendency of the disciplinary enquiry the petitioner has been placed under suspe...
The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Jagaran Prakashan (P) Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-02-2007
Reported in: [2008]296ITR627(All)
1. We have heard the learned Counsel for both sides.2. The following question has been referred in this case:1. Whether on the, acts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the expenditure on hiring of cars does not come within the purview of Section 37(3-B) for the purposes of 10% disallowances?3. It appears that under Section 37 business expenditure which is sought deducted from the profits and gains of business or profession has been led under certain cases under Sub-section (3A) and Sub-section (3B) with explanation (c).4. Apparently, these provisions which had been inserted and have now deleted were for the purposes of stopping extravagant expenditure on advertisement, publicity, sales promotion, running and maintenance of Aircraft, running and maintenance of Motor Cars and payments made to Hotels Under Sub-section (3A) of Section 37, if expenditure on the above exceeded Rupees one hundred thousand, the entire excess would not be permitted to b...
Santosh Kumar Porwal Son of Chhote Lal Porwal Vs. Director, Bal Vikash ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-02-2007
Reported in: [2007(115)FLR109]
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard Sri Yogesh Kumar Saxena counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Shree Prakash Singh standing counsel.2. Case of the petitioner is that he was appointed on ad hoc basis as Junior Clerk in the office of Bal Vikash Pariyojana Adhikari. Farrukhabad respondent No. 3 vide letter of appointment dated 25.7.1987 appended as Annexure 1 to the writ petition. His appointment was conditional till selection of regularly selected candidate.3. It appears from letter dated 3.4.1987. appended as Annexure 2 to the writ petition, that some recommendation was made by Bal vikash Pariyojana Adhikari. Tirua, district Farrukhabad for regularization of the services of the petitioner on the post of Junior Clerk. However, services of the petitioner were terminated vide order dated 20.6.1987, enclosed as Annexure 3 to the writ petition on the ground that he was an ad hoc employee and his services were no longer required.4. Aggrieved by the order of his termination, the petitioner filed Civil ...
Smt. Nisha Rani Agarwal Vs. the Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-01-2007
Reported in: [2007]294ITR46(All)
1. The following two questions have been referred under Section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act:1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case there was any material before the Tribunal to hold the initiation of proceedings under Section 147(a) in reassessment proceedings as valid?2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case interest on capital and accumulated profits, paid to minors is covered under Section 64(a)(iii) and 64(1)(iii) in the proceedings in response to notice under Section 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961?2. Apparently, the second question contains a clerical mistake and the words 'Section 64(a)(iii)' need to be omitted.3. Smt. Nisha Rani Agrawal (herein after called the assessee) is the assessee in her individual capacity. She had two sons who, during the irrelevant period, were minors. Their names are Rohit and Rajiv.4. Rohit was admitted to the benefit of partnership in the following firms to the extent of a share indicated against the name of each...
Nathu Ram Tiwari Son of Sri Shambhu Dayal Tiwari Vs. U.P. State Public ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-01-2007
Reported in: [2007(114)FLR567]
Anjani Kumar and Sudhir Agarwal, JJ.1. Aggrieved by the order dated 30th July 2000 passed by the U.P. Public Services Tribunal, Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) the petitioner has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorari for quashing the said order as also the order dated 30th October 1975 which was impugned before the Tribunal. Petitioner has also sought a writ of mandamus commanding respondents No. 2 to 5 to reinstate him and pay full back wages.2. The facts in brief are that the petitioner was appointed as Bus Conductor in U.P. Government Roadways in the year 1967. He was removed from service in 1970. In appeal the order of removal was revoked and he was reinstated by order dated 10/1lth January 1971 and posted at Kanpur City Bus Service. In the year 1972 U.P. State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation) came into existence and the employees of U.P. Government Roadways depar...
Kailash Nath Tiwari Son of Shri Ram Sewak Tiwari Vs. Union of India (U ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-01-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)SLJ546(NULL)
Dilip Gupta, J.1. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 3rd Murch. 1982, sentencing the petitioner, who was working as Ambulance Assistant in Military Hospital, Ramgarh Cantt., to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for three years and also dismissing him from service in the Court Martial proceedings that had been held under the provisions of the Army Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). The quashing of the order dated 12th April, 1982 of confirmation of sentence as also the order dated 27th August, 1984 by which his petition against the sentence was rejected by the Chief of the Army Staff have also been sought.,2. The petitioner who was working in the Military Hospital, Ramgarh Cantt. was served with a letter dated 14th February, 1982 mentioning that he would be tried by a General Court Martial. Along with the said letter, copy of the summary of evidence and a copy of the charge-sheet dated 12th January, 1982 was also enclosed. The charge-sheet mentioned...
Mohd. Ibrahim and anr. Vs. Mohd. Yusuf and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-01-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)AWC3539
Dilip Gupta, J.1. This second appeal has been filed by the defendants for setting aside the Judgment and decree dated 24th May, 1982 passed by the learned VIth Additional District Judge, Moradabad by which the appeal filed by the plaintiff was allowed and the judgment and decree dated 12th September, 1980 passed by the trial court was set aside and the claim of the plaintiff for specific performance of the contract was decreed and it was further directed that the defendant No. 1 will execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff within a period of one month after receipt of the balance amount of Rs. 500.2. Original Suit No. 130 of 1997 was filed by Mohd. Yusuf initially against Mohd. Iliyas for specific performance of the agreement to sell dated 2nd June, 1976 and in the alternative, for recovery of Rs. 6,000 from the defendant with interest. It was stated in the plaint that the aforesaid agreement to sell dated 2nd June, 1976 was executed between the plaintiff and defendant No. 1 a...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›