Allahabad Court July 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. Decent Metal Industries
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-04-2007
Reported in: (2008)13VST429(All)
Vikram Nath, J.1. Heard Sri K.M. Sahai, learned Counsel for the applicant.2. Despite notice to engage another counsel no one has put in appearance for dealer-opposite party.3. The dispute relates to the assessment year 1994-95. The Commissioner of Trade Tax has questioned the order of the Trade Tax Tribunal, Bench II, Aligarh, dated August 8,1994 by means of this revision under Section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 (in short, referred to as, 'the Act') and has sought to raise the following question of law:Whether, on the facts and under the circumstances of the case, the learned member of the Trade Tax Tribunal was justified to have held that L.T. open clamps A-type were taxable at the rate of four per cent as iron and steel?4. The dealer is involved in supply of goods to various parties including Government Departments. It was initially assessed by order dated December 1,1998. However, certain transactions relating to supply of goods being L. T. open clamps A-type were noticed to...
Ateeq Ahamad Son of Haji Firoz Ahmad Vs. the State of U.P. Through Sec ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-03-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)AWC3916
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. This writ petition has been filed seeking following reliefs:(a) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondents not to demolish the commercial building of the petitioner situated at plot No. 22/D, Civil Lines, Allahabad without giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and without taking any decision by the State Government on the letter dated 26.12.2006 of the Board;(b) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding upon the respondents to take decision on the letter dated 26.12.2006 of the Board with further direction to the respondents to decide the application dated 25.11.2006 of the petitioner for compounding and regularizing the construction made by the petitioner on plot No. 22/D, Civil Lines, Allahabad.2. The facts giving rise to this case are that the petitioner purchased the plot No. 22/D Civil Lines, Allahabad on 21st March, 2005 and submitted map/plan for constructing the commercial b...
Tej Singh Son of Late Shiv Ram Singh Vs. Regional Joint Director of Ed ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-03-2007
Reported in: [2007(115)FLR440]
S.N. Srivastava, J.1. By way of this writ petition, petitioner challenged the impugned order dated 22.7.2002 passed by District Inspector of Schools, Mathura absorbing one Sri Narain Pandey , working as Assistant Clerk in Saubhari Uchchatar Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Khaira, Mathura in Kisan Inter College Ral, Mathura, which is Annexure -5 to the writ petition.2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner urged that petitioner was working as Class IV employee and was entitled to get promotion against the vacancy caused due to retirement of one Kanak Singh on 31.1.2002 after completing his age of superannuation. He urged that no person could be absorbed or appointed against the post to be filled up by promotion. He urged that out of three posts. This vacancy was to be filled up by promotion only and petitioner was the only qualified person to be considered for promotion which was denied by the impugned order.4. This Court by an order dated 2.2.07 granted three...
Rakesh Kumar Son of Bhagat Ram Vs. Committee of Management, Shivpati D ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-03-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)AWC3602; [2007(115)FLR523]
S.N. Srivastava, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the order passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Naugarh, District Siddharthnagar, dated 20.2.2001 (Annexure-9 to the writ petition) deciding Issue No. 2 and allowing the preliminary objection filed by the Defendant that Suit is cognizable under U.P. Public Services (Tribunal) Act, 1976.2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner urged that finding of the Civil Judge (Junior Division) that petitioner is a public servant and the case of petitioner could be entertained under U.P. Public Services (Tribunal) Act, 1976 is unsustainable in law in view of the fact that petitioner is an employee of a Degree College managed by a private Management affiliated to a University under the U.P. State Universities Act and in view of the definition of public servant under Section 2(b) of the UP, Public Services (Tribunal) Act, 1976 petitioner cannot be said to be a public servant and as such the impugn...
Surendra Kumar Vs. Munna Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-03-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)AWC3969
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.2. The petitioner has come up in this writ petition challenging the order dated 5.8.2002 passed by the Additional District Judge, Court No. 1, Rampur in S.C.C. Revision No. 96 of 1997, Munna Lal v. Surendra Kumar. The order is as under:^^fuxjkuh LkO;; Lohdkj dh tkrh gS A v/khuLFk U;k;ky; }kjk ikfjr fu.kZ; [kf.M+r fd;k tkrk gS A dsl v/khuLFk U;k;ky; dks bl fu.kZ; esa fn;s x;s funsZ'kks ds vuqlkj fuf.kZr djus gsrq fjek.M fd;k tkrk gS A i{kdkj v/khuLFk U;k;ky; ds le{k fnukad 27-8-2002 dks mifLFkr gksa A g0 5-8-2002eksgEen bdckyvij ftyk U;k;k/kh'kdksVZ la0 1] jkeiqj A3. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the petitioner had given his newly constructed shop on rent for four years to respondent No. 1 @ Rs. 250 per month in 1989. The tenancy was got extended by the respondent-tenant on one pretext or the other. When the respondent did not vacate the shop in dispute despite granting sufficient time for the s...
Roshan Lal Mittal Vs. Rent Control and Eviction Officer/S.D.M. and anr ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-02-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)AWC3174
Prakash Krishna, J.1. These two writ petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by a common judgment, as jointly agreed by the learned Counsel for the parties. To appreciate the controversy involved in both the writ petitions, facts are noted from the leading case, i.e., Writ Petition No. 19926 of 1995 which will suffice.2. Raising a short controversy, the present writ petition is on behalf of a permanent lessee in whose favour a lease has been created by means of a registered lease deed dated 17.4.1916 in respect of a vacant piece of land whereupon shops No. 848 and 848(1) are situate at Nayaganj (Glrbarganj), Bulandshahr.3. Whether Section 29A of Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act') (U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972) is applicable to an unexpired lease of land is the only question involved in these two writ petitions.4. An application under Section 29A(5) of the Act was filed by the landlord respo...
U.P. State Road Transport Corporation and anr. Vs. Om Prakash and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-02-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)AWC4207; [2007(115)FLR70]
S.U. Khan, J.1. Both these writ petitions are directed against the same award dated 28.2.1990 given by Presiding Officer, Labour Court (IV), U.P. Kanpur in Adjudication Case No. 105 of 1986. The matter which was referred through order dated 29.10.1986 was as to whether the action of the employer, U.P.S.R.T.C. terminating the services of its employee Om Prakash Singh, a Conductor, through order dated 4.6.1983 was valid or not.2. The charge against the employee was that on 25.1.1983 on surprise inspection it was found that he was carrying 38 passengers without tickets. In domestic enquiry charge was found proved. The employee admitted that oral statements of the witnesses were recorded in the enquiry in his presence and that he did not make any complaint regarding unfairness of domestic enquiry, during continuance of enquiry. Labour court held that enquiry was fair. Apart from it, labour court in its award held that the workman in cross-examination clearly admitted that at the time of su...
State of U.P. Vs. Iiird Additional District Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-02-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)AWC209
Prakash Krishna, J.1. The present writ petition arises out of the proceedings under Section 21 (8) of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 in respect of an accommodation which was let out to the petitioner initially at the rent of Rs. 40 per month on 15.11.1971 and it was enhanced to Rs. 115 per month on 1.2.1972, as some more accommodation was added. Subsequently, the rent was enhanced in the month of June, 1978 to Rs. 160 per month. The accommodation in question is situate in Narainpur Kasba Auraiya wherein office of Weight and Measurement Department is located.2. An application giving rise to the present writ petition was filed by Smt. Mula Devi, respondent No. 3 herein, on 13.12.1984 under Section 21 (8) of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 for fixing its rent at Rs. 400 per month. It was registered as Case No. 29 of 1986. The said application was contested by the petitioner on the ground that Smt. Mula Devi, the landlady has entered into an agreement on 11.9.1984 whereby it was provided that since 1.6...
Union of India (Uoi) Through General Manager, North Eastern Railway Vs ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-02-2007
Reported in: 2008ACJ2533
U.K. Dhaon and Narayan Shukla, JJ.1. Heard Mr. Anil Shrivastava, the learned Counsel for the appellant and Mr. Jaspreet Singh and Mr. P.K. Singh learned Counsel for the respondents.2. The Union of India has preferred the instant first appeal from order under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 against the judgment and award dated 3.4.2003 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Lucknow in Claim Case No. 0000033 by which compensation of Rs. 4,00,000 was awarded to the claimant-respondent.3. The brief facts of the case are that a claim petition under Section 124-A of the Railways Act, 1989 was filed by the claimants-respondents on account of death of Sadhana Kumari. The said claim petition was contested by the appellant by filing written statement, stating, inter alia, that the alleged incident does not fall under the ambit of an 'untoward incident' as defined in Section 123 (c) (2) read with Section 124-A of the Railways Act.4. On the pleadings by the parties, the Railway...
Punjab National Bank and ors. Vs. a Unique Export House and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-02-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)AWC847
S.U. Khan, J.1. At the time of hearing no one appeared on behalf of respondents hence only the arguments of learned counsel for the defendant/revisionists were heard.2. This is defendants' revision directed against order dated 28.3.1990 passed by Civil Judge, Moradabad, in Misc. Case No. 71 of 1989, through which opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 in this revision were permitted to file suit as indigent person. The suit was instituted for recovery of Rs. 25 lacs and odd against applicants and proforma respondent.3. District Magistrate submitted his report dated 15.12.1989 to the effect that plaintiffs did not possess sufficient means to pay court fees and State had no objection in case plaintiffs were permitted to institute suit without payment of court fees.4. According to the learned counsel for the defendant-applicants the most objectionable portion in the impugned order is the observation of the court below that under Order XXXIII, Rule 1. C.P.C., it is not necessary to see that how much ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›