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.
J.K. JaIn and anr. Vs. Rakesh Kumar Saini
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-17-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)AWC4066
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Factual scenario of the case is that the petitioners are owners/landlords of the shop, in dispute, situate in Subhash Bazar, Meerut City which is in the tenancy of the respondent.2. The petitioners instituted S.C.C. Suit No. 135 of 1988, J.K. Jain and Anr. v. Sri Jagannath Prasad, in the Court of Judge, Small Causes Court, Meerut, claiming that the shop, in dispute, being new construction, the provisions of U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulations of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972, (hereinafter referred to as the U.P. Act No. XIII of 1972) are not applicable.3. It was alleged that the shop, in dispute was demolished and a fresh construction was made in 1987. Fresh house tax was assessed in 1987. Accordingly, the petitioners served Sri Jagannath Prasad (since deceased), predecessor-in-interest of the present respondent with a notice dated 18.7.1988 under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act which was refused by him. The trial courts dismissed the suit of the p...
Suresh Singh Son of Late Ram Bahadur Singh Vs. State of U.P. Through t ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-16-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)AWC3411; [2007(114)FLR1128]
Vineet Saran, J.1. The petitioner was appointed on 2.11.1970 as Court Moharrir in the Urban Ceiling Department. He was later promoted as Reader. The petitioner remained on casual leave for three days from 15.3.1990 to 17.3.1990. Thereafter 18.3.1990 was Sunday and he moved a fresh application for casual leave for further three days from 19.3.1990 to 21.3.1990. He thus remained on casual leave for six days and thereafter joined duties on 22.3.1990. During this period there was rearrangement regarding allocation of work in the office. It is alleged that the petitioner did not handover files and hence on 29.3.1990 the office Almirah of the petitioner, in which the files were kept, was broken by the Deputy Director, Urban Land Ceiling and the files were taken in possession. Regarding the same, the petitioner lodged a complaint with the Senior Superintendent of Police, Varanasi, Director, Urban Land Ceiling and the District Magistrate, Varanasi.2. On 4.9.1990 the petitioner was placed under...
J.P. Silk Mills Private Limited Through Its Managing Director, Sri Man ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-16-2007
Reported in: (2008)1CompLJ178(All)
Amitava Lala,, J.1. The writ petition has been made before this Court that One Time Settlement (hereinafter called as 'OTS') guidelines notified by the Reserve Bank of India vide Circular No. RBI/2005-06/153 dated 3rd September, 2005, is binding upon the bank to accept the same mandatorily. Factually, twice the OTS has been rejected on 20th March, 2006 and 15th May, 2007. The order has been passed under Section 13(4) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, from which alternative forum of appeal under Section 17, before the Debts Recovery Tribunal is available.2. Learned Counsel appearing for the writ petitioner contended before this Court that since the circular of Reserve Bank of India has mandatory effect, the Bank is compelled to accept the same having its statutory force He cited a judgment reported in : AIR2001SC3095 Central Bank of India v. Ravindra and Ors. From sub paragraph 5 of paragraph 55, it has been poin...
irshad Alam Vs. Natthu Lal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-16-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)AWC3679
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner at the admission stage.2. By means of this petition the petitioner has challenged the validity and correctness of the judgment and order dated 30.11.2006 passed by the XVIth Additional District Judge, Kanpur Nagar in Rent Appeal No. 100 of 1999. Natthu Lal v. Irshad Alam.3. The petitioner is tenant in the shop in dispute situate on the ground floor of premises No. 130/8/L-A, Bagahi, Kanpur Nagar wherein the petitioner-tenant is doing the business of incense sticks (Agarbattis). The sole respondent-Nathu Lal is the owner and landlord of the shop in dispute. He filed an application under Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for release of the shop in dispute on the ground of bona fide need for opening medical clinic and medical store for his doctor son Dr. Anil Kumar and doctor daughter-in-law Dr. Leela.4. Objection in the shape of...
Manju Singh Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-16-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)AWC3733
Devi Prasad Singh, J.1. The petitioner, who is the wife of a Lieutenant Colonel of the Indian Army residing in Jankipuram locality of the capital of the State, has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India feeling aggrieved of the encroachment of roads and traffic mismanagement in the cities of the State of U.P. including Lucknow.2. The submission is that on account of inaction on the part of the State during peak hours, congestion takes place in the markets as well as densely-populated areas of the city of Lucknow. The attention of this Court has been drawn to other cities of the State of U.P., particularly the 'A' Class cities with the submission that the State has failed to discharge its constitutional and statutory obligations to provide quality of life i.e. fundamental in nature, protected by Article 21 of the Constitution of India.3. It has been argued by the petitioner's counsel that on account of increase of population in the urban area, it is expecte...
Sidh Nath Shukla Vs. Judge Small Causes (Prescribed Authority) and ors ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-16-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)AWC1624
Poonam Srivastav, J.1. Heard Sri B. P. Jauhari, learned Counsel for the petitioner.2. This is a writ petition on behalf of the tenant regarding a disputed premises House No. 68/17, Gandhi Nagar, Chhitwapur Pajawa, P.S. Husainganj, Lucknow. The contesting respondent is the landlady. A suit for eviction under Section 21(1)(a)(b) of the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972, (hereinafter referred as the Act) was moved before the prescribed authority, which was numbered as P.A. Case No. 2 of 2003. The ground for release was that the house in question is 100 years old and is in dilapidated condition. It can fall any moment, besides it requires reconstruction for personal use of the landlady. Previously one Smt. Jagpala was the owner and landlady who sold it to the present landlady vide sale deed dated 12.8.1983. The release application was contested by filing objection written statement by the petitioner and after exchange of affidavits, the release application was allowed vide judgment dated 19.1.2007. ...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. U.P. State Handloom Corporation
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-16-2007
Reported in: [2009]310ITR54(All)
1. We have heard both sides.2. The following questions are being sought to be called as a reference by way of this application.1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the hon'ble Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was legally justified in dismissing the Departmental appeal and confirming the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) cancelling the penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of Rs. 23,65,000 even when the assessee was new one and it has not made compliance to fulfil the legal obligation by furnishing the return of income under Section 139(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, and also it has deliberately did not comply with the notice issued under Section 139(2) to file the return of income ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, if any Explanation to Section 271(1)(c) has not been invoked and concealment penalty has been imposed on substantive provisions of the section, penalty so imposed will be legally sustainable ?3. The Tribunal has ...
Manoj Kumar Singh Son of Sri Kukhram Singh Vs. State of U.P. Through P ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-13-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)AWC3696
Arun Tandon, J.1. One Gorakhnath Jaiswal was a judgment debtor. Appeal filed by him was also dismissed, the matter thereafter was taken to the Hon'ble Supreme Court. During the pendency of the Special Leave Petition orders were issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court directing return of the money which Gorakhnath Jaiswal had withdrawn during the pendency of the proceedings. The amount was 34 lacs. The Hon'ble Supreme Court on 22.03.1999 issued following directions:In so far as the property to Gorakhnath Jaiswal is concerned, we direct Gorakhnath Jaiswal to appear in person or through Pairokar before the District Judge, Ghazipur, on the date fixed by him for auction of the property so as to assist the Court in identifying the property to enable it to be put to auction in terms of the earlier orders of this Court.2. Accordingly the property of Gorakhnath was put to auction for realization of the money under orders of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.3. In the auction so held no one participated. Th...
The New India Assurance Company Limited Through the Legal Cell Through ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-13-2007
Reported in: [2007(114)FLR1175]
Amitava Lala, J.1. This appeal is arising out of the judgement and award dated 10th May, 2007 passed by the Commissioner, under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter called as the 'Commissioner'), Kanpur Region, Camp Etawah in Case No. 8 of 2005 (Daya Ram and Anr. v. R.D. Electricals Contractor and Anr.) on account of death of the deceased 'while working on the high tension line. Five consecutive deaths were occurred. The claim petitions have been made by the claimants saying that a sum of Rs. 3,045/- was the salary of the deceased but ultimately at the time of hearing the employer stated that such persons were kept in the muster roll and the daily wages of the muster roll employees were Rs. 145/- per day. Therefore, awarded amount was increased from the claimed amount on such fact.2. Now the question arose as to whether the Commissioner is empowered to pass an award more than the claim amount or not. According to us. normally it can not exceed. However, such rule, accordin...
Ansal Papers Through Its Director Sri Deepak Ansal Vs. State of U.P. a ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-13-2007
Reported in: (2009)20VST727(All)
R.K. Agrawal, J.1. By means of the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, M/s Ansal Papers, seeks the following reliefs:i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari to quash the impugned notice dated 17.4.1993 issued by the respondent Nos. 2 under Section 15A(1)(1) of the Act (Annexure 4 to the writ petition);ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent No. 2 not to proceed further and not to initiate any penalty proceedings, i.e. not to pass any penalty order in pursuance of the impugned notice dated 17.4.1993.iii) issue such other and further writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem tit and proper in the nature and circumstances of the present case.iv) Award costs of the petition to the petitioner.2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present writ petition are as follows:According to the petitioner it is a registered firm and is engaged in the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »