Allahabad Court August 2007 Judgments
Employees State Insurance Corporation Through Its Regional Director Vs ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-31-2007
Reported in: [2007(115)FLR698]; (2008)IILLJ432All
Pankaj Mithal, J.1. Heard Shri Saral Srivastava, learned Counsel for the appellant and Shri I.M. Tripathi, learned Counsel for the respondent and perused the record.2. Employees State Insurance Corporation has challenged the order dated 27.1.2001 passed by the Employees Insurance Court, Kanpur Nagar in appeal No. 244 of 1993 (Kamal Ahamad v. Employees State Insurance Corporation) whereby the Employee Insurance Court has determined the permanent partial disability of the respondent to the extent of 10%.The respondent was an employee of the Elgin Mill and was insured with the Employees State Insurance Corporation. He suffered injury in his left eye while on duty on 6.1.1990. The Medical Board rejected the claim of the respondent on 25.7.1991 whereupon the respondent preferred an appeal before the Employees Insurance Court, which has been partly allowed by the impugned order.3. The first submission of the learned Counsel for the appellant is that the appeal of the respondent before the Em...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner, Trade Tax Vs. Kanpur Tractors Private Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-31-2007
Reported in: (2009)20VST493(All)
Rajes Kumar, J1. These three revisions under Section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') are directed against the order of the Tribunal dated August 26, 2002 relating to the assessment years 1988-89, 1989-90 and 1991-92 by which Tribunal had deleted the penalty under Section 10A of the Act.2. Brief facts of the case are that the dealer/opposite party (hereinafter referred to as 'the dealer') appears to be authorised dealer of M/s. Maruti Udyog Limited and was carrying on the business of sale and purchase of vehicles. The dealer purchased spare parts from outside the State of U.P. against form C for the sale of such parts. However some of such parts purchased against form C had been used under the warranty claim of the customers free of cost and after using such parts under the warranty claim, the claim had been made from M/s. Maruti Udyog Limited for which credit note was issued. The assessing authority levied the penalty under Section 10A of the C...
Tag this Judgment!iqbal Ahmad Son of Ismail and ors. Vs. Deputy Director of Cosolidation ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-30-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)AWC630
S.N. Srivastava, J.1. Intervener application filed on behalf of Bhagirathi son of Neemar resident of village Baksenda Post Sikandra Tahsil Phulpur District Allahabad which has been pressed into service by Sri K.J. Shukla, Advocate is ordered to be placed on record.2. The question of maintenance of water channels, water bodies, Ponds, Tanks, Pokhar, Talab etc. stemmed for consideration of the Court in the instant writ petition in the course of hearing. From the ancient time, the water reservoir in the shape of ponds, lake and various other water bodies were created and maintained to cater to the needs of homo sapiens. It is eloquent from history that in Indus civilization, water reservoirs consisting of tanks, ponds, lake etc. furnished the main source to cater to the needs of potable water. It is further eloquent from the history that during Chandra Gupta and Kautilya period and also during medieval period, mode of preserving water in reservoirs was adopted by way of rain harvesting an...
Tag this Judgment!Pratap Singh Shishodia S/O Sri Gajendra Singh Vs. Board of Revenue and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-30-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)AWC380
S.K. Singh, J.1. Heard Sri Kunwar R.C. Singh in support of this petition. No body appeared for the respondents.2. Challenge in this petition is the order passed by Board of Revenue, Additional Commissioner and that of the Additional Collector dated 24.11.1983, 10.6.1983 and 13.01.1982 (Annexures XI, X and VIII) respectively.3. Before adverting to the arguments, notice of facts in brief, will suffice.4. Petitioner claims to have received a portion of Plot No. 729 and 731 situated in Agrawala Mandi Tateeri Tehsil Baghpat, district Meerut, in view of allotment made/approved by the Sub-Divisional Officer dated 28.02.1980 pursuant to which on 04.09.1980, he deposited Rs. 326.80 and then he claims to have raised construction. For the aforesaid allotment, petitioner claims to have filed application on 27.09.19:79 on the ground that he is residing at present in Tateeri Meerut and he has no land for his residence and therefore, he be allotted suitable area. On that application, Lekhpal, Supervi...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Shivalik Drug (Family Trust)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-30-2007
Reported in: (2008)214CTR(All)450; [2008]300ITR339(All)
1. This is an income-tax reference at the instance of the CIT. The Tribunal, Delhi Bench-B, New Delhi has referred the following question to this Court for its opinion:Whether, the Tribunal is right in holding that amounts paid by way of travelling allowance to the trustees by the assessee trust would not be subject to the provisions of Rule 6D of the IT Rules 2. The dispute relates to the asst. yr. 1982-83. The assessee is a family trust deriving income from manufacture and sale of allopathic and ayurvedic medicines. During the relevant assessment year, it claimed deduction of Rs. 17,824 (sic) as travelling allowance expenses. The ITO found that the travelling allowance claimed by the assessee was excessive. He invoked Rule 6D of the IT Rules and held that travelling allowance as per the aforesaid Rule 6D was admissible to the extent of Rs. 29,965. However, in the first appeal as well as in the second appeal, it has been held that Rule 6D of the rules has no application to the facts o...
Tag this Judgment!Chaturghun Vs. Phanpati Rai and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-30-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)AWC213
Pankaj Mithal, J.1. Heard Sri C. K. Rai, holding brief of Sri Faujdar Rai learned Counsel for the appellant. Respondent No. 1 was issued notice to engage another counsel. He was served with the notice and the service was held to be sufficient but even then no one has put in appearance on his behalf. Respondents No. 2 and 3 are duly represented but no one turned up on their behalf despite the list being revised.2. The plaintiff-respondent No. 1 had filed Original Suit No. 386 of 1971 for permanent mandatory injunction restraining the defendant appellant from interfering in his right to use the 'nali' shown by letters v] c] l] n in the plaint map and for mandatory injunction directing the defendant-appellant to remove the roots and branches of the trees from his grove land shown by letters ;] j] y] o in the plaint map. The suit after contest was partly decreed by the Court of first instance vide judgment and order dated 22.5.1981. It was decreed in respect of the 'nali' but was dismissed...
Tag this Judgment!Mohd. Ishaque and anr. Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-30-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)AWC217
S.N. Srivastava, J.1. Though the relief sought in this petition was to issue a writ direction or order in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent No. 2 to decide the Case No. 15 of 2007, under Section 33/39, L.R. Act pending before S.D.M. Tahsil Sadar Allahabad regarding plot No. 532 admeasuring 2 bighas 5 biswas situated in village Kareli Tahsil Sadar district Allahabad, it transpired that earlier petition filed by the petitioner had already culminated in dismissal and the petitioner camouflaging the factum of dismissal of earlier writ petition preferred the present petition and further the Court made certain queries which are reproduced below:(1) Whether zamindari has been abolished in the City of Allahabad particularly in village Kareli, Tahsil Sadar district Allahabad if so the copy of notification.(2) The entire record by which petitioners' names were mutated in khatauni on the basis of unregistered mortgage deed relied upon by the petitioners, reference to which has been ...
Tag this Judgment!Bharat Electricals Through Its General Manager, Gopal Krishna Agrawal ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-30-2007
Reported in: [2008(118)FLR897]
H.L. Gokhale, C.J.1. The appeal seeks to challenge the judgment and order rendered by the learned Single Judge dated 9.7.2007, wherein he has dismissed the petitions filed by the appellants herein. The appellants Industries herein are dealing in mechanical and electrical engineering. They were aggrieved by the State Government notification issued under Section 3(b) of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 dated 15.5.2000, whereby the wages of the workmen in three different categories have been revised. The earlier notification was issued on 29.4.1989 and the wages for the unskilled employees were Rs. 700/-, for the semi-skilled Rs. 850/- and for the skilled Rs. 950/-. Now they have been revised to Rs. 2535/- for unskilled, Rs. 2785/- for semi-skilled and Rs. 3090/- for skilled, where the number of employees for the concern is between 50 to 500 Where the number of employees is above 500, it is revised to Rs. 2660/-. Rs. 2925/- and Rs. 3190/- respectively.2. As far as this Section 3(b) ...
Tag this Judgment!Hira Lal Vinod Kumar Vs. Commissioner of Trade Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-30-2007
Reported in: (2008)17VST149(All)
Rajes Kumar, J.1. Present three revisions under Section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') are directed against the order of the Tribunal dated September 7, 2001 relating to the assessment years 1985-86, 1986-87 and 1987-88.2. The applicant was registered dealer and was engaged in the business of manufacture and sales of metal ingot. For the assessment years 1985-86, 1986-87 and 1987-88 the applicant had disclosed taxable turnover at Rs. 19,71,005, Rs. 49,99,637 and Rs. 32,28,127.24. The assessing authority rejected the books of account and by way of best judgment assessment, estimated the taxable turnover at Rs. 21,05,000, Rs. 52,00,000 and Rs. 36,00,000, respectively. The books of account have been rejected mainly on the ground that the applicant being manufacturer, had not maintained any manufacturing account as required under Section 12(2) of the Act. Being aggrieved by the assessment orders, the applicant filed appeals before the Deputy Commi...
Tag this Judgment!R.D. Ram S/O Sri Ram Pher Ram Vs. Ratan Kumar Tandon S/O Late Lalji Ta ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-29-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)AWC1681
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. This Special Appeal has been filed under the provisions of Chapter VIII Rule 5 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 against the order dated 06.08.2007 passed by the learned Single Judge in Civil Misc. Contempt Petition No. 3875 of 2005 rejecting the application for recall if its earlier orders dated 02.03.2007 and 16.03.2007.2. This case has a chequered history, as two rounds of litigation have already been completed. The matter has gone upto the Hon'ble Supreme Court twice and in spite of the fact that several orders have been passed by various Courts, the litigation is not coming to an end.3. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the land in dispute, i.e. Bungalow 26/14, Hastings Road (Nyaya Marg), Allahabad, measuring an area of 22528 sq. meters stood notified under the provisions of Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter called the 'Act 1894') on 14.02.1986 and in respect of the same, declaration under Section 6 of ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »