Allahabad Court August 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.
Rama Shanker Son of Nanaee (In Jail) Vs. the State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-29-2007
Reported in: 2008CriLJ129
Vijay Kumar Verma, J.1. Both these appeals have been preferred against the judgment and order dated 31.05.1993 passed by 4th Additional Sessions Judge Deoria, in ST. No. 289 of 1991, whereby the appellant Rama Shankar has been convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life under Section 302 IPC and two years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 201 IPC In Case Crime No. 31/91, P.S. Bhatani, District Deoria.2. The incident resulting in the death of Akhilesh aged about five years, son of the complainant Smt. Guddi wife of Ram Kripal r/o village Ghati, P.S. Bhatani, District Deoria occurred In the morning of 17.03.1991. The case of the prosecution as appearing from the First Information Report (Ext. Ka 11) and statement of Smt. Guddi (P.W. 1), in brief, is that on 17,03.1991 at about 5.00 a.m. the complainant along with her daughters Basanti and Babi had gone to attend natural call out side the village abadi leaving her son Akhilesh sleeping on the cot. The appellant-accused Ram...
Smt. Kiran Yadav Vs. Smt. Santoshi Devi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-29-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)AWC1794
H.L. Gokhale, C.J.1. The appeal is admitted and by consent, heard forthwith. Heard Mr. R. C. Singh, learned Counsel for the appellant and Sri Santosh Kumar Misra, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 1 and learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 2, 3 and 4 and Sri Anuj Kumar, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 5.2. The appellant herein is the candidate for the post of Shiksha Mitra to be selected for school at village Ghatail Chheti in District Deoria. The ranking of the candidates was done as per the rules whereafter the appellant was placed at No. 1 with 60.70% and one Nirja Yadav was placed at No. 2 with 56.85% and respondent No. 1 was placed at No. 3 with 55.50%.3. In this scenario, normally the appellant should have been selected but she was denied appointment on the ground that she was not residing in the village concerned and the requirement for the selection is that the person concerned has to be resident of the concerned village. The District Magistrat...
Punjab Auto Industries P. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-29-2007
Reported in: [2008]306ITR149(All)
1. This is an appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, at the instance of the assessee for the assessment year 1989-90. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer disallowed interest of Rs. 87,064 on an amount of Rs. 4,83,687. The Assessing Officer was of the view that the assessee has diverted its fund and purchased agricultural land not for business purpose for a sum of Rs. 4,83,687 and therefore, the assessee was not entitled to deduction of interest thereon. The said portion of the order was set aside in appeal by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), However, the Tribunal on further appeal at the instance of the Department restored the assessment order on this point and maintained the disallowance of Rs. 87,064. In the appeal the following question of law has been raised:Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is legally justified in confirming the disallowance of interest at Rs. 87,0642. Heard Shri Pawan Shree Agraw...
Mohd. HussaIn Vs. Bank of India and ors.
Court: DRAT Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-28-2007
Reported in: I(2008)BC105
1. This is an appeal filed by the appellant against an order and judgment dated 18th July, 2005 passed by D.R.T., Allahabad in Original Application No. 141/2001 allowing the application for issuance of the recovery certificate for Rs. 15,36,648/- against the defendants along with interest, etc. The appellant Mohd. Hussain claimed himself to be the purchaser of the property, which is said to have been mortgaged in connection with the loan in question advanced by Bank of India respondent No. 1 in favour of Majestic Engineering Corporation.Respondent Nos. 2/1 to 2/11 are said to be the legal heirs of Abdul Rasheed who was defendant No. 1 and has died. Respondent Nos. 3, 4 and 5 were said to be the guarantors for above loan. The case of the appellant is that he is neither borrower nor the guarantor and has purchased the house in question situated in Sarai Gate, Rampur for value and after due care. According to the appellant the property in question was not mortgaged with the respondent Ba...
The State of U.P. and the Prescribed Authority/S.D.O. Vs. Ist Addition ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-27-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)AWC745
S.U. Khan, J.1. Heard learned standing counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rahul Sahai, learned Counsel for the contesting respondents. Counter affidavit on behalf of contesting respondents has also been filed.2. This writ petition is directed against judgment and order dated 06.12.1985 passed by 1st A.D.J., Gorakhpur in Misc. Ceiling Appeal No. 133 of 1983.3. Ceiling proceedings under U.P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act were initiated against tenure-holder respondent No. 2-Smt. Sharada Devi. The case on the file of Prescribed Authority, S.D.O. Maharajganj was registered as case No. 26/33, State v. Smt. Sharada Devi. The matter was decided by the Prescribed Authority on 24.02.1983 and certain area of land belonging to respondent No. 2 was declared as surplus land. Against the said judgment and order, four appeals were filed, one by the tenure holder and the other three by her transferees. The appeal in question, i.e. Misc. (Ceiling) Appeal No. 133 of 1983 was field by respon...
U.P. State Road Transport Corporation Through the Regional Manager Vs. ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-27-2007
Reported in: [2007(115)FLR486]
S.U. Khan, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. This writ petition is directed against award dated 28.3.1998 given by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court U.P. Gorakhpur in Adjudication Case No. 272 of 1992. The matter which was referred to the Labour Court was as to whether the action of petitioner employer terminating the services of its employee Ram Pati respondent No. 3 with effect from 22.8.1978 was valid or not. Reference was made through government order dated 25.3.1992 and the Industrial Dispute was raised by respondent No. 3 in 1991 through C.P. Case No. 40 of 1991 i.e. after about 13 years of his termination. The labour court directed reinstatement with full back wages.3. Services of respondent No. 3 who was conductor were terminated after domestic enquiry. Preliminary issue regarding fairness of domestic enquiry was framed on 23.8.1993. The Presiding Officer, Labour Court in respect of the said issue passed an order on 29.9.1993 mentioning therein that the Administra...
Shobha Ram Ex Constable/G.D. Son of Sri Jail Singh Vs. Commandant, 29 ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-27-2007
Reported in: [2007(115)FLR732]
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri P.N. Rai, learned Counsel for the respondents.2. The petitioner was enlisted in C.R.P.F. in 1975-94. He was charge-sheeted for mis-behaving with the ladies as was being communicated by Head constable Sushil on 25.3.2001. During this interrogation the petitioner also committed misconduct and was charge-sheeted on 30.3.2001 on five counts.3. By order of Commandant 29 Battalion, C.R.P.F. dated 18.6.2001 petitioner was dismissed from service.4. Aggrieved by the said order the petitioner preferred an appeal dated 29.8.2001 before the DIG C.R.P.F., which was also dismissed. He then preferred a revision before the Inspector General of Police, C.R.P.F. which was also rejected by the revisional authority by its order dated 6.1.2003. Then the petitioner submitted a petition before the Director General of Police on 18.6.2003 which was also rejected on 1.7.2003.5. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order the petitioner filed writ petitio...
Anil Kumar Yadav Son of Sri Rama Yadav Vs. State of U.P. Through Secre ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-27-2007
Reported in: [2007(115)FLR852]
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard counsel for the petitioner, the Standing counsel for the respondents and perused the record.2. This writ petition has been preferred for issuance of a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned order dated 12.8.2007 passed by the Superintendent of Police, Pratapgarh whereby the services of the petitioner were terminated on the ground that the petitioner has concealed the factum of pendency of a criminal case against him.3. It has further been prayed that the respondents may be directed not to give effect the operation of the impugned order dated 1.2.8.2007 aforesaid and also for issuance oi a writ commanding the respondents to permit the petitioner to complete his training as constable in Training School at Pratapgarh and pay the stipend/allowance/salary payable and admissible to him.4. Brief facts of the case are that in response to the advertisement No. 10-51-2006 (1) dated 1.9.2006 the petitioner applied for recr...
Commissioner of Income-tax and anr. Vs. Mentha and Allied Products P. ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-27-2007
Reported in: [2008]304ITR214(All)
1. We have heard learned Counsel for the Income-tax Department as well as learned Counsel for the respondent.2. A return was filed by the assessee without including therein cash compensatory support amounting to Rs. 65,61,640. The cash compensatory support is hereinafter referred to as the 'CSS' for short. This non-inclusion was based upon a decision of a Special Bench of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi in the case of Gedore Tools India Private Limited v. IAC reported in [1988] 25 ITD 193. Subsequently, the Finance Act, 1990, vide its Section 28(iiib) brought about an amendment, with retrospective effect, that the cash assistance was taxable. In view of this amendment, the assessee voluntarily filed a revised return and included in the CCS therein.3. The Assessing Officer levied penalty under Section 271(1)(c) of Rs. 37,89,350 holding that the non-inclusion of CCS in the original return amounted to 'concealment'.4. The appellate authority set aside the penalty on the ground th...
Ram Dutt Sharma Vs. Commissioner of Trade Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-27-2007
Reported in: (2009)20VST880(All)
Rajes Kumar, J.1. Present ten 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 May 22, 2007 relating to the assessment years 1989-90, 1990-91, 1991-92, 1992-93 and 1993-94 both under the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.2. Brief facts of the case are that the applicant was a registered dealer under the U.P. Trade Tax Act and claimed to be the purchasing commission agent and during the years under consideration purchased gur on behalf of ex-U.P. principal and after purchasing the said goods, the same have been dispatched at the destination of ex-U.P. principal. The claim of the applicant was that the movement of goods outside the State of U.P. was in the course of inter-State purchases and therefore, neither the purchases nor its movement of goods outside the State of U.P. were liable to tax. The assessing authority has not accepted the plea of the applicant ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »