Allahabad Court February 2008 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.
Postal Seals Industrial Co-operative Society Ltd. Through Its Secretar ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-18-2008
Reported in: [2008(117)FLR521]
Amitava Lala, J.1. This appeal has been preferred from the order dated 10th January, 2008 passed by concerned Civil Judge, which is the 'Court' as per The Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948. There is a provision of appeal under Section 82 of the said Act which is as follows:82. Appeal- (1) Save as expressly provided in this section, no appeal shall lie from an order of an Employees' Insurance Court,(2) An appeal shall lie to the High Court from an order of an Employees' Insurance Court if it involves a substantial question of law.(3) The period of limitation for an appeal under this section shall be sixty days.(4) The provisions of Sections 5 and 12 of the (Limitation Act, 1963 (36 of 1963)), shall apply to appeals under this section.2. From the plain reading of the provision it appears to us that the appeal shall lie to the High Court if it involves any substantial question of law. According to the appellant, the substantial question of law is that the cooperative society is not lia...
Virendra Kumar S/O Sri Dharma Pal Singh Vs. State of U.P.,
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-18-2008
Reported in: AIR2008All138
V.M. Sahai and R.N. Misra, JJ.1. We have heard Shri Ravindra Mishra, learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing counsel for the respondents.2. The petitioner is a practising advocate in 'tehsil Kol of district Aligarh. He was appointed Notary vide order dated 26.4.1999 -for a period of three years. The copy of the appointment letter is annexure-1 to the writ petition. The appointment was made by the Governor of the State by exercising its power under Section 3 of the Notaries Act, 1952. The petitioner applied for renewal of his further term within time but vide order dated 19.12.2002, the renewal was refused as is evident from annexure-3 to the writ petition. The petitioner has challenged the validity of the said order. The learned Counsel to the petitioner has contended that the order, annexure-3 is illegal and arbitrary and against the provisions of the Notaries Act. In the counter-affidavit filed by Shri S.P. Tiwari, Deputy Secretary, Law Department, Government of U.P. ...
State of U.P. Through Collector and ors. Vs. Smt. Rama Devi Wife of La ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-18-2008
Reported in: 2008(2)AWC1519; [2008(117)FLR442]
Rajes Kumar, J.1. Present appeal is against the order of learned District Judge, Mainpuri dated 30.04.1993 in Civil Appeal No. 63 of 1992, State of U.P. and Ors. v. Smt. Rama Devi and Ors. arising from Suit No. 402 of 1990, Smt. Rama Devi and Ors. v. State of U.P. and Ors.2. Brief facts giving rise to the present appeal are that Smt. Rama Devi and two others filed suit No. 402 of 1990 against the defendants/appellants for the declaration that she is entitled to service benefits after the death of her husband and for the decree of monetary injunction for the payment of service benefits including pension and other benefits. Rama Devi is the widow of Bhim Singh and Km. Rani and Neetu were minor daughters. Bhim Singh was constable in P.A.C. and was posted at Aligarh. He was suspended on 22.05.1987 on the ground that he was involved in a criminal case under Section 307 I.P.C. in session trial No. 390 of 1987 he was convicted and sentenced to 4 years R.I. by Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Ma...
Daya Ram Vs. Smt. Lakshmina and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-18-2008
Reported in: 2008(2)AWC1316
Rajes Kumar, J.1. The present second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 12.2.1992, passed by the Special Judge, Gorakhpur arising from the order of the trial court dated 24.11.1988, passed in Civil Suit No. 859 of 1983.2. The plaintiffs filed suit for the cancellation of the sale deeds dated 8.11.1982 and 4.3.1982 which were executed by plaintiff No. 2, the mother of plaintiff No. 1. By the sale deed dated 8.3.1982 Araji No. 137K Rakba 42 decimal and Araji No. 256 Rakba 36 decimal total 78 decimal land were sold, while against sale deed dated 8.11.1982 Araji No. 23 Rakba 52 decimal Araji No. 136 Rakba 6 decimal Araji No. 165 Rakba 62 decimal total Rakba one acre 20 decimal were sold. It was claimed that plaintiff No. 2 was illiterate lady and intended to sell only 42 decimal land to the defendants. By committing a fraud and misrepresentation, the sale deed for 78 decimal was got executed on 8.3.82 and for other land sale deed was got executed on 8.11.82. After the...
Sri Karodi and anr. Vs. Dasai and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-18-2008
Reported in: AIR2008All100; 2008(2)AWC1569
Shiv Charan, J.1. Present second appeal has been instituted against the judgment and decree dated 25.2.2004, passed by Addl. District Judge/Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Jhansi passed in Civil Appeal No. 95/99, Sri Karodi and Anr. v. Dasai and Anr. By the impugned judgment and decree learned appellate court dismissed the appeal of the appellants with costs.2. The perusal of the judgment of the court below shows that Original Suit No. 130 of 1997, Dasai v. Karodi and Anr. was instituted for declaration to the affect that the sale-deed dated 23.4.97 is null and void and liable to be cancelled. It has been alleged in the plaint that there were three brothers of the plaintiff, namely, Shyam Lal defendant No. 3, Dasai plaintiff and Brij Bhushan. That the disputed property situated at Mohalla Gudari town Ranipur Pargana Mau District Jhansi is the ancestral property of the plaintiff and his brothers. That a partition took place of the disputed house in between the plaintiff and his brothers ...
Ram Chandra Prasad Srivastava and ors. Vs. Kalika and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-18-2008
Reported in: 2008(2)AWC2086
Rajes Kumar, J.1. Present second appeal is against the order of the IInd Additional District Judge, Ballia dated 30th March, 1977 arising from the Suit No. 331 of 1969.2. Plaintiffs-appellants filed the suit for permanent injunction restraining the defendants-respondents from causing any interference in the plaintiffs possession over the disputed house. It was claimed that the house was ancestral property and was in possession of the plaintiffs and without the partition, defendants-respondents were raising the construction. The trial court vide order dated 13th March, 1976 dismissed the suit with costs. It has been held that the plaintiffs have no share in the disputed premises and the disputed house was not the ancestral property of the plaintiffs and it was the self acquired property of defendant No. 4 only. It was also observed that the land over which the baithaka which is in dispute has been constructed formerly belonged to Maharaja Dumraon from whom it was acquired by defendant N...
Dey's Medical (U.P.) (P) Ltd. Vs. Union of India (UOi) and Ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-15-2008
Reported in: (2008)216CTR(All)83; [2009]316ITR445(All)
1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner is challenging the assessment order dt. 31st Dec, 2007 (Annex. 5 to the writ petition) passed by Jt. CIT, Range-II, Allahabad, under Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') for the asst. yr. 2005-06 insofar as it has fastened the liability of tax of Rs. 1,29,10,775 upon the petitioner. He has also challenged the vires of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act.3. The petitioner is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of cosmetics and medical products having its unit at Allahabad. With respect to some advertisements made by M/s Dey's Medical Stores ., the petitioner claims to have made certain payments being his share of expenditure towards advertisement but the said payments were made without deducting tax at source though mandated under Section 194C of the Act. For failure of deduction of tax at source, the amount paid by the petitioner claimed to be expenditure on account of advertise...
Paras Nath Son of Raj Nath Vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation and or ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-15-2008
Reported in: 2008(2)AWC1532
Ashok Bhushan, J.1. Heard Sri V.K. Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Sri Shailendra Kumar Singh appearing for respondent No. 3, who is contesting respondent in both the writ petitions.2. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that respondent No. 3 is only contesting party and other respondents being proforma respondents, the writ petition be decided without service to notice to other respondents.3. Both the writ petitions raise similar question of law and facts and are being decided finally by this common judgment by consent of the parties.4. These two writ petitions pray for quashing the order dated 20th September, 2007 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation dismissing the revision filed by the petitioners under Section 48 of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 as well as the order dated 16th November, 2004 passed by Consolidation Officer condoning the delay in objection filed by respondent No. 3. Writ Petition No. 58671 of 2007 is being treated as leadi...
Jagdish Singh, Vs. Smt. Dhanna Bai Widow of Late Shri Mulwa Fasiya
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-15-2008
Reported in: 2008(2)AWC1565
Shiv Charan, J.1. Heard Sri K.K. Deubey, learned Counsel for the appellants and Sri Harish Chandra Mishra on the point of admission of the second appeal for hearing and I have also perused the judgements of the courts below and other documents filed by the parties. From perusal of the documents shows that the appellants instituted O.S. No. 430 of 1986 for cancellation of the will dated 17.4.1986 executed by Pancham Singh in favour of defendant Smt. Dhanna Bai. It has been alleged in the plaint that plaintiffs are sons and widow of Pancham Singh. That Pancham Singh 'inherited the property situated at Nandpura and Orchcha. That Pancham is used to visit Jhansi in order to look after the property situated in Jhansi and he engaged the defendant Smt. Dhanna Bai for domestic purposes for cleaning of the house etc. That Pancham Singh was suffering from cancer and he was weak and frail and mentally not sound. He remained hospitalized for treatment. As the defendant was looking after Pancham Sin...
Shiv Prasad and ors. Vs. Janardan Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-15-2008
Reported in: 2008(2)AWC1517
Shiv Charan, J.1. Heard Sri Abhishek Kumar learned Counsel for the appellants and Sri Satya Priya Upadhya advocate for the respondents on the point of admission of second appeal for hearing and also perused the judgment of the court below and other documents, pleadings etc., filed on record.2. From the perusal of the record it is evident that O.S. No. 311 of 1981, was instituted by the respondent Janardan Singh and others for permanent prohibitory injunction and also for mandatory injunction for demolition of construction raised on the property in dispute. It was alleged in the plaint that plaintiffs are the owners of plot No. 1174/3 measuring 48 decimal situate at Kasba Maniyar Pargana Khareed district Ballia and the plaintiffs are in possession for the last more than 12 years. Defendants have got no connection and concern with the property in dispute but defendants illegally encroached upon the land in the month of March, 1981 as shown in the plaint map. At that time, the plaintiff w...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »