Allahabad Court July 2009 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.
Brahma Singh Vs. District Inspector of Schools and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-28-2009
Reported in: 2010(1)AWC338
Sudhir Agarwal, J.1. Heard Sri K.S. Mishra, learned Counsel for the petitioner at great length and learned standing counsel representing respondents No. 1 and 2. Despite notice having been served upon respondent No. 3 neither he has filed any counter-affidavit nor any one has put in appearance on his behalf.2. The short question up for consideration is whether the petitioner was eligible for promotion to the post of Lecturer against a vacancy occurred on 30.6.1991 in Hindu Anglo Vaidic Inter College, Saharanpur (hereinafter referred to as 'College'). The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher (C.T. grade) in the College on 17.2.1981. Sri Mishra stated that in 1986, the cadre of C.T. Grade was declared a dying cadre and, therefore, he became Assistant Teacher in L.T. grade and continued as such. On account of one Sri Shyam Dayal Srivastava, Lecturer (Geography) on 30.6.1991 a substantive vacancy on the post of Lecturer fell vacant and he, being senior-most L.T. grade teacher, was...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Surendra Kumar Gupta
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-27-2009
Reported in: [2009]319ITR253(All)
1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law for opinion of this Court:Whether the hon'ble Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was legally correct in confirming the action of Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) to allow the assessee's claim for deduction to the extent of 40 per cent. of the amount received as incentive bonus particularly when it is the part of salary ?2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows:3. The reference relates to the assessment years 1989-90 to 1991-92.4. The respondent-assessee is a development officer with Life Insurance Corporation of India. In all the three assessment years he had received incentive bonus from Life Insurance Corporation against which he had claimed certain expenditure. The Assessing Officer was of the view that incentive bonus was part and parcel of the assessee's income under the head 'Salary' and as such he was entitled to only standard deduction under Section 16(i) of the Act. F...
Committee of Management, K.S. Inter College and anr. Vs. State of U.P. ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-27-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)AWC4051
Devi Prasad Singh, J.1. The petitioner's Committee of Management has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India being aggrieved with the appointment of authorised controller under the U.P. High Schools and Intermediate Colleges (Payment of Salaries of Teachers and Other Employees) Act, 1971 (in short the 'Act') on the ground that the authorised controller has been appointed for unspecified period which is not permissible under the Statutes.2. The question involves, whether an authorised controller be appointed under the Act, for unspecified period?3. In brief, the facts are that on account of alleged non-compliance of payment of salary of two class IV employees, the Regional Joint Director, Aligarh passed the order dated 6/7.6.2008 under Sub-section (3) of Section 6 of the Act (contained in Annexure-1A to the writ petition). Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner approached this Court by filing C.M.W.P. No. 30489 of 2008 which was decided finally by the judgment an...
Salim UddIn Ansari Vs. Additional District Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-24-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)AWC3571
Poonam Srivastav, J.1. Heard Sri Arvind Srivastava, learned Counsel for the petitioner-tenant and Sri Rahul Shripat for the landlord-respondent.2. The petitioner-tenant challenged the judgment dated 5.5.2009 passed by the Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, Meerut confirming the judgment of the Judge. Small Causes Court, Meerut dated 26.4.2006.3. The dispute relates to House No. 35, located at Kalka Ka Bagh, Khatikan, Shahpeer Gate, Meerut at a monthly rent of Rs. 18. A notice dated 10.1.1997 was served on the petitioner that he has not paid rent and consequently the tenancy stood determined from the date of expiry of notice. S.C.C. Suit No. 127 of 1997 was instituted. The respondent Nos. 3, 4 and 5, plaintiffs claimed to be heirs of late Jorawar Singh who used to collect rent during life time of Kalka Prasad. Kalka had executed a Will in respect of property No. 35 Kalka Ka Bagh, Khatikan, Shahpeer Gate, Meerut in favour of Jorawar Singh. After death of Jorawar Singh, the plaintiffs stepped ...
Zahid HussaIn Vs. Ram Swaroop Gupta
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-24-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)AWC3877
Poonam Srivastav, J.1. Heard Sri A.K. Tiwari, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri M.M.D. Agrawal, Counsel for the contesting respondent.2. The dispute relates to a shop situated at Chimara Road Kasba Jaswant Nagar, Pargana Saifai, district Etawah, which was let out at monthly rent of Rs. 300 per month. The landlord/respondent sent a notice dated 20.8.1996 demanding arrears of rent and terminating tenancy on the ground that shop in dispute is 1994 construction and, therefore, U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 is not applicable. After expiry of the period of notice, the instant suit for eviction was instituted, which was contested by the petitioner. He denied allegation in his written statement and his stand was that previously there was a shop having Tin shade covered on four sides by tattar and bamboos on the same land where the present shop is standing.3. The tenant's submission was that previously he was paying rent to the landlord at the rate of Rs. 40 per month. Affidavits were exchan...
Zonal Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India and ors. Vs. Deputy ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-24-2009
Reported in: AIR2010All13; 2009(4)AWC3735
Arun Tandon, J.1. These two connected writ petitions have been filed by the officers of the Life Insurance Corporation of India challenging the demand of stamp duty to the sum of Rs. 1,77,71,488 raised by the Deputy Inspector General/Deputy Commissioner, Stamps, Kanpur Division, Kanpur vide order 29.11.2003 and the consequential demand notices dated 5.2.2007 and 22.2.2007.2. Facts relevant for deciding these two petitions are as follows:Life Insurance Company is a statutory Corporation created under the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956. The Corporation has its zonal office at Kanpur Nagar.3. For the purposes of execution of life insurance policies for every sum of Rs. 1,000 insured an insurance stamp of the value of 40 paisa is required to be affixed on each policy bond. The Divisional Office at Kanpur made purchases of self adhesive insurance stamps from the registered stamp vendors of Maharashtra between 19.4.1993 to 29.3.2001 and is stated to have used the same on policy bonds i...
Arvind Kumar Rai Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-24-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)AWC4075
Devi Prasad Singh, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel and perused the record.2. With the consent of the parties' counsel, the writ petition is finally disposed of at admission stage.3. The petitioner Arvind Kumar Rai has applied for grant of fire arm licence to the District Magistrate, Ghazipur. The application has been rejected, hence the present writ petition.4. In brief, the petitioner has applied for grant of fire arm licence (revolver) alongwith a certificate given by the Pradhan of his village with regard to grant of licence. The application was kept pending by the respondents without taking a decision. Hence, the petitioner had approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by preferring Writ Petition No. 2001 of 2006 which was decided finally vide judgment and order dated 11.5.2006. A mandamus was issued to the District Magistrate, Ghazipur to decide the petitioner's application for grant of fire arm licence within o...
In Re: Shakumbari Sugar and Allied Industrial Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-24-2009
Reported in: [2010]97SCL136(All)
Bharati Sapru, J.1. This petition has been filed by the Company under Sections 101, 102 and 103 of the Companies Act, 1956 by which the Company has sought a reduction in its share capital from Rs. 32,85,42,000 comprising of 32,85,42,000 equity shares of Rs. 10 to be reduced to Rs. 16,42,71,000 comprising of 16,42,71,000 equity shares of Rs. 10 each fully paid-up by cancelling in writing half of the issued subscribed and paid-up share capital of the Company. In the circumstances, as stated in its special resolution dated 8-8-2008, the Company has placed its memorandum of association as Annexurc-A to the application and Clause 10 of the said association allows the Company to reduce its share capital by way of its special resolution. A notice was given to all the shareholders and creditors on 22-5-2008 and a resolution was passed by the shareholders of the company on 8-8-2008. This, special resolution is also on record. This petition was duly advertised and the petitioner has placed on re...
Kailash Chandra Gupta Vs. Subhash Chandra Gupta
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-23-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)AWC3876
ORDERPoonam Srivastav, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the Counsel for the contesting respondent.2. The Instant writ petition has been filed against the judgment and orders dated 23.4.2002, passed by the Judge, Small Causes Court, and 3.2.2005, passed by the Additional District Judge/Special Judge (Economic Offences), Allahabad.3. The petitioner Instituted S.C.C. Suit No. 107 of 1998, Kailash Chandra Gupta v. Subhash Chandra Gupta for eviction on the ground of arrears of rent. The contesting respondent moved an application 70C stating therein that the Judge, Small Causes Court, does not have any jurisdiction since the question of title is involved. The plaintiff claims himself to be owner on the basis of Will, which is disputed by the contesting respondent, who happens to be brother of the plaintiff. Another Suit No. 18 of 1993 was also instituted by the petitioner, which was pending before the Judge, Small Causes Court and the plaint thereof was also annexed with the...
Mohan and anr. Vs. District Magistrate/Collector and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-23-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)AWC3567
S.U. Khan, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned standing Counsel for respondents No. 1 to 3 and 5.2. Petitioners claim that on 6.5.2009, an order has been passed in their favour by Consolidation Officer, Nand Ganj, district Ghazipur in Case No 280, Mohan v. Sarkar under Section 42A of U.P.C.H. Act. Copy of the said order is Annexure-4 to the writ petition.3. Under the aforesaid section only clerical or arithmetical errors apparent on the face of record may be corrected. This provision is equivalent to Section 152, C.P.C. However, Consolidation Authorities are very liberally using this section for passing any type of order without properly appreciating its very limited scope. Powers under this section shall rarely be invoked and with great caution. In the order (Annexure-IV), it is mentioned that petitioners filed objections to the effect that in alleged Case No. 484, some order was shown to have been passed on 2.5.2001 and on the basis of that forged and fictitious...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »