Allahabad Court July 2010 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.
Rajesh and Another. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-13-2010
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the Staterespondent. The present 482 Petition has been filed for quashing of the order dated 21.07.2010 passed in criminal case no. 3415 of 2009 (Satpal v. State of U.P.) in case crime no. 832 of 2009 under sections 406, 420, 506 IPC pending before the 1st A.C.J.M., Ghaziabad and also for quashing of the cognizance taken order dated 01.09.2009 and the order dated 07.07.2009 issuing nonbailable warrant against the applicants 2, It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that the matter is purely of civil nature and the discharge application of the applicants has been dismissed by the concerned Magistrate by order dated 18.01.2010, which is bad in law. 3. From the perusal of the material on record and looking into the facts of the case at this stage it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicants. All the submission made at the bar relates to the disputed question of fact, which cannot be ...
The Commissioner of Income Tax-i,lucknow. Vs. M/S Bora Polyclinic Pvt. ...
Court: Allahabad Lucknow
Decided on: Jul-05-2010
1. Heard Sri D.D. Chopra, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri J.N. Mathur, learned Senior Counsel on behalf of the respondent and perused record.2. Since common question of law are involved in both the appeals, with the consent of parties counsel, we proceed to decide present appeals by the present common judgment.3. The respondent assessee, a Company, runs a Hospital at Sitapur Road, Lucknow. The income tax returns for the assessment year 1998-99 and 1999-2000 were filed showing loss of Rs.221974.00 which was processed under Section 143 (1) of the Income Tax Act (In short the Act). The assessment for both the assessment years, were reopened under Section 148 of the Act and notice under Section 148 of the Act was issued on 8.3.2002. A notice under Section 142 (1) was also issued on 28.1.2003 and the assessment was completed under Section 147/148 of the Act on 13.3.2003 on the total income of Rs.27,44,310.00 and Rs.27,54,870.00 for both years. The assessee preferred appeal which w...
Chinta Mani. Vs. State of U.P. and Others.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-05-2010
1. The appellant is a borrower. He took a loan from the respondent State Bank of India, Branch Dibai, to the tune of Rs. 2 Lacs for the purchase of a Tractor. The appellant admittedly defaulted in making repayment of the said agricultural loan that was disbursed in the year 2001. Consequently, recovery proceedings were initiated and a Citation of recovery was issued for recovery of the amount of loan as arrears of land revenue under the provisions of the U.P Zamindari Abolition & Land Reforms Act, 1950 read with the 1952 Rules.2. The challenge in the writ petition giving rise to this appeal was to the Citation of recovery dated 3.4.2010 whereby a sum of Rs. 2,17,000/- was sought to be recovered together with 10% recovery charges. The learned single Judge upon the concession made by the appellant petitioner that he is ready to pay the entire amount of loan with interest in easy installments, proceeded to pass an order on 25.5.2010 fixing the time period for the repayment and if the said...
Ara Mohammadi Maqsood @ Maqsood Ahmad And, ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-03-2010
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and also learned Addl. Government Advocate. The argument substantially is that fraught relation emanating from matrimonial bickering escalated into launching of criminal proceeding vide Case Crime No. .1175 of 2010 under Sections 498-A, 494, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act P.S. Kotwali, district Mau. 2. Having considered the arguments advanced across the bar, we have a feeling that Court owes a duty to the society to strain to the utmost to repair the frayed relations between the parties so that the wounded situation may be healed into a healthy rapprochement. The matter in hand also appears to be one of those cases in which reconciliation should be tried between the disputing parties.3. While referring the matter to Mediation Centre with the consent of the petitioners, it is directed that petitioner No.1 shall deposit a sum of Rs.10,000/- with the Mediation Centre by way of Bank draft drawn in favour of Medi...
Asok Pandey. Vs. Union of India and Others.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-03-2010
1. Application for amendment filed in Court is taken on record. Shri Asok Pandey, a practising lawyer of this Court, has filed this writ petition by way of Public Interest Litigation with the following 3 prayers:(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to appoint long tenure (with) bold Judges in the office of the Chief Justice of the High Court and to fix the tenure of the Chief justice of the High Court on the pattern of fixation of tenure (fixed tenure) for the office of President, Governor etc.;(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to appoint ..... the Acting Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court as a permanent Chief Justice of High Court, and(iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to ensure filling of vacant posts of Judges of the Allahabad High Court in a time bound manner. 2. Having been pointed out tha...
D.A.V. Inter College, Banda Vs. Yogesh Sinha, and Others.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-03-2010
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The brief facts of the case are that father of the plaintiff/respondent Late Baij Nath Sinha was admittedly retired as Principal of D.A.V. Inter College, Banda on 09.10.1967. Sri Baij Nath Sinha applied for the pension under the Govt. Order dated 17.12.1965 and accordingly his pension was sanctioned by Deputy Director of Education, Jhansi and till his death i.e. 17.10.1996 he was getting pension under the aforesaid Government Order. 2. After the death of Late Baij Nath Sinha, the plaintiff/respondent no. 1 being one of his sons claimed family pension on the ground that he was dependant of his father at the time of his death. The claim of the plaintiff/respondent for grant of family pension was rejected by the Deputy Director of Education, Jhansi vide order dated 19.5.1997 on the ground that under the relevant Government Order he is not entitled for family pension. 3. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the plaintiff-respond...
Haidar Ali and Others. Vs. State of U.P. and Others.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-03-2010
1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for the complainant and also learned A.G.A. appearing for the State. The argument substantially is that fraught relation emanating from matrimonial bickering escalated into launching of criminal proceeding vide F.I.R. which was registered at case crime No.756 of 2010, under Sections 498-A,323,506 IPC and 3/4 D.P.Act, P.S. Shamli, District Muzafrar Nagar.2. Having considered the arguments advanced across the bar, we have a feeling that Court owes a duty to the society to strain to the utmost to repair the frayed relations between the parties so that the wounded situation may be healed into a healthy rapprochement. The matter in hand also appears to be one of those cases in which reconciliation should be tried between the disputing parties.3. While referring the matter to Mediation Centre with the consent of the petitioners, it is directed that petitioner No.1 shall deposit a sum of Rs.10,000/- with the Mediation Centre by way...
Mahendra GuptA. Vs. State of U.P. and Another.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-03-2010
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA. 2. The applicant is directed to serve notice on respondent no. 2 through Incharge Sessions Judge, Bareilly positively, within a week from today. Notice will indicate that this application will come up for further arguments on 22.07.2010. On the next date, respondent no. 2 Tauqir Raza Khan is directed to be present before this Court in person and he may engage a counsel also to defend himself. 3. A perusal of the records indicates that respondent no. 2 moved Bail Application No. 745 of 2010 in case crime no. 519 of 2010, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 436, 307, 332, 336, 427, 152, 295, 153-A I.P.C. and 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act read with Section 3 of Damages of Public Property Act, relating to Police Station-Prem Nagar, District-Bareilly. The aforesaid bail application was heard by Incharge Sessions Judge / Additional Sessions Judge-I, Bareilly. At the time of hearing of the bail application, Incharge Sessions Judge heard lea...
Ashutosh Kumar Pandey. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-03-2010
1. The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. against the judgment and order dated 24.7.2007 and 29.1.2007 passed in Criminal Revision No.115 of 2007 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.7, Sitapur and in Crl. Misc. Case No.122 of 2006 in a proceeding under Section 125 Cr.P.C. passed by A.C.J.M.-II, Sitapur contained in Annexure Nos.1 and 2 to the petition, respectively. 2. Counter and rejoinder affidavit have also been exchanged between the parties.3. Heard Shri Tung Nath Tiwari learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A for the opposite parties nos.1 to 3 as well as Shri Rajiva Dube for the opposite party no.4 . 4. It reveals from the perusal of the record that Smt. Rakhi ( opposite party no.4 herein ), who is wife of Ashutosh Kumar Pandey (petitioner herein) had filed a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II with the prayer that her husband be directed to pay maintenance allowance to he...
Rameshwar. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-03-2010
1. This is a criminal appeal against the judgment of the Sessions Judge, Moradabad dated 17.9.1982 passed in session trial No.271 of 1981.THE FACTS2. An incident happened at 11:30 hours on 24.6.1980. In this incident one Dan Singh (the Deceased) was killed. Sompal Singh (the Informant) is Samadhi of the Deceased. He lodged the FIR at 13:15 hours. It was registered as Case Crime No.233 of 1980 under Section 302 IPC, Police Station Didauli, District Moradabad.3. The allegation in the FIR are as follows;i. Rameshwar (the Appellant) had taken Rs.1754/- from the Deceased. The Deceased asked the Appellant to return the money several times.ii. At about 11:30 hours, the Deceased had gone to the house of the Appellant to ask him to return the money. When he asked for money, the Appellant and his son Umesh (both are referred to as the Accused) hit the Deceased with latthis.iii. The Appellant hit the Deceased on his head. His son Umesh also hit on the body of the Deceased. 4. The police investiga...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »