Allahabad Court August 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.
Aligarh GramIn Bank Vs. Chandra Shekhar and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-28-2010
1. This criminal revision has been directed against the judgment and order dated 25.10.2000 passed by IV Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh in Criminal Case No. 602 of 2000, (State of U.P. v. Chandra Shekhar), under sections 419, 420, 409, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Hasayan, District Aligarh by which the learned Magistrate has acquitted the respondent no.1 of charges levelled against him. 2. A perusal of the record goes to show that K.P. Singhal, Branch Manager, Gramin Bank, Mahau, District Aligarh lodged an F.I.R. at P.S. Hasayan on 18.1.1992 at 18.20 P.M. with this allegation that Bhagwan Singh, real brother of Rajendra Singh, made a complaint to this effect that accused Chandra Shekhar an officer of the said bank committed embezzlement of amount lying in the Saving Account No. 1185 of his deceased brother Rajendra Singh by putting his forged thumb impression on the cheque, at which he inquired into the matter and found that on 22.11.1991 Chandra Shekhar withdrew a sum of Rs.27...
Ashish Sharma Vs. State of U.P
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-28-2010
(1) This appeal is filed by Sri Ashish Sharma the accused who is convicted in Sessions Trial No. 89/1999 by Additional Sessions Judge (Court No. 1), Barabanki arising out of Case Crime No. 1154/1999 for the offence u/s 147/148/149/302 IPC, P.S. Kotwali, District Barabanki and is sentenced for the offence u/s 147 IPC for a period of one year imprisonment, for the offence u/s 148 IPC for a period of two years imprisonment, for the offence u/s 302/149 IPC for a period of life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine for a period of two years additional rigorous imprisonment. (2) We have heard learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned AGA on behalf of the State and perused the record. (3) Before us, this appeal is pressed merely on this ground on behalf of appellant that the appellant is in jail in connection of the judgment and order dated 29.10.2004. It is significant to mention that the appellant's date of birth is 05.08.1981 as per high school...
Dinesh Chandra Pachauria Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-28-2010
1. This criminal revision has been directed against the judgment and order dated 2.9.1987 passed by VI Additional Sessions Judge, Kanpur in S.T. No.318 of 1986 (State v. Ashok Kumar and others), under sections 147/440, 324/149, 307/149/395 & 307 I.P.C., P.S. Panki, District Kanpur Nagar, by which the respondents no.2 to 6 have been acquitted of the charges levelled against them. 2. I have heard Shri B.N.Singh, learned counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A. for respondent no.1 on this revision and perused the record. None has appeared on behalf of respondents no.2 to 6 to oppose this revision. 3. The learned counsel for the revisionist has contended that the learned Sessions Judge has committed illegality in holding that the F.I.R. is highly delayed and the complainant in consultation with his counsel explained the delay in lodging the F.I.R. by disclosing the facts that the police of the said police station with a view to screen the offenders did not lodge the report and co...
Saraswati Engineering and Traders, Noida Vs. State of U.P. and Others.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-28-2010
1. In the present petition the petitioner seeks the following relief : "(i) to ssue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing respondent no. 2 to stay proceedings initiated under Section 10-B of the U.P. Trade Tax Act for the assessment year 1999-2000. (ii) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing respondent no. 3 to stay proceedings for realisation of tax assessed for the assessment year 2001-2002 in so far as it related to levy of tax in excess of 4%. (iii) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing respondent no. 3 to stay assessment proceedings for the assessment year 2002-2003. (iv) to issue any other and further writ, order or direction as may be deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. (v) to award cost of the petition to the petitioner as against the respondents." 2. The brief facts giving rise to the present petition are that the petitioner is a partnership firm and carries on the b...
Dwarikesh Sugar Industries Limited, Bundki, Najibabad, District Bijnor ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-27-2010
1. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 7.1.2004 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Grade-1, Trade Tax, Moradabad Zone, Moradabad by which he has granted approval under the proviso to Section 21 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") to initiate the proceeding beyond the normal period of limitation for the assessment year 1997-98 and the notice issued under Section 21 of the Act by the Assessing Authority in pursuance of the order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Grade-1, Trade Tax, Moradabad Zone, Moradabad. 2. It appears that the Assessing Authority had sought approval to re-open the proceeding on the ground that after passing of the assessment order dated 18.7.1998 on an inquiry made by the S.T.O. (SIB) from the seized books of account on 31.3.2000, it was found that the petitioner had purchased diesel from outside the State of U.P. for Rs.36,27,027/- which was provided to the transporter against the...
Jania Sons, Moradabad. Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-27-2010
1. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 06.03.2007 passed by Additional Commissioner, Grade-I, Trade Tax, Moradabad Zone, Moradabad for the assessment years 2000-01, 01-02 and 2002-03, all under the Central Sales Tax Act, by which he has granted the approval to initiate the proceedings under Section 21 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") beyond the normal period of limitation and the initiation of re-assessment proceedings by Deputy Commissioner (Assessment), Grade-II, Trade Tax, Moradabad for the aforesaid assessment years vide notice dated 08.03.2007. 2. The petitioner is a partnership firm, carrying on the business of manufacture and sale of Wooden Pallets and Plywood and Fitments. The Uttarakhand had been formed on 09.11.2000 after carving out some of the area of State of Uttar Pradesh. Prior to the formation of Uttarakhand, the provisions of U.P. Trade Tax Act were applicable to the area of Uttarakhand. T...
Ms. Atul Sports and Drawing Emporium and Others Vs. Union of India and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-27-2010
1. The counsel for the petitioners at the outset contended that petitioners are challenging the ex parte decree dated 09.09.2002 passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal in Transfer Case No. 106 of 2000 as well as the order, which has been passed by the Recovery Officer on 21st July, 2010. 2. I am of the considered opinion that the first prayer made by the petitioners is an abuse of process of the Court. From the records of the present writ petition it is clear that after the judgment dated 09.09.2002 was passed in Transfer Application No. 106 of 2000. The judgment debtor made an application for setting aside the ex parte decree, which was numbered as Application No. 216 of 2002. This application was dismissed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal on 14.01.2003. Recovery proceedings were initiated in terms of the aforesaid judgment and decree. The property in dispute was attached and was actually sold. At that stage the petitioners (predecessor in interest) filed Writ Petition No. 12655 of 2004 ch...
ShamsuddIn Ansari Vs. Union of India and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-27-2010
y1. By means of the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner is challenging the validity of the notice dated 24.6.2006 under Section 148 of the Income Tax Act (called the 'Act' for short) issued by the Income-Tax Officer, Bhadohi, for the assessment year 2003-04. 2. The petitioner was enjoying the share income from M/s. Delux Carpet Company, Bhadohi, rental income from house property and income from other sources. The petitioner has furnished the return disclosing the income for the assessment year 2003-04. Admittedly, during the year under consideration, the petitioner has constructed a house in which a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- has been shown invested. During the course of the assessment proceeding the assessing authority made a query from the petitioner to explain the source of Rs. 3,00,000/- invested in the construction of the house. The petitioner explained the investment out of savings. However, such explanation has not been accepted by the asses...
Cm. Sant Kripal Inter College Goswan Mallawan, Distt.Hardoi Vs. Sri Ji ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-27-2010
1. Application for discharge of contempt notice, accompanied with counter affidavit, filed on behalf of opposite party are taken on record. 2. C. M. Application No. 65526 of 2009 moved on behalf of petitioner in Contempt Case No. 22 (C) of 2009 for impleading Sri Anoop Chandra Pandey as opposite party no.2, has not been pressed by learned counsel for petitioner. Hence, it is rejected as not pressed. 3. Sri Jitendra Kumar, Secretary, Secondary Education, Government of U.P., Lucknow is present in person in compliance with this Court's order dated 20.08.2010. 4. Heard learned counsel for petitioners, Sri Lalit Shukla, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel and perused the record. 5. These contempt petitions under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India have been filed with the prayer that opposite party may be punished for wilful disobedience and non compliance of this Court's judgment and orders dated 03.01.2008 passed in writ petiti...
Dwarikesh Sugar Industries Limited, Bundki, Najibabad, District Bijnor ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-27-2010
1. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 20.5.2003 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Grade-1, Trade Tax, Moradabad Zone, Moradabad by which he has granted approval under the proviso to Section 21 (2) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") to initiate the proceeding beyond the normal period of limitation for the assessment year 1998-99 and the notice issued under Section 21 of the Act by the Assessing Authority in pursuance of the order passed by the Additional Commissioner, Grade-1, Trade Tax, Moradabad Zone, Moradabad. 2. It appears that the Assessing Authority had sought approval to re-open the proceeding on the ground that after passing of the assessment order dated 18.7.1998 on an inquiry made by the S.T.O. (SIB) from the seized books of account on 31.3.2000, it was found that the petitioner had purchased diesel from outside the State of U.P. which was provided to the transporter against the price for tra...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »