Allahabad Court May 2015 Judgments
State of U.P. through Principal Secretary, Home and Others Vs. Rajendr ...
Court: Allahabad Lucknow
Decided on: May-11-2015
Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, C.J. The issue On 7 November 2012, a Division Bench referred the following question of law for resolution by the Full Bench: "Whether a temporary police constable appointed under Section 2 of the Police Act 1861 (Police Act), who has not been placed on probation, can be terminated from service in accordance with the Uttar Pradesh Temporary Government Servants (Termination of Service) Rules, 1975 (Police Regulation) or whether the procedure provided under Para 541 of the Police Regulations dealing with the constables on probation shall be applicable" The issue before the Full Bench, turns upon the interpretation of the provisions of the Police Act and of the Police Regulations. The issue is whether a person, who has been appointed as a police constable on a temporary basis, is entitled to the benefit of Regulation 541 of the Police Regulations. The constables who are before this Court, contend that the services of a person who is appointed on a temporary basis, can...
Tag this Judgment!Jai Kumari Devi and Others Vs. Pushpa Gupta and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-08-2015
Heard Sri Ram Singh, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri S.C.Srivastava, learned counsel appearing for the respondent. The claimants/appellants (hereinafter referred as the 'appellants') have filed the present appeal against the judgment and award dated 11th October, 2010 passed by Sri S.S.Upadhyay, Additional District Judge, Court No.4, /Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Fatehpur in M.A.C.P. No.35 of 2007 (Smt.Jai Kumari Devi and others Vs. Smt. Pushpa Gupta and another) whereby the quantum of compensation awarded by the tribunal has been challenged on several grounds. Though the controversy relates only to the quantum of compensation but in order to appreciate the questions involved in the present appeal, we think it proper to briefly noticed the facts. Shorn of unnecessary facts, the claim petition was filed by appellant no.1, mother, appellant no.2 father, appellant no.3 sister and appellant no.4 brother of the deceased Km.Vibha with the averments that the deceased was aged ab...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax-II, Agra Vs. Shyam Biri Works
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-06-2015
Tarun Agarwala, J. 1. The present appeal relates to the Assessment Year 1993-94. Since the tax effect was more than Rs.2 lacs, the appeal was presented on 24th December, 2004 on the basis of Instruction No.1979 dated 27th March, 2000. When the appeal was taken up for hearing, a preliminary objection was raised by the learned counsel for the respondent-assessee on the issue of maintainability of the instant appeal. Reliance was placed on Section 268A of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) as well as the Instructions No.3 of 2011 dated 9th February, 2011 by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (hereinafter referred to as the CBDT) laying down the monetary limits for regulating the filing of the appeals. The learned counsel for the assessee contended that under the Instructions No.3 of 2011, the monetary limit for filing an appeal by the Department was Rs.10 lacs, whereas the tax effect in the instant appeal is less than Rs.10 lacs and, therefore, the appeal should be dis...
Tag this Judgment!Shiv Charan Lal Sharma Vs. Allahabad Bank A.M.U. Branch Aligarh and Ot ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-06-2015
1. The petitioner is the guarantor and father of respondent nos. 5 and 6 who took a cash credit limit of rupees seventy five lacs in a partnership firm known as S.R. Tractors in 2012 in which they were the partners. The petitioner stood guarantee for the cash credit limit by depositing the title deeds of his residential house no. 5/298A, Lohia Nagar Banna Devi, G.T. Road, Aligarh. It transpires that the accounts of respondent nos. 5 and 6 became NPA on 31.5.2014 pursuant to which a notice under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') dated 2.6.2014 was issued demanding a sum of Rs. 44.92 lacs. Thereafter, symbolic possession under Section 13(4) was also taken on 29.8.2014. It further transpires that the respondent bank filed an application dated 30.10.2014 before the District Magistrate under Section 14 of the Act praying for actual physical delivery of possession. O...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›