Himachal Pradesh Court March 1991 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.
Manmohan Dass Kapur and anr. Vs. Assistant Controller of Estate Duty
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-27-1991
Reported in: [1991]192ITR474(HP)
Devinder Gupta, J. 1. In the present writ petition, the petitioners have sought the quashing of the order, annexure 'G', passed by the respondenton August 29, 1980, refusing to allow relief to the petitioner in the payment of the entire court-fees paid for obtaining probate.2. Smt. Lila Wati Kapur, mother of petitioner No. 1, expired on May 23, 1958. She had executed a will on April 10, 1958, creating a trust known as 'Lila Wati Kapur Trust, Shimla'. The trust is petitioner No. 2 and petitioner No. 1 has been named in the will as sole executor and to manage the property of the deceased as well as the income of the trust. Petitioner No. 1 filed an estate duty return under the provisions of the Estate Duty Act, 1953 (Act No. 34 of 1953) (hereinafter to be called as 'the Act'), and the respondent on March 28, 1959, framed an estimate on the total estate amounting to Rs. 3,26,642 after giving credit for a sum of Rs. 3,750 for succession certificate fees and Rs. 20,382.24 on account of prov...
Seth Panchhi Ram and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-25-1991
Reported in: (1992)101CTR(HP)143,[1991]192ITR289(HP)
Devinder Guptal, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh, has, at the behest of the ssessee, referred the following question of law to this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the imposition of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) by the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner, vide his order dated May 23, 1977, was within the period of limitation prescribed under Section 275 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'2. The assessee was assessed in the status of a Hindu undivided family for the assessment year 1965-66, which was completed under Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), on March 17, 1970, on a total income of Rs. 1,02,300, on the basis of a return which had been filed by the assessee on August 7, 1965, declaring his total income at Rs. 11,093.50, which was later on revised to Rs. 89,318 on August 10, 1967. The Inspecting Assistant Commissioner, on...
Himachal Road Transport Corporation, Simla Vs. Bhanno Mull and Sons
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-20-1991
Reported in: AIR1992HP37
Bhawani Singh, J.1. This revision petition by the Himachal Pradesh Transport Corporation (hereafter 'petitioner') assails the judgment of District Judge (Appellate Authority), Shimla in Case No. C.M.A. 174-S/14 of 1981, decided on 15-7-1982, whereby the order of eviction passed by Rent Controller, Shimla in Case No. 32-2/79 dated 4-8-1981 has been confirmed.2. The respondent instituted eviction application under Section 14(2) of the Himachal Pradesh Urban Rent Control Act, 1971 (hereafter shortly 'Rent Control Act') for the eviction of the petitioner from building 'Wynstay', Lower Lakkar Bazar, Shimla. The ground of eviction has been specifically stated in para 16(a) as follows :--'The tenant has used the building after the commencement of the H.P.U.R.C. Act, 1971 without the written consent of the landlord for a purpose other than that for which it was leased i.e., whereas the building was hired out for the purpose of using it as an office for the transport department, the said buildi...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Dr. (Mrs.) Kamlesh Madan (Legal Heir of ...
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-19-1991
Reported in: [1991]191ITR459(HP)
Devinder Gupta, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh, has referred the following question of law to this court:'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal erred in law in allowing the set off of the loss allocated to the assessee's spouse in the firm in which the assessee, and his spouse were partners, against the other income of the assessee under Section 64(1)(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ?'Late Dr. R.N. Madan and his wife Dr. (Mrs.) Kamlesh Madan were partners in the firm, Madan and Co. For the assessment year 1977-78 and for the subsequent year 1978-79, in this assessment, the share allocation to Dr. Kamlesh Madan including the unabsorbed depreciation came to a loss. During the assessment proceedings, it was claimed that this loss should be set off against the income of Dr. R. N. Madan in view of the provisions of Section 64(1)(i) of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Such a claim on behalf of the assessee ...
Gurdev Singh and ors. Etc. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and ors. Overruled
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-14-1991
Reported in: AIR1992HP70,1992CriLJ2542
Bhawani Singh, J.1. These criminal writ petitions, being common in nature, scope and effect are being decided by a common judgment and the learned counsel for the parties also agree that they should be so decided.2. The petitioners, in both these petitions, are undergoing imprisonment in the jails of the State. They submitted the petitions to this Court which were placed on Judicial side for examination and decision by Chief Justice P.D. Desai, as he then was. In Criminal Writ Petition 6 of 1985 (Gurdev Sing v. State of H. P.) the petitioners complain that they are employed for work but are being paid Rs. 1.50 per day for the labour. They also say that no wages are paid for the first three months of labour. Jn Criminal Writ Petition No. 49 of 1985 (Bhag Singh Chauhan v. State of H. P.), in addition to the allegation of the improper management of wage amounts by the Superintendent of Jail and the Store Keeper, they also say that they are forced to work with contractors either at less wa...
Miss. R.D. Kohli and anr. Vs. Major Joginder Lal Sachdeva
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-04-1991
Reported in: AIR1992HP1
ORDERV.P. Bhatnagar, J.1. This civil revision preferred under the provisions of Section 16(8) read with Section 24(5) of the Himachal Pradesh Urban Rent Control Act, 1987, is directed against the order dated 28-12-1990 passed by the learned Rent Controller, Shimla. The brief facts of the case necessary to understand its background are that set No. 16, Roop Mahal (Eastern Wing), cart Road, Shimla (herein-after referred to as 'the premises in dispute') was in possession of the petitioners as tenants. Major Joginder Lal Sachdeva, respondent, purchased the premises in dispute and thereafter filed an application for ejectment of the petitioners under the old Act inter alia on the ground of bona fide necessity.This application was allowed by the Rent Controller but was challenged in appeal during the pendency of which the Rent Control Act was amended and a stipulation was introduced that a purchaser of tenanted premises could not maintain an application for ejectment for a period of five yea...
Mrs. Rita Wilson Vs. the State of Himachal Pradesh
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-04-1991
Reported in: 1992CriLJ2400
ORDERKamlesh Sharma, J. 1. In this petition Under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner has challenged FIR. No. 21 of 1991, dated 24-1-1991, registered at police station Saddar Shimla and the order dated 28-1-1991 passed by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Court No. 2, Shimla. The Petitioner is the Principal of Auckland House School Shimla where education is imparted to girls. This school is day school as well as boarding school.2. The FIR was lodged by one George who is presently working as Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur. As stated in the FIR the wife of the complainant Mrs. Amita George is working as teacher in the school since June 1986. She has been allotted residential accommodation in the school premises. The complainant was residing with his wife till February 1990 when he was posted outside Shimla. Since then he has been visiting his wife in the school premises off and on. He has given two incidents in his complaint, Annexure A-2 to the reply-affi...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›