Array
(
    [0] =>  ..... detriment or impediment to the shop in the sense that it could be called an allied business in expanding concept of departmental stores. under clause (d) of section 20(2) of u. p. act no. 13 of 1972, a tenant can be evicted from a building after determination of his tenancy, if the tenant has without the consent in writing  ..... with regard to the constructions, structure alterations made in the building as it is likely to diminish its value or utility or disfigured it, as required under section 20(2)(c) of the act, is liable to be set aside on the short ground that such constructions etc. were made in the year 1970 vide para 9 of the plaint itself ..... -applicants. no evidence in rebuttal could be produced by the tenant applicant and these constructions, structural alterations and additions clearly falls within the mischief of section 20(2)(b) and (c) of the act.15. recording of the evidence of the plaintiff was started on 1.2.1985. on this date examination-in-chief was recorded and 18.2. ..... 
    [1] =>  .....  that the land acquisition proceedings have lapsed in view of section 11a of the act. in order to understand the scope of the plea it will be useful to extract the relevant provisions of the act (section 6, section 11, section 11a, section 17 and section 48(1)).section 6. declaration that land is required for a public purpose ..... considered the scope of invoking urgency clause and found that in the given situation the state government is empowered to invoke the urgency clause of section 17 of the act in acquisition proceedings for planned housing development.30. we accept the submissions of the learned counsel for the respondents that in view of possession  ..... proceedings are void. it has been further averred that the petitioner was not given an opportunity of being heard as required by sub-section (2) of section 5a of land acquisition act. the petitioner has never received any notice with respect to the acquisition proceedings. opposite parties have not issued any public notice regarding ..... 
    [2] =>  ..... levels of the consolidation authorities and that the consolidation authorities have rightly declined to condone the delay in filing the objection by the petitioner under section 9a(2) of the act. not only this, the petitioner's conduct in ante-dating the objection was also such, which disentitles him from getting any condonation of  ..... 1977, whereas the learned consolidation officer has held that it was actually filed sometime in november, 1978, after the de-notification of the village under section 52 of the act. however, the opposite party no. 3 opposed the prayer of the petitioner. the consolidation officer held that there was no sufficient cause for condonation .....  sometime in the 1971, shri bisesar, father of the petitioner, filed an objection, claiming sirdari right over the said plot, his objection under section 9a(2) of the act was dismissed by the consolidation officer and the order of dismissal of his objection was upheld by the settlement officer (consolidation) in appeal and by ..... 
    [3] =>  .....  that as a home or abode. it must be held that the minors ordinarily resided only at komarapalayam and not at kote village. the proceedings under section 25 of the act initiated by the respondent where thus properly laid before the district court at salem.11. in the case of konduparthi venkateswarlu and ors. v. ramavarapu viroja ..... where he last resided, or even where he happens to be at the time the proceedings are initiated. such consideration cannot be applied with reference to section 9(1) of the act. on a consideration of the evidence, it has already been found that the settled home of the first appellant and the minors is only komarapalayam, where .....  nagar holding that court at kanpur nagar has authority and jurisdiction to deal with the application moved on behalf of the respondent smt. rashmi harry under section 25 of guardians & wards act, 1890.2. brief facts giving rise to the instant writ petition in brief is that petitioner and respondent no. 2 were married as per christian rites ..... 
    [4] =>  .....  learned counsel for the department, sri bharatji agarwal, and held that the interest on securities cannot be taken to be interest within the meaning of section 2(7) of the act and therefore no substantial question of law is involved. the tribunal has relied upon the judgment of the allahabad high court.5. the same question  ..... taken into consideration for the purpose of assessing chargeable interest.3. sri pradeep agarwal tracing the history of the interest-tax act and in particular the definition given under section 2(7) of the interest-tax act prior to october 1, 1991, and by comparing the definition given thereafter says that a substantial question of law arises in .....  authority which has assessed the amount of total chargeable interest at rs. 68,10,23,228 was under section 8(1) of the interest-tax act and directed for initiating penalty proceedings under section 13 of the interest-tax act, has been set aside. this amount of total chargeable amount allegedly was much in excess of the total ..... 
    [5] =>  ..... . in his evidence, the petitioner failed to discharge the burden cast upon him to prove that he comes under the definition of the workman given under section 2 (z) of the act, as no evidence was led by the petitioner regarding the nature of duties performed by him. he has not stated anywhere as to what manual, supervisory .....  the petitioner raised an industrial dispute. since the matter could not be reconciled, a reference was made by the state government under section 4-k of the u.p. industrial disputes act, 1947 (for short 'the act') to the tribunal, which was registered as adjudication case no. 3 of 1999. the reference was as to whether the dismissal of ..... into the said question as to whether an admission in the suit (which was subsequently withdrawn) would be binding on the petitioner in proceedings under the industrial disputes act. from the findings recorded by the tribunal, it is clear that the petitioner was performing managerial duties and could not be treated as a workman for the  ..... 
    [6] =>  ..... way, the cases are being sent to the drt, lucknow for fresh disposal on remand.9. the drat is a appellate tribunal constituted under section 8 of the act. section 22 of the act provides procedure and powers of the drt and drat and a perusal thereof shows that appellate tribunal exercises all such powers as are exercisable by  ..... in different provisions and there is no reason to read the 'court' as inclusive of 'tribunal' or vice-versa for the purpose of section 31 of the act. therefore, in my view, section 31 would have no application in respect to a case pending before a tribunal, if another tribunal is established subsequently having a different territorial jurisdiction ..... jurisdiction since drat, allahabad has no power to transfer a case filed in one tribunal to another tribunal except after following the procedure laid down under section 17-a of the act.5. learned counsel for the bank, on the contrary, submitted that the order of drat, allahabad is self speaking and well reasoned needs no  ..... 
    [7] =>  ..... have heard sri sharad malviya advocate for the applicant, learned a.g.a. for the state and sri rameshwar nath advocate for opposite-party no. 2/ complainant.4. section 118 of the 'act' in clause (g) of which the phrase 'that holder is a holder in due course' has been defined is as follows:(g) that holder is a holder  ..... holder in due course' of those 5 cheques which are in the name of different payees and the trial court was therefore not competent to take cognizance under section 142 of the 'act on basis of those 5 cheques. the order of the trial magistrate passed on the application of the applicant given in this behalf, on 15.3.1999 ..... in this application the grouse of the complainant is that complaint case no. 171 of 1998 ashoka kumar bhargawa v. anil kumar jaiswal under section 138, the negotiable instruments act, 1881 (here-in-after called the act) against the applicant pending in the court of additional chief judicial magistrate vi, allahabad filed on basis the of 6 cheques, one of which ..... 
    [8] =>  ..... ) any person to whom a summons under sub-section (1) of section 37 of the indian it act, 1922 (11 of 1922), or under sub-section (1) of section 131 of this act, or a notice under sub-section (4) of section 22 of the indian it act, 1922, or under sub-section (1) of section 142 of this act was issued to produce, or cause to be  ..... belong to such person.42. strengthening the aforesaid plea, learned counsel has gone to the extent of saying that in fact under the existing provisions of the it act, namely, section 132, no search could be made so far as bank accounts are concerned where it is said that money of the person, who is being searched,  .....  relying upon the dictum of the pooran mai v. director of inspection : [1974]93itr505(sc) for establishing the legality of the search conducted under the ndps act in violation of section 50 was the subject-matter of consideration, which interpretation in no way assists or strengthens the plea of the petitioners.26. the aforesaid circular dt. 7th  ..... 
    [9] =>  .....  in both the cases has been given by the additional commissioner of income-tax and, therefore, the sanction did not meet the requirement of sub-section (2) of section 151 of the act.7. sri shamboo chopra, learned standing counsel, however, submitted that the plea regarding sanction having not been given by the joint commissioner, was not .....  by the additional commissioner and not by the joint commissioner nor was there any averment assailing the notice for non-fulfilment of the provisions of section 151(2) of the act. when this fact was pointed out, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner did not refer to the averments made in the rejoinder affidavit .....  material before the income-tax officer to form the reasonable relief that the income had escaped assessment. the challenge to the validity of the notice issued under section 148 of the act was repelled by the court. both the applicants challenged the judgment and order dated december 3, 2004 (see : [2006]284itr642(all) ) passed by  ..... 
)