Uttaranchal Court October 2002 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.
Mcdermott International Inc. Vs. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Oct-25-2002
Reported in: (2003)180CTR(Uttranchal)492; [2003]259ITR138(Uttaranchal)
A.A. Desai, C.J.1. This petition by an assessee is directed against notices (marked as annexures 'I', 'P', 'U', 'Z' and 'AE') purported to have been issued under Section 147 read with Section 148 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). They have been impugned principally on the ground that they suffer from serious legal infirmity since they were issued after the expiry of four years from the end of the relevant assessment years, even in the absence of the condition or conditions as envisaged by a proviso to Section 147 of the Act.2. To appreciate the challenge the relevant facts are thus : The petitioner is a limited foreign company incorporated under the Municipal laws of Panama. The company has been engaged, inter alia, in designing, fabricating, construction, installation as a sub-contractor of various contractors of the Oil and Natural Gas Commission (India). The petitioner-company pursuant to Section 139 of the Act submitted returns for the assessment y...
Basant Sarkar and anr. Vs. Nagar Panchayat and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Oct-23-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)AWC840(UHC)
P. C. Verma, J.1. This second appeal is listed for final hearing. Heard learned counsel for the appellants as well as Sri Sandeep Tandon, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2.2. The plaintiffs filed a suit as residents of the locality against Nagar Panchayat, Dineshpur, District Udham Slngh Nagar seeking a decree of permanent injunction not raising any construction over the suit land. According to the plaintiffs, the suit land is a park over which no construction can be allowed to be raised in view of provisions of Sections 6 and 8 of the U. P. Parks, Playgrounds and Open Spaces (Preservation and Regulation) Act, 1975. The evidence was led by the parties before the trial court on the issue as to whether the suit land is a park or not. According to the trial court, it was a park but the trial court recorded this finding on the basis of oral evidence of the parties and on the basis of khatauni filed by the plaintiffs as documentary evidence and when the Nagar Panchayat was created...
Ram Chandra Malani Vs. Century Pulp and Paper and anr.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Oct-18-2002
Reported in: [2003(96)FLR140]; (2003)ILLJ807UC
Irshad Hussain, J.1. The petitioners herein have filed the above writ petitions challenging the action of the respondents in dispensing with their services by accepting the letter of resignation dated November 17, 2000 submitted by the petitioner of first mentioned writ petition and by passing an order of dismissal dated November 16, 2000 in regard to the petitioner of the second abovementioned writ petition.2. The brief facts are that the petitioner Chandra Shekhar Nagila was appointed as Assistant Engineer in the year 1985 and was later on promoted to the post of Senior Superintendent. He tendered resignation on November 27, 2000, which was accepted on the same day by the respondents. The contention of the petitioner is that the resignation was not voluntary but was forced to submit it under duress. He, therefore, challenged the order of acceptance of the same.3. The petitioner Ram Chandra Malani was initially appointed on the post of co-coordinator and by promotion got the post of A...
Ashok Kumar Vs. Family Court and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Oct-11-2002
Reported in: I(2003)DMC816
Irshad Hussain, J.1. This is a revision against the order dated 25.9.2002 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Dehradun. The order was passed in the proceedings pending for setting aside of the ex-parte judgment and order passed Under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'Code') on the application of the wife.2. The revisionist alleged to have not received the summons or notice of the application and also claimed that address was wrongly mentioned in the application Under Section 125 of the Code. Considering this, the revisionist may have a good ground for having the ex-parte judgment and order set aside and keeping in view this aspect, the learned Principal Judge should not have saddled the liability on the revisionist to deposit entire amount of maintenance due before the disposal of the application for setting aside the ex-parte judgment and order. Considering this, the order so passed need to be modified to the extent that during the pendency of the appl...
Mapex India (P.) Ltd. Vs. Himalayan Gold Beverages (P.) Ltd. and anr.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Oct-03-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)AWC840b(UHC)
Irshad Hussain, J.1. This civil revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure ('C.P.C.' for the short) has been preferred against the order dated 25.9.2002 passed by the Civil Judge (Senior Division/first Fast Track Court, Dehradun in suit No. 555 of 2001, rejecting the amendment application paper No. 58A filed by the plaintiff-revisionist and fixing a date for disposal of preliminary issue framed on the plea of the defendant-respondent that the suit is not legally maintainable for mere relief of injunction.2. The learned counsel on behalf of defendant-respondent put in appearance and resisted the admission of the revision on the plea that by virtue of the amended Section 115. C.P.C. which has been made effective with effect from 1.7.2002, the present revision is not maintainable.3. Heard Sri Alok Slngh, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri V. K. Kohli, learned counsel for the respondent No. 1.4. The relevant provision of Section 115 of C.P.C. as it now stands after ...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›