Uttaranchal Court July 2008 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.
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Gyan Lal and anr.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jul-29-2008
Reported in: AIR2009Utr49
ORDERB.C. Kandpal, J.1. This appeal, under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, has been preferred against the judgment and award dated 6-9-2002, passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/District Judge, Rudraprayag, in MACP No. 37/2001.2. Brief facts of the case, giving rise to this appeal, are that Gyan Lal used to carry goods from Gaurikund to Shri Kedarnath after loading the same in the mules. On 12-5-2001 at about 6.30 p.m. his mule was tied by the side of the road at Syalpani, new Bus Station, Gaurikund. The driver of Bus No. U.G.Y. 8735 came there in a rash and negligent manner and overturned the bus, due to which the mule was crushed by the bus and died at the spot. The Tarpaulin worth Rs. 1,500/-, saddle worth Rs. 5,000/-, two umbrellas worth Rs. 200/-, Sunde of mules worth Rs. 300/-, wearing clothes worth Rs. 500/- and two bags of straw kept inside the thatch (Chappar) were also damaged, According to claimant, the mule was purchased by him at the cost of Rs. 40,000/- a...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Tide Water Marine International Inc.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jul-28-2008
Reported in: [2009]309ITR85(Uttaranchal)
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. Both these appeals, preferred under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, involve a common question of law, as such both are being taken up together for their disposal.2. Income-tax Appeal No. 54 of 2007 (old No. 139 of 2000), is directed against the order dated August 24, 1999, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, (Delhi Bench 'A'), passed in I. T. A. No. 381/Del/99, whereby the appeal of the assessee was allowed holding that he is not liable to pay interest under Section 234B of the Income-tax Act, 1961. Income-tax Appeal No. 72 of 2007 is directed against the order dated September 15, 2006, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (Delhi Bench 'F') in I. T. A. No. 3616/D/2003, in which the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) (hereinafter referred as the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)) is affirmed that the assessee is not liable to pay the interest under Section 234B of the Income-tax...
Commissioner, Trade Tax/Commercial Tax Vs. Perfetti Van Melle (India) ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jul-28-2008
Reported in: (2009)19VST218(NULL)
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. These four revisions are filed by the Commissioner, Trade Tax/Commercial Tax, Uttarakhand, under Section 55 read with Section 80 of the Uttaranchal Value Added Tax Act, 2005, and directed against the order dated August 17, 2007, passed by the Chairman, Trade Tax Tribunal, in Second Appeal No. 74 of 2007, Second Appeal No. 75 of 2007, Second Appeal No. 76 of 2007 and Second Appeal No. 77 of 2007, which are allowed by the said authority by a common judgment challenged in these revisions.2. In all these four revisions, the question of law involved is as under:Whether 'Chlormint candy', 'Chlormint gum', 'Chlormint ice', 'Chlormint ice gum', 'Chlormint with herbasole', 'Happydent', 'Gum draggy', 'chewable gum draggy', and 'Chatar patar', are, wrongly held to be ayurvedic medicine by the Trade Tax Tribunal 3. Heard learned Counsel for the parties at length.4. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent/assessee, Perfetti Van (India) Pvt. Ltd., is registered under t...
Harish Chandra Singh Chilwal Vs. Pushpa
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jul-24-2008
Reported in: II(2008)DMC454
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. This appeal, preferred under Section 19 of Family Courts Act 1984, is directed against the judgment and order dated 11.9.2007, passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, whereby petitioner/ appellant's Divorce Petition No. 56 of 2003, under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, is dismissed by said Court.Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the lower Court record.2. Brief facts of the case are that both the parties are Hindus. Petitioner-Harish Chandra Singh Chilwal, got married to respondent Smt. Pushpa, on 23.2.1993, at Ramnager, according to Hindu rites. After the marriage, for sometimes the couple lived peacefully but thereafter they started quarrelling. Out of the wedlock, two daugthers were born, who are now grown up. The petitioner/appellant's case is that respondent used to insult him by saying that his practice as an Advocate is poor and he is living as a dependent on his family. She used to taunt him by saying that she earns more than her h...
Eveready Industries India Ltd. Vs. State of Uttarakhand and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jul-18-2008
Reported in: (2008)17VST18(NULL)
B.S. Verma, J.1. Since the controversy including the legal issue involved in these writ petitions is similar, therefore, for the sake of convenience, all the three writ petitions are being decided by this common judgment.2. The writ petition No. 1683 of 2007 (M/S) has been filed for the following reliefs:(a) a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari be issued quashing the circular dated January 13, 2006 issued by the Commissioner of Taxes, Dehradun, respondent No. 2, as well as the circular dated January 4, 2006 issued by respondent No. 1;(b) a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari be issued quashing the notice dated January 20, 2006 issued by the Deputy Commissioner (Assessment), respondent No. 3;(c) a suitable writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus be issued restraining/prohibiting respondent No. 3 from imposing any tax upon the petitioner for the assessment years 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 on the sales made by the petitioner wit...
Ram Avtar and anr. Etc. Vs. State
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jul-18-2008
Reported in: 2009CriLJ595
J.C.S. Rawat, J.1. Both Criminal Appeals have been directed against the judgment and order dated 02.06.1989 passed by Shri I.P. Singh, the then Sessions Judge, Nainital in S.T. No. 135/1988 State v. Ram Ratan and Ors. whereby the appellant Ram Ratan was convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I. for two years and four years under Sections 452, I.P.C. and 307,I.P.C. respectively. Both Ram Avtar and Bankey Lal were convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I. for two years and three years each under Section 452, IPC and Section 307/34 IPC respectively. Both the sentences of all the appellants would run concurrently.2. The facts, in nutshell, are that on 01.10.1987 at 9:10 p.m. an FIR Ex.Ka.4 was lodged by injured Girwar Singh PW4 alleging therein that at about 8:35p.m. on the aforesaid day he was sitting on a cot inside his 'Baithak'. There were two leaves of the door of that 'Baithak', out of which, one of the leaves was open and other leaf of the door was bolted from inside the house. There wa...
Smt. Neelam Kumari and anr. Vs. U.P. Financial Corporation
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jul-11-2008
Reported in: AIR2009Utr5
ORDERV.K. Gupta, C.J.1. With the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, this writ petition is being disposed of today at the motion hearing stage.2. It is a very peculiar case, where the respondent/plaintiff, by itself and through its counsel, as well as the learned Court below have exhibited and demonstrated their total ignorance of law as far as the applicability of Section 5 Limitation Act is concerned. Actually, the learned Court below has gone a step further by not only wrongly applying Section 5, but also allowing the plaintiffs prayer for condonation of the delay without issuing any notice to the defendants in the suit.3. The respondent is a Financial Corporation under the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951. It filed a suit for declaration and injunction against the petitioners herein for setting aside a sale deed executed on 29th December, 1993 and for consequential relief of permanent injunction restraining the petitioners from selling, transferring etc. the prope...
The Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Maha Laxmi Sugar Mills Company ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jul-04-2008
Reported in: (2008)219CTR(Uttranchal)393
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. This appeal, preferred under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, is directed against the order dated 03.12.2004, passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (hereinafter referred as CESTAT), whereby Appeal No. ST/69/04-NB(S), filed by the assessee was allowed.2. Following substantial question of law has been raised by the Revenue in this appeal:Whether, the penalty under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994 in respect of default in submitting ST-3 return for period prior to 31.03.2000, even though the same was filed on 23.01.2002 i.e. long after the amendment in the Statute with retrospective effect came into force vide Finance Act, 20003. We Heard learned Counsel for the parties.4. Brief facts of the case are that respondent-assessee M/s Maha Laxmi Sugar Mills Company Ltd., Iqbalpur, Haridwar are manufacturers of sugar, and also engaged in the business of providing service of transport of goods. The assessee has service ta...
Haridwar Hotels Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Chief Revenue Commissioner/Chief Control ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jul-04-2008
Reported in: AIR2009Utr1
ORDERP.C. Verma, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the orders dated 1-8-2006 and 6-1-2006 passed by the Chief Revenue Commissioner/Chief Controller, Revenue Tribunal, Uttarakhand, Dehradun and Additional District Magistrate (Finance), Haridwar respectively. These orders are contained in Annexure 1 and Annexure 2 to the writ petition respectively.2. Facts giving rise to these impugned orders are that the petitioner which is an incorporated private limited company purchased a piece of land measuring 2117.33 square metre pertaining to Khasra No. 91 in the residential area of municipal limits of Haridwar for a consideration of Rs. 25 lakhs from Sri Ashwani Kumar its owner.3. The petitioner paid the stamp duty on Rs. 25,00,000/-.4. An anonymous complaint was received by the Additional District Magistrate (Finance), Haridwar that the petitioner has paid lesser stamp duty on the conveyance (sale deed), by which the land was purchased. The Additional District...
Subhash Behar and Etc. Vs. State of Uttarakhand and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jul-03-2008
Reported in: AIR2009Utr19
J.C.S. Rawat, J.1. Since there is a common question of law involved in all the petitions, therefore, all these petitions have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. By means of all these petitions, the petitioners have initially challenged the validity of the Uttarakhand Co-operative Societies (Amendment) Ordinance, 2007 dated 22-10-2007 promulgated by the Governor of Uttarakhand by amending Section 29 of the Uttarakhand Co-operative Societies Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred as 'Principal Act, 2003'). Thereafter, the aforesaid Ordinance was replaced by an Amendment Act known as Uttarakhand Co-operative Societies (Amendment) Act, 2007 (Annexure-6) of Writ Petition No. 1203 (M/B) 2007) by which the tenure of the Management Committee of the Co-operative Societies and its elected members has been reduced from 5 years to 2 years. Consequently, the respondent No. 4 appointed the Administrators in all the Cooperative Societies at all levels in the State of Ut...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›