Allahabad Court May 1976 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.
State of U.P. Vs. Chandra Gupta and Co.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-04-1976
Reported in: AIR1977All28
K.C. Agrawal, J.1. This is a defendant's appeal from the judgment and decree dated 22-8-1964 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge, Meerut, decreeing the suit of the plaintiff-respondent partly for a sum of Rs. 14,283. The suit was filed by the plaintiff-respondent in the following circumstances.2. The Executive Engineer, Ganges Canal, Meerut Division, Meerut, issued a notice dated 13th August, 1957, inviting tenders for constructing a new Tail Fall V. R. B. at Mile 7-0-330 of Jani Escape. The tender submitted by the plaintiff-respondent, in pursuance of the aforesaid notice, was accepted on the 19th of August, 1957, and a formal contract in that behalf was, thereafter, executed on November 4, 1957. The plaintiff started the work, but as the officers of the defendant began to harass him, he had to stop it on January 24, 1958. Upon the understanding arrived at, the work was resumed soon thereafter but it was finally again stopped by the plaintiff on March 21, 1958. Admittedly, th...
Ragho Prasad and ors. Vs. B. Pratap NaraIn Agrawal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-04-1976
Reported in: AIR1976All470
G.C. Mathur, J. 1. The following question has been referred for opinion to this Bench:'Whether the court-fee on the memorandum of appeal against the final decree in a suit for accounting is to be paid under Section 7 (iv) (b) or under Section 7 (i) of the U. P. Court-fees Act ?' 2. The question has been referred at the instance of a Division Bench which was of the opinion that there was conflict between the decision of a Full Bench of three Judges of this Court in Ghalib Rasool v. Mangu Lal : AIR1949All382 and the decision of a Full Bench of five Judges of this Court in Asharfi Lal v. Firm Thakur Prasad Kishori Lal : AIR1970All197 . 3. Section 7 (iv) (b) of the Court Fees Act as amended in Uttar Pradesh reads thus:-- 'The amount of fee payable under this Act in the suits next hereinafter mentioned shall be computed as follows: (iv) In suits- (a) ....... (b) for accounts; according to the amount at which the relief sought is valued in the plaint or memorandum, of appeal; Provided al...
Divisional Superintendent, Northern Railway and anr. Vs. R.B. Hanifi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-04-1976
Reported in: (1977)ILLJ309All
T.S. Misra, J. (for himself and on behalf of K. B. Asthana C.J.)1. The respondent who was an employee of the Govern-ment in the Railway Department was placed under supension with effect from 29th October, 1959. His services were terminated by the General Manager, Northern Railway by an order dated ' the December, 1960 in terms of Rule 149(3) of the Indian Railway Establishment Code. Volume 1, with effect from 13th December, I960. The Supreme Court on December 5, 1963 decided by majority in Moti Rum Deka v. General Manager, North East Frontier Railway : (1964)IILLJ467SC , that Rules 148(3) and 149(3) of the Indian Railway Establish-ment Code were invalid On 20th July. 1965 the petitioner submitted a representation to the General Manager, Northern Railway seeking a review of the order dated 6th December, I960 by which his services had been terminated. Ultimately by an order dated 23rd September, 1966 the petitioner's ' representation ' was accepted and he was reinstated in service, vide ...
Satya Prakash Malviya Vs. Stae of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-04-1976
Reported in: 1977CriLJ115
Hari Swarup, J.1. This petiion has been moved for a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct the State Government to release the petitioner on parole. The petitioner is under detention under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, hereinafter called the 'Act'. He made an epplication to the State Government under Section 15 of the Act and prayed that he may be released on parole so that he might participate in the proceedings of the Vidhan Sabha of which he is a Member. His application was rejected by the State Government by its order dated 29-4-1976.2. The petitioner has contended that unless he is permitted to attend the Assembly Session, he might lose his seat by reason of Clause (4) of Article 190 of the Constitution read with Rule 280(6) of Uttar Pradesh Vidhan Sabha Ki Pra-kriya Tatha Rarya Sanchalan Niyanrn-wali, 1958 which provided for a seat being declared vacant by the Vidhan Sabha on a Member's being absent for a particular period of time. The petitioner contends that unles...
The State of U.P. Vs. Mahant Avaidh Nath
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-03-1976
Reported in: AIR1977All192
Gopi Nath, J. 1. This is a defendants' appeal arising out of a suit for injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the plaintiffs' possession over the land in dispute and obstructing him from appropriating the timber of the trees of the plots in suit. The dispute relates to 8 plots of village Chowk, Tappa Sonari, Pargana Tilpur, Tahsil Mah-rajganj, district Gorakhpur. 2. Plaintiffs case was that there was a temple of Sri Gorakhnath in Gorakhpur, that the plaintiff was the Mahant of the temple, that the plots in dispute were groves planted by the temple in order to provide firewood for the maintenance of a perpetual fire (Akhand Dhuni) of Sri Gorakh Nath Ji and for use of every day Bhandara of Sadhus in the temple. The plaintiff-respondent claimed to be the Bhumidhar in possesion of the plots in dispute. The Forest Department of the State, it was alleged illegally issued a notification declaring the said plots as Reserved Forest. Plaintiff's case was that the said plots...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›