Allahabad Court May 1984 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.
Doctors' Sahkari Grah Nirman Samiti Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Avas Avam Vikas ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-07-1984
Reported in: AIR1984All234
H.N. Seth, J.1. A Scheme known as Sikandara Grihsthan Evam Sarak Yojna, Agra was notified under Section 28(1) of the U. P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Adhiniyam, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the Adhiniyam) on 4th April, 1970. In due course the said notification was followed by a notification under Section 32 (1) of the Adhiniyam published in the U. P. Gazette dated 28th June, 1980.2. The two petitioners, namely Doctors' Sahkari Grih Nirman Samiti Ltd. and Ram Babu Gupta filed the present petition on 30th April. 1981 and questioned the authority of the Board constituted under the Adhiniyam to, in pursuance of the aforesaid notification, acquire their rights in respect of certain Bhumidhari plots mentioned in paragraph '2' of the petition. They submitted that in view of Section 55 of the Adhiniyam. which lays down that any land or any interest therein required by the Board for any of the purposes of this Act, may be acquired under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (Act No...
Bhudeo Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-04-1984
Reported in: AIR1984All386
ORDERB.N. Sapru, J.1. This writ petition arises out of proceedings under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, hereinafter referred to as the Act.2. In proceedings under the Act, the Competent Authority, Aligarh, declared 3350.07 Sq. metres of land belonging to the petitioner as vacant land in excess to the ceiling limit. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed an appeal. The appeal was dismissed by Sri N.N. Sharma, District Judge, Aligarh on 1-4-1980. Now the petitioner has filed the instant writ petition.3. Before the appellate authority as also before this Court in writ petition it is being urged that the land, comprised in plot No. 1664/2, measuring 2764.22 Sq. metres, should not have been treated as vacant land as it was agricultural land. This contention was rejected by the appellate authority on the ground that in the Khasras of 1382 and 1383 Faslis, the land measuring 1 bigha 4 biswas was entered as Parti Purani and in the Khasra no crop was mentioned in these years. The l...
Bharat and ors. Vs. Ram Pratap and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-02-1984
Reported in: AIR1985All61
K.N. Misra, J.1. This appeal was heard by one of us brother K. N. Goyal J. who after noticing that there was some conflict in the decisions of single Judges on the legal question involved in this appeal referred this second appeal to be decided by the Division Bench This appeal has thus come up before us for decision.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the plaintiff appellant had filed a suit No. 239 of 1964 for declaration against the defendant-respondents and in that suit an application under Order 23 Rule 1(2) Civil PC (for short C.P.C.) (as it stood prior to its amendment) for permission to withdraw the suit with liberty to file a fresh suit on the same cause of action was moved This application was allowed by order dated 28-9-1967 passed by Munsif, North, Sultanpur. The operative portion of the order reads :--'The application is therefore allowed while permitting the plaintiff to withdraw the suit The plaintiff will pay up the entire cost of this suit to the defendant...
Rajendra Kumar Gupta and anr. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-02-1984
Reported in: AIR1984All262
A.S. Srivastava, J.1. The District Magistrate, Kanpur, exercising powers under Section 23 of the Defence and Internal Security of India Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) conferred on him by the U. P. Notification No. 88 (1)/4-l (2)/76 dated 3-6-1976 requisitioned 777 Sq. vds and 7 1/3 Sq. ft. of land comprising of plot Nos. 36 and 36-A situate on the Mall, Kanpur on 29-10-1976 for enabling the State Handloom and Powerloom Finance and Development Corporation Ltd., Uttar Pradesh, Kanpur (hereinafter referred to as the U. P. State Handloom Corporation) for constructing shops and show-rooms over it for its handloom products as it was necessary for maintaining supplies of these products to the business community and thereby rendering services essential to weaving community and protecting them from exploitation by the middle traders. The U.P. State Handloom Corporation, after this requisition, took possession of this land and incurred expenses and constructed show rooms over it....
Krishna NaraIn Garg and ors. Vs. Mahabir Agencies and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-01-1984
Reported in: 1984CriLJ1682
ORDERKamleshwar Nath, J.1. This is an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash an order dt. 15.3.1983 passed by C.J.M., Barabanki, whereby the applicants have been summoned to stand trial for an offence under Section 420 read with Section 34 IPC on the basis of a complaint lodged by opposite, party No. 1.2. Opposite party No. 1 M/s Mahabir Agencies of Barabanki is a proprietorship firm of Banshi Dhar carrying business of supplying handloom fabrics to customers; they have a store house at Delhi for supply of the goods to the customers. Applicant No. 4 Jai Narain Garg's wife is applicant No. 5 Smt. Dayawanti. Applicants Nos. 1 and 3 Krishna Narain Garg and Raj Narain Garg are sons of Jai Narain Garg. Applicant No. 6 Smt. Manju Devi is the wife of a third son of Jai Narain Garg. Applicant No. 7 Smt. Mamta Garg is the wile of applicant No. 1. Applicant No. 2 Kaushal Kishore Pandey and Applicant No. 8 Kapil Deo Sharma are the employees of the other applicants.3. The relevant facts, st...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›