Allahabad Court October 1985 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.
Indian Farmers Fertiliser Cooperative Ltd. Vs. R.K. Misra
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-11-1985
Reported in: (1987)ILLJ257All
O.P. Saxena, J.1. This is an appeal against the order dated 25th May 1983 passed by the IX Additional District Judge, Allahabad holding that the suit is not barred by the Industrial Disputes Act, and is also not premature, and directing that the record be sent to the trial Court with the direction to restore the suit and to decide it in accordance with law.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal are:3. The plaintiff is an employee of defendant No. 1. He was served with a chargesheet dated 29th April 1981. On 8th May 1981, an Enquiry Officer was appointed. On 24th August 1981, the Enquiry Officer submitted a report. On 9th September 1981, a show-cause-notice was issued to him as to why he should not be dismissed from service. The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration that the charge-sheet dated 29th April 1981, the order dated 8th May 1981 appointing an Enquiry Officer, the enquiry report dated 24th August 1981 and the show-cause-notice dated 9th September 1981 are illegal, inoperative...
Barumal Singh Vs. 3rd Additional District Judge, Saharanpur and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-09-1985
Reported in: AIR1986All307
1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. The facts giving rise to the present petition are as under :An application under Section 192 of the Indian Succession Act was moved by Smt. Vidha in the Court of the District Judge, Saharanpur, against the petitioner Baru Mal Singh. The application was made on the ground that she was the widow of Padam Prasad, who died on 7th November, 1978. Her case was that on the death of the deceased Padam Prasad, she being his widow, inherited the property and, consequently, she had a right to move the application. The application was made in respect of the assets of the deceased Padam Prasad. In the application, the main relief sought was in regard to the determination of the right and possession over a shop, situate in Bazar Nakhasa, Saharanpur.3. This application was contested by the petitioner and it was alleged that Smt. Vidha was not the widow of the deceased Padam Prasad. It was further alleged that, in fact, the petiti...
Jay Prestressed Products Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and or ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-04-1985
Reported in: 1986(9)ECC9; 1986(26)ELT913(All)
V.K. Khanna, J.1. Petitioner No. 1 is a company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1956, which is carrying on the business of manufacturing and dealing in R.C.C. poles, sleepers and similar other items. On 15th November, 1976 the petitioner entered into a contract with railways for the manufacture and supply of mono block concrete sleepers. One of the clauses of the said contract was that the petitioner No. 1 will be paid Rs. 135 per piece inclusive of all labour and material excepting for malleable cast iron inserts and fastenings, which were to be supplied free by the said Railway Board. Clause 6.3 of the aforesaid contract specifically stated that any taxes and duties leviable on the said concrete sleepers from time to time was to be, and is to the said Railway Board's Account. In terms of clause 6.4 of the said contract, the malleable inserts were to be supplied free of cost to the petitioner No. l2. On 1st August, 1981, the respondent No. 2, Superintendent, Customs and C...
Talib HusaIn and anr. Vs. Ist Additional District Judge, Nainital and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-03-1985
Reported in: AIR1986All196
A.N. Verma, J.1. A learned single Judge finding that there was a conflict of opinion between various decisions of this Court rendered by Division Benches and single Judges referred the following question for consideration by a larger Bench :'Whether a prospective allottee has a right to file an objection and contest the application for release made by the landlord for a building or a part thereof after the deletion of the original Rule 13(4) of the Rules under the U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972?'2. This Bench has been constituted for resolving the above controversy. Since only a specific question has been referred to us we do not consider it necessary to set out the facts of this case in detail. We will, however, mention the relevant facts as briefly as possible with a view to indicating the circumstances in which the question has arisen in the instant case. The dispute relates to the second storey of a building situate at Haldwani. The respondents Nos. 3 and 4 are the landlords of that buil...
Ram Babu Verma Vs. Om Prakash Verma and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-03-1985
Reported in: AIR1986All355
N.D. Ojha, J.1. This first appeal from order has been preferred against the order dt. 22nd Oct. 1983, passed by the Civil Judge, Etawah, in suit No. 20 of 1983 pending in his Court directing a receiver to be appointed on the ground that it was just and convenient to do so. The parties were required to submit within seven days the name of the person to be appointed receiver. It was also stated in the said order that in case the parties fail to furnish the name of the receiver within seven days the receiver shall be nominated by the Court. This appeal was preferred even before any person could be nominated as receiver.2. Having heard counsel for the parties we are of opinion that this appeal is not maintainable in view of the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Sunni Central Waqf Board v. Sirajul Haq, AIR 963 All 537 where it was held :--'An appeal lies under Order XLIII, Rule 1(s) from an order passed under Order 40, Rule 1. If an order is an order passed under Order XL, Rule ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›