Allahabad Court April 1993 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.
U.P. State Sugar Corporation Vs. Asst. Labour Commissioner and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-17-1993
Reported in: [1994(68)FLR86]; (1994)IILLJ1046All
B.L. Yadav, J.1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India filed by the employer U.P. State Sugar Corporation, is directed against the orders dated June 8, 1992, and dated February 2, 1993 (Annexures 6 and 8 respectively) to the petition.2. The 'workman, respondent No. 2 made an application for reinstatement under Section 2-A of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, (for short the Act), but the same was time barred. The explanation was furnished for the delay and a prayer was made that the delay may be condoned and the application may be treated to be within time and the matter may be decided on merits. The Conciliation Officer by order dated June 8, 1992 treated the cause to be sufficient and condoned the delay. Against that order the petitioner prefered a review application and the same was dismissed by order dated February 6, 1993, holding that there was no provision for review.3. Sri H.S. Nigam, learned counsel for the petitioner, laid great emphasis that no fi...
Narendra Kumar JaIn and Another Vs. Sukumar Chand JaIn and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-16-1993
Reported in: AIR1994All1
1. This is a Civil First Appeal against the judgment of the III Addl.District Judge, Meerut dated 28-1-1992 whereby Court below was allowed the application filed by the defendant-respondents under O. 7, R. 11, C.P.C. and has rejected the plaint under the said order. The plaintiff-appellants are aggrieved against the said order and they seek setting aside of the said order through the medium of this appeal.2. To appreciate the controversy and for the just disposal of this appeal it is necessary to give a brief history of the case as emerge from the pleadings of the parties before the Court below.3. The plaintiff-appellants seem to have made an application under S. 18 of the Religious Endowments Act of 1863, hereinafter called as 'the Act', for permission to file a suit under S. 14 of the said Act. The permission was granted to the appellants to file the suit by a written order dated 24-7-1991 by the District Judge. As a result of this order the plaintiff-appellants had filed the suit ag...
Praveen Kumar and Others Vs. Vii Additional District Judge, Meerut and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-16-1993
Reported in: AIR1994All153
ORDER1. In this petition counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent No. 2 who is the main contesting party. Rejoinder affidavit has also been filed on behalf of petitioners, and both the learned counsel for parties have agreed that petition may be disposed of finally at this stage. It is relevant to mention here that respondents 3 to25 are pro forma parties and they have not been contesting the proceedings at any stage and the petition may be disposed of finally even in their absence and from the facts it is clear that no prejudice will be caused to them.2. Facts giving rise to this petition are that respondent No. 2 filed Original Suit No. 1022 of 1992 claiming a decree of permanent injunction restraining petitioners not to dispossess her from the shop in dispute in pursuance of the decree dated 12-5-1979, passed in Original Suit No. 287 of 1977. She has claimed herself as tenant of the shop No. 84 (old), new number 332, situate in Mohalla Sabji Mandi, Kotla, Chaupala, G...
Smt. Pushpa Rani Vs. Vijay Pal Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-16-1993
Reported in: AIR1994All216; I(1994)DMC345
1. This appeal arises out of the judgment and decree passed by Civil Judge, Bareilly on 31-8-1988 in a matrimonial case under S. 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act filed by the respondent against the appellant. After trial the suit was decreed and a decree for restitution of conjugal rights was passed in favour of the respondent against the appellant. The appellant who is wife of the respondent prays for setting aside the judgment of the Court below because in her opinion the judgment passed by the Court below is against the evidence on record, and it is contrary to the material documentary evidence on record produced by her. It is, further averred that appreciation of evidence by the trial court is also not proper. Appellant's case is that she has suffered cruelty and mental agony on the part of the respondent and she was justified in refusing to live with the respondent. Appellant's further case is that respondent and his family had dealt with the appellant with cruelty or demanding dowry f...
Smt. Satyawati Vs. 10th Addl. Dist. Judge and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-16-1993
Reported in: AIR1993All306
ORDER1. Feeling aggrieved by an order passed by the revisional Court exercising jurisdiction under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act whereunder allowing the revision, an order passed by the trial Court rejecting an application filed by the judgment-debtor under Order IX, Rule 13 of Civil Procedure Code was set aside and the suit restored for being decided afresh the plaintiff has now approached this Court seeking redress praying for the quashing of the revisional order.2. The facts shorn of details and necessary for the disposal of the present case lie in a narrow compass. The petitioner had filed a suit being suit No. 31 /85 in the Court of Judge Small Causes seeking ejectment of the defendant from the premises in dispute and for recovery of arrears of rent and damages for use and occupation which was decreed ex parte against the defendant on 18-4-88. This decree was challenged by the defendant by means of a revision which was filed under Section 25 of the Provincial...
Family Planning Association of India and anr. Vs. Presiding Officer, L ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-16-1993
Reported in: [1994(68)FLR95]; (1994)IILLJ1030All
B.L. Yadav, J.1. Whether the duties performed by the respondent No.2 Smt. Chanda Begam, the alleged workman performing the job of a lady social worker whose work was primarily to persuade the ladies for the purpose of family planning, is covered within the definition of the word 'workman' under Section 2(z) of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short the Act), is the short question that falls for determination in the present petition filed by the petitioner, the employer, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, with a prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned award dated May 20, 1992 (Annexure-I to the petition).2. The facts of the case are almost admitted. Respondent No.2 was employed as lady social worker in the Kanpur Branch of the Family Planning Association of India. The main job of the lady social worker was to impart information and knowledge of family planning methods, to motivate eligible couples for acceptanc...
Devesh Behari Saxena Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-15-1993
Reported in: (1995)124CTR(All)165; [1994]208ITR637(All)
1. List revised. None appears for the petitioner.2. The petitioner is challenging the order passed under Section 269UD(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, by the appropriate authority. In favour of the petitioner, an agreement to sell without being accompanied by the delivery of possession was executed. The question is whether on the basis of such an agreement to sell, an interest in the property which is the subject-matter of the agreement to sell, can be said to have been created in favour of the petitioner, and if not, whether he can maintain the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. A similar question came up before the Karnataka High Court in Rajata Trust v. Chief CIT [1992] 193 ITR 220 in which the said court held that no interest is created on the basis of agreement to sell in the proposed transferee and, therefore, the transferee cannot object to the purchase of the property by the Central Government under Section 269UD(1) which is inserted in Chapter XX-C and, moreo...
Megha Ram Vs. Commissioner, Meerut Division and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-15-1993
Reported in: 1993CriLJ3469
ORDERD.P.S. Chauhan, J.1. The petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking relief for quashing the order passed by the Additional District Magistrate, Muzaffarnagar dated 30-10-1986 and the appellate order, dated 12-10-89 passed by the Commissioner Meerut Division, Meerut relating to revocation of his fire-arm licence, which was in respect of 12 bore DBBL gun (No. 5706/2880A/7).2. Since counter and rejoinder affidavits have already been exchanged, I with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, propose to decide the case itself.3. The controversy involved in the present case is dependent on determination of questions of law and the facts have only peripheral relevance.4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner Shri R. S. Maurya, holding brief of Sri Yatindra Singh and learned standing counsel Sri Sidarth Singh.5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the orders impeached, in the present petition, are illegal and void fo...
Haji Peer Bux and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-13-1993
Reported in: 1993CriLJ3574
Virendra Saran, J.1. Petitioners Haji Peer Bux alias Saleern Lala and Fazloo alias Saghir Haji alias Saghir Jamal who are father and son respectively have filed this petition for quashing the First Information Report dated 18-3-1993 lodged by Mohd. Saleem and registered as Crime No. 45 of 1993, under Section 394/307, IPC of P.S. Chaman Ganj, District Kanpur Nagar and Section 3/5 Explosive Act.2. We have gone through the First Information Report and other materials placed on the record and have heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel.3. We are of the opinion that it is not a fit case in which this Court may exercise its discretion under Article 226 of the Constitution to quash the FIR.4. Learned counsel for the petitioners, however, prayed that a direction be issued by this Court that when the petitioners surrender and make application for bail, their bail application may be considered on the same day and in case the hearing or the disposal of the bail...
Modi Industries Ltd. Vs. Additional Labour Commissioner and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-12-1993
Reported in: (1994)ILLJ482All
R.R.K. Trivedi, J. 1. In the above petition, petitioner has challenged the order passed by respondent No. 1 by which he has forwarded to the Collector of the District a certificate under his signature specifying the amount of wages due from the petitioner for being recovered as arrears of land revenue.5 In both the petitions counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged and learned counsel for the parties have agreed that the petitions may be heard and decided finally at this stage. 2. Brief facts from which the aforesaid two petitions have arisen are that petitioners failed to pay the wages of the workers for the month of December, 1992 which ought to have been paid to them by 10th of the following month. The workers approached respondentNo. 1 Additional Labour Commissioner, for securing payment 5 of their wages. Respondents No. 1 acting under Section 3 of the Uttar Pradesh Industrial Peace (Timely Payment of Wages) Act 1978 (hereinafter referred to as U.P. Act of 1978), gave a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »