Allahabad Court April 1995 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.
Km. Ruchira Chauhan Vs. Rohilkhand University, Bareilly and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-10-1995
Reported in: AIR1996All12; (1995)2UPLBEC756
ORDER1. The petitioner was a student at K.G.K. College, Moradabad in M.Sc. Physics. The institution is affiliated with Rohilkhand University. The petitioner had appeared in M.Sc. Part I and in one of the papers, she secured lesser marks According to the prevalent practice and Rule in Rohilkhand University, she had appeared for appearing in the Improvement Test in the said paper. She deposited the requisite fee for appearing in the improvement test. Simultaneously, the petitioner was permitted to join M.Sc. Part II and she appeared in M.Sc. Part II examination also. The petitioner was successful in the Improvement Test examination and has secured higher mark than the earlier examination from which she wanted to appear in the Improvement Test. Since the petitioner had appeared in final M.Sc. also, she claimed that her result of M.Sc. final was also to be declared taking into consideration the marks obtained in the Improvement Test in the said subject.2. The respondent-University had decl...
Surat Kumar Patnaik and Another Vs. Kanpur University and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-10-1995
Reported in: AIR1996All13; (1995)2UPLBEC904
ORDER1. In this writ petition, the petitioners claim that they were admitted in B.Sc. (Ag. Part I) examination which was conducted by the Kanpur University from Kulbhaskar Ashram Degree College, Allahabad. After examination, the result of all other students appeared was declared and it was revealed that the names of the petitioner were not there in the list of successful candidates. On enquiry it was revealed that the petitioners' result was not declared and was withheld. It has been said that the petitioners had appeared in the examination of B.Sc. (Ag. Part I) after submitting their application for examination and deposited the examination fee appeared in the examination along with the other students. There was no justification for withholding the result of the petitioners since there was no complaint of use of any unfair means.2. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged by the parties. In para 5 of the counter-affidavit, it has been stated by therespondents that the peti...
Kayashtha Sabha Mainpuri, Through Its Secretary Bhawani Shanker Saxena ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-07-1995
Reported in: AIR1996All9; (1995)2UPLBEC1327
ORDER1. The petitioner claims to be a Registered Society of the Kayastha Sabha of Mainpur which is said to be running a Degree College and Inter College namely Sri Chitra-gupta Degree College and Sri Chitra Gupta Inter College. It is said that the election of the Committee of Management is likely to be held on 9th April, 1995 for the Degree College. It has been requested by a letter dated 23-3-95 addressed to the Vice-Chancellor, Agra University, Agra that an observer for conducting the elections of the office bearer of the Committee of Management be appointed. A representation was also sent by the petitioner on 13th March, 1995 to the Vice-Chancellor that 9th April is the date fixed for holding the election and the request for appointment of an observer was not accepted till then. Such a prayer was made again for appointing an observer.2. The petitioner has prayed in the writ petition for issuing a direction in the nature of writ of mandamus commanding the respondent Vice-Chancellor, ...
Matloob HussaIn S/O Mahmood HussaIn Vs. Dilshad Ali Son of Sri Barkat ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-07-1995
Reported in: 1996CriLJ944
ORDERC.A. Rahim, J.1. Learned counsel for the applicants is present. Learned counsel for the opposite party is found absent at the time of hearing. This matter is pending since 1982 and it has not been admitted as yet. Since intricate question of law is involved, the hearing is taken up to see whether the application is maintainable ex facie before the eye of law.2. The fact which is for consideration of the present application, is that the opposite party No. 1 lodged one first information report on 23-5-1982 under Section 395/397, I.P.C. naming the applicants and 22 others as accused with the allegation that in between the night of 22/23-5-1982 the accused persons removed the goods by demolishing the boundary wall of the house of the complainant. A case was registered but the Investigating Officer after investigation submitted a final report. On 7-6-1982 the opposite party No. 1 filed a protest petition with the allegation that the final report has been submitted without proper invest...
Vijai NaraIn Singh Sengar Vs. State of U.P. and Other
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-06-1995
Reported in: AIR1996All51
ORDERR.A. Sharma, J.1. Petitioner has challenged the validity of U.P. Panchayat Raj (Amendment) Act, 1994 (U.P. Act No. 9 of 1994) on the ground that it violates second proviso to Article 200 of the Constitution of India, in as much as, its bill was not reserved for consideration of the President.2. Under second proviso to Article 200 the Governor is required to reserve the bill for consideration of the President, if in his opinion it would, if it becomes law, 'so derogate from the powers of the High Court as to endanger the position which that Court is by this Constitution designed to fill'. There is no provision in the U.P. Act which affects the power of this Court. It is not the Act but Article 243-O of the Constitution which bars the jurisidiction of the Court in the electoral matters. Article 243-O is as under:--'243-O. Bar to interference by Court in electoral matters -- Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution - (a) the validity of any law relating to the delimitation of co...
Suresh Mittal Vs. Smt. Saras Gupta
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-05-1995
Reported in: II(1995)DMC238
C.A. Rahim, J.1. This revision arises out of the judgment and order dated 4.9.1982 passed by the IV Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Etawah in Case No. 262 of 1990 under Section 125 Cr. P.C. allowing maintenance to the opposite party at the rate of Rs. 400/- per month from the date of institution of the application.2. The order of the learned Magistrate has been challenged mainly on the ground that the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Etawah has got no jurisdiction to by the case and that the opposite party is not unable to maintain herself. It has also been stated that the opposite party has deserted the revisionist and lived separately and that the revisionist having retired from service does not have sufficient means to provide his wife.3. With regard to the first part the learned Counsel has submitted that the marriage took place on 29.11.1987 at Delhi at the opposite party lived there upto 10.12.1987 and she left the place of her husband. So the Etawah Court has got no j...
Mirtunjay Singh Vs. Vice-chancellor, Purvanchal University, Jaunpur an ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-04-1995
Reported in: AIR1996All10; (1995)3UPLBEC1363
ORDER1. The petitioner is a student of B.A. Part III of Hindu Degree College, Zamania, district Ghazipur. The students Union elections are scheduled to be held. The respondent No. 2 notified the name of the Election Officer. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there has been a number of irregularities in the process of election that has been initiated. It is said that the election is scheduled to be held tomorrow. The learned counsel submit that according to the Constitution of the students union the rules provide about a particular manner. I do not consider it necessary to mention the rules in which the manner of conducting the election has been provided. The learned counsel pointed out that the respondents have adopted a course, which is wholly in contravention with the said students union Constitution. It is said that the petitioner being aggrieved by the process of election made a representation to the Vice-Chancellor, who is overall in charge of the affairs of th...
M/S. Rafiq Ahmad Vs. District Magistrate, Bareilly and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-04-1995
Reported in: AIR1995All446
ORDERR.A. Sharma, J.1. Petitioner claims to be petty oil dealer holding a licence under the provisions of U.P. High Speed Diesel Oil and Light Diesel Oil (Maintenance of Supply and Distribution) Order, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as the Order). He has filed this writ petition for a writ or mandamus directing the respondents to permit him to store 50000 (fifty thousand) gallons diesel at a time in the tank.2. When this petition was heard on 29-3-1995 the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner was that there is no order providing for storage limit, for a licensee holding petty/ retail diesel licence. We accordingly adjourned the case at the request of learned counsel for the the parties, so as to enable them to trace out the Government Order, if any, issued in this connection. The learned Standing Counsel has placed before us the order dated 16-9-1987 yesterday, whereby the storage limit for petty diesel licensee has been fixed at 4000 Ltrs. According to this order a pett...
Urmila Vs. Kaushal Kishore
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-04-1995
Reported in: II(1995)DMC276
N.B. Asthana, J.1. This revision has been directed against the order dated 20.6.1994 passed by Judge, Family Court, Kanpur in Case No. 829 of 1993 Kaushal Kishore v. Smt. Urmila Devi under Section 125 Cr.P.C. whereby the Trial Judge accepted the application under Section 127 Cr.P.C. moved by the Opp. Party and cancelled the order of interim maintenance passed on 8.1.1987 granting her maintenance allowance at the rate of Rs. 300/- per month for herself and her children.2. The application was filed upon the allegations that the Opp. Party who is admittedly her husband has refused to keep her and their child and has cruelly treated her. The contention of the Opp. Party was that the revisionist is living in adultery and therefore he has sufficient reason to live separately. The Opp. Party then filed a petition under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act seeking divorce from the revisionist. This petition was allowed on 25.9.1990. The marriage between the parties was dissolved. The revisionist p...
U.P. State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Gopi Chand and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-03-1995
Reported in: 1995ACJ1247
S.R. Singh, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree (award) dated 27.4.1983 passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (VIII Additional District Judge), Allahabad, in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 166 of 1979 between Gopi Chand, claimant and U.P. State Road Trans. Corporation and Anr., opposite parties.2. The claim, the petitioner filed before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, arose out of a motor accident which occurred on 10.7.1978. The deceased Ashok Kumar was a boy of 13 years of age and student of VIth standard at the time of accident. The father of the deceased was engaged in purchase and sale of food-grains both by way of pheri (hawk) as well as through a shop at his residence and had an income of Rs. 300/- per month. He claimed Rs. 1,00,000/- by way of compensation for the death of his son Ashok Kumar as a result of injuries sustained by him in the accident arising out of use of motor vehicle belonging to the appellant. It was also alleged in the claim pe...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›