Allahabad Court May 1996 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.
Jai Singh Vs. Kasganj Sahkari Kray Vikray Samiti Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-08-1996
Reported in: (1997)1UPLBEC229
R.K. Mahajan, J.1. This revision is against the order of Shri Vijay Verma, Civil Judge, Etah, dated 25-7-1986 in Misc. Case No. 51 of 1985 arising out of Execution Case No. 26 of 1982.2. It appears that the award was passed by the arbitrator Under Section 71 of the U. P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1965 arising out of dispute between society and one Jai Singh, decree holder. It appears that there was dispute of some realisation of money of contract and amount involved is Rs. 31,000. The award has been put to execution Under Section 92 (c) of U. P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) to Civil Court. Objections were taken regarding the illegality of passing of award and also it does not fall within the ambit of Section 70 of the Act and reference could not have been made. The learned Civil Judge accepted the objections by holding that the matter should have been taken under Indian Arbitration Act and not Under Section 70 of the Act.3. Feeling aggrieved t...
Nazim HussaIn Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-03-1996
Reported in: II(1996)DMC308
G.S.N. Tripathi, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. This is criminal revision Under Section 397, Cr. P.C. A decree was passed Under Section 125, Cr. P.C. in favour of Smt. Shahana Begum, respondent No. 2. Admittedly, she is the wife of Sabir Hussain. In pursuance of the decree, some property was attached as per attachment memo dated 1.8.1995 (Annexure II to the petition).2. From the report of the attaching officer, it is clear that at the time of attachment Sabir Hussain was not available rather, the residents of the locality informed him that he has residing in Delhi. As regards the ownership of the property Nazim Hussain, revisionist, filed an objection before the learned lower Court that the property attached, as per attachment memo aforesaid, belongs to him. As against it, Smt. Shahana Begum filed an objection before the learned lower Court and he alleged that the property attached was the same property which was given to her in Dahej. It means that if her statement is acc...
Mahabir Singh Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-03-1996
Reported in: 1997CriLJ1703
J.C. Mishra, J.1. The appellant Mahabir Singh was convicted under Section 302/34 IPC and 394 IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment under Section 302/34 and seven years rigorous imprisonment under Section 394 IPC Both the sentences were to run concurrently.2. The prosecution case is that in the night intervening 23 April 1979, 3 or 4 miscreants, variously armed with Parsa, Lathi and Ballam entered in the house of the informant Ram Narain, by scaling the adjoining house of Hazari Lal, with the help of a ladder and then climbed up the second storey roof of the informantus, with the help of some ladder and then reached the first floor of the informant house by climbing down the staircase. The informant, along with his wife Smt. Parwati Devi and children, was sleeping on the roof, infront of the verandah, where a burning lantern was defusing light. They were awakened by the sound of the foot-steps of the robbers, who approched him and demanded keys from him, by putting a pharsaon h...
Kailash Nath Gupta Vs. Enquiry Officer, Allahabad Bank and ors. Overruled
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-01-1996
Reported in: [1996(74)FLR2354]; (1997)IILLJ453All
Om Prakash, J.1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks quashing of the impugned orders passed by the Disciplinary Authority (Respondent No. 2) and the Appellate Authority (Respondent No. 4) an-nexures 3 and 5 to the writ petition respectively.2. Admittedly, the petitioner was an Officer ; Grade III in the Allahabad Bank at the time the disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him. The Disciplinary Authority having found the petitioner guilty of charges, ordered his removal. The petitioner filed an appeal against that order, which was dismissed.3. Aggrieved the petitioner has come up to this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.4. Sri G.C. Bhattacharya learned counsel for the petitioner made the following submissions before us :(1) That the petitioner was appointed by the Board of Directors as per the appointment letter dated October 30, 1973 - annexure to the amendment application and if that is so, he cannot be removed from service by the Assistant General Manager (Resp...
Ram Surat Duvedi Vs. Ram Kumar Trivedi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-01-1996
Reported in: 1997CriLJ1667
ORDERO.P. Jain, J.1. This is an application for leave to appeal in a case of acquittal under Sections 468, 469 and 471 IPC. Applicant Ram Surat Duvedi is a Lecturer in an Educational Institution and accused Ram Kumar Trivedi is the Principal of the institution. The first complaint was filed by Ram Surat Duvedi in 1978 alleging that the Principal, Ram Kumar Trivedi, has fabricated a resignation letter purporting to be signed by Ram Surat Duvedi. It was alleged by the complainant that the resignation letter is a forged one and therefore the Principal should be punished for forgery.2. The first complaint was dismissed under Section 203 Cr.P.C. on 16-1 -1979 with the observation that the complainant's counsel pleaded no instructions and the complainant himself is absent. As there was no evidence under Section 202 Cr.P.C. the Court dismissed the complaint under Section 203 Cr.P.C. on 9-4-1979 the complainant Filed the second complaint and his statement was recorded under Section 200 Cr.P.C....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›