Allahabad Court November 1997 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.
Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd., Mirzapur Vs. Smt. Parvati Devi and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-17-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)AWC434
D.C. Srivastava, J.1. This revision is directed against the findings recorded by the Court of Small Causes on issues No. 6 and 7 against the defendant-revisionist.Issue No. 6 reads as under:'Whether this Court has jurisdiction to try the suit?' Issue No. 7 reads as under ;'Whether the suit is barred by U. P. Act 13 of 1972'2. In compliance of order of this Court passed on 19th May. 1997 in Civil Revision No. 147 of 1997 between the parties, the court below instead of deciding issue No, 6 as preliminary issue, proceeded to decide issues No. 6 and 7 as preliminary issues, on the ground that the two issues are interconnected.3. The brief facts alleged in the plaint, copy Annexure-1 are that open plot of land was given on lease by the landlady to defendant No. 1. M/s. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. For 20 years. The open plot was given for establishing a Petrol Pump and selling petrol products. The lease deed was executed on 18th September, 1957. There was provision for renewal of lease...
Muneshwar Dayal Vs. Zila Karyakram Adhikari, Bijnor and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-13-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)AWC426; (1998)2UPLBEC1023
O.P. Gars, J. 1. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner--Muneshwar Dayal has challenged the order dated 2.1.1996 passed by respondent No. 1--Zila Karyakram Adhikari, Bijnor on the basis of order dated 7.12.1995 passed by respondent No. 2--The Nideshak, Bal Vikas Seva Evam Pustahar, U. P.. Lucknow and has prayed that the said order be quashed and the respondents be directed by means of a writ of mandamus not to interfere in the functioning of the petitioner on the post of peon.2. Counter and rejoinder-affidavits have been exchanged. Heard Sri M. C. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned standing counsel.3. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner was appointed on the post of peon in class IV cadre in the Office of Bal Vikas Pariyojna Adhikari, Nazimabad, district Bijnor on 25.9.1993. He joined the post of peon on 1.10.1993. A Selection Committee was constituted under the rules for regularizatlon of the services of the petitioner. The petitioner was called...
Surendra Singh Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-13-1997
Reported in: (1998)1UPLBEC280
R.A. Sharma and Bhagwan Din, JJ.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as Sri H.R. Misra and Sri S.K. Rai, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents.2. The petitioner, who was an Assistant Secretary of Sadhan Sahkari Samiti Limited, Majhgawan, Vikas Khand Rani Ki Sarai, was authorised to carry on the duties of the Secretary. By means of the impugned order, one Sri Hasai Ram, who belongs to Centralised Service and belongs to the cadre of Secretary, was appointed as the Secretary of the said Sadhan Sahkari Samiti. The said order has been assailed by the petitioner on the ground that the impugned order amounts to reversion, inasmuch as, the petitioner, who was holding the post of Secretary, has been reverted to the post of Assistant Secretary. The petitioner remained as Secretary for six years and the respondents have waived their right to demote him. The order impugned was passed without giving any opportunity to show cause and the same is nonest. The petitioner was appo...
Ram Khelawan and ors. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-13-1997
Reported in: 1998CriLJ2331
Giridhar Malaviya, J.1. This Full Bench has been constituted to consider the question of bar on jurisdiction of the Courts as it prescribed under Section 195(1)(b)(ii) of the Code of Criminal procedure. However, since the entire case has also been referred to the Full Bench on the ground that the revision is very old and the proceedings in the trial Court are held up, it would be proper to set out the facts of the case in the beginning.2. One Smt. Sugia lodged a report against Ram Khelawan, Katwaru, Sita Ram and Chhote Lal on 4-6-1978 at police Station-Cantt., Varanasi alleging there in that on 23-2-1978 Ram Khelawan accused set up some other woman by asking her to impersonate Sugia and to get a fictitious sale deed executed in the name of Sugia. The report said that accused Katwaru and Sita Ram identified the impersonator as Sugia and accused Sita Ram had joined these persons and had conspired to get the said fictitious sale deed executed. After the First Information Report was lodged...
Raja Ram Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-12-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)AWC393
D.C. Srivastava, J.1. Rejoinder-affidavit filed be kept on record. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel.2. In this writ petition the prayer is for quashing the orders dated 26.3.1982 and 18.12.1982 (Annexures 2 and 3 to the writ petition) passed by theDistrict Judge, Gorakhpur.3. The brief facts are that the competent authority under the Urban Land Ceiling and Regulation Act determined the surplus land from the holding of the petitioner rejecting his objection that his sons had also share in the land in question, An appeal under Section 33 of the Act was filed which was dismissed in default by the appellate authority on 26.3.1982 vide Annexure 2. An application for restoration of the aforesaid appeal was filed which too was dismissed on 18.12.1982 through order contained in Annexure 3. These two orders are in challenge. The main challenge is to the order dated 18.12.1982. The contention is that once an appeal was admitted and was dismissed in defaul...
Atar Singh Sarraf Vs. Commissioner of Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-12-1997
Reported in: 1999(105)ELT26(All)
S.L. Saraf, J.1. By this revision application, the applicant has challenged the order passed by the Tribunal dated 3rd February, 1993. The applicant is engaged in the business of cleaning and repairs of old ornaments. The applicant also buys old ornaments and sells them in the market. The applicant is not engaged in any business as envisaged under Section 2(e-1) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 which reads as follows :''manufacture' means producing, making, mining, collecting, extracting, altering, ornamenting, finishing or otherwise processing, treating, or adapting any goods but does not include such manufacture or manufacturing processes as may be prescribed.' 2. On basis of the aforesaid definition, it is submitted by the learned Counsel for the applicant that the applicant is not engaged in manufacturing or processing of any goods. It is submitted that no alteration in the character or nature of the ornaments has been made and the goods remain the same.3. Learned Counsel for the ap...
ikramul Haq Vs. District Inspector of Schools, Allahabad and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-11-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)AWC377
Sudhir Naraln, J.1. The common questions of law and facts are Involved In both these petitions. They are being disposed of jointly. The reference to the petitioner and the respondents shall be taken from Writ Petition No. 4134 of 1997.2. The dispute relates to the promotion to the post of Lecturer in Majldia Islamla Inter College. Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as the Institution). Ikramul Haq, petitioner and Mohammad Sabir, respondent No. 3 both are functioning as Assistant Teachers in L.T, grade in the Institution. One Mohammad Khalid was permanent lecturer in the Institution. He retired on 30th June, 1996, on attaining the age of superannuation and on his retirement, the post of lecturer fell vacant. The petitioner and respondent No. 3 both claimed promotion to the post of lecturer. The petitioner is admittedly senior to respondent No. 3. The dispute was that the petitioner was not eligible and qualified for appointment to the post of lecturer in Urdu and Persian on the date the...
Smt. Lalta Devi and Another Vs. Prescribed Authority (Pargana Adhikari ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-11-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)AWC394
Ravi S. Dhavan and V.P. Goel, JJ.1. This petition was brought fifteen years ago by Smt. Lalta Devl and Heera Lal, in effect, resisting the planning of the respondents in widening the Grand Trank Road. The petitioner No. 1 has died, her heirs have been substituted.2. On facts, there is no issue. The petitioners have shops on the side of the Grand Trank Road. Several persons like the petitioners and along side them saw their shops demolished to give way to a public plan to clear the Grand Trank Road for highway traffic. The petitioners tied up the respondents in knots in litigations. First they filed a case before the Munsif, being the Additional Munslf, Varanasi, in Suit No. 2 of 1976. Smt. Munsera Devi and another v. Nagar Palika. Mugalsarai, They did not make the relevant parties, parties to the suit. The contention of the petitioners was that they be not evicted except in accordance with law. The learned Munsif gave a declaration, in effect, that the petitioners ought not to be evict...
Smt. Satyawati Verma Vs. U.P. State of Electricity Board and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-11-1997
Reported in: 1998(1)AWC681
Sudhir Narain, J.1. The petitioner, on receiving notice dated 20.8.1996 that she will retire on 14.2.1997 on attaining the age of 58 years filed this writ petition claiming that she is entitled to retire at the age of 60 years.2. The core question is as to whether the petitioner is liable to be retired at the age of 58 years in view of Regulation 37 of U. P. Rajya Vidyut Parishad Shikshak Sewa Viniyamavali, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as Viniyamavali) which provides the age of retirement as 58 years or at the age of 60 years as provided under Regulation 21 of Chapter III of the Regulations framed under U. P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921. There is no controversy on facts.3. The U. P. State Electricity Board, a body constituted under the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) started a school. Initially It was a Junior High School and later on it was raised to Intermediate College and known as Vidyut Parishad Kanya Inter College. Kasimpur, Aligarh (here...
Bharat Sen Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-11-1997
Reported in: I(1999)DMC398
S.K. Phaujdar, J.1. This application has been filed to stay the proceeding of Case No. 528 of 1993, under Section 127, Criminal Procedure Code initiated by one Meera Devi against the present applicant. It is stated that initially Smt. Meera Devi filed an application under Section 125, Criminal Procedure Code in Criminal Case No. 272 of 1983 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jaunpur which was allowed on 5.12.1985 after contest and the applicant was directed to pay Rs. 175/- to opposite party No. 2-Smt. Meera Devi and Rs. 75/- to her daughter as monthly allowance. This order was challenged in Criminal Revision No. 298 of 1985 before the Sessions Judge, Jaunpur and the revision application was dismissed. Thereafter the present applicant filed Criminal Misc. Application No. 4387 of 1987, under Section 482, Criminal Procedure Code and the same was admitted on 10.4.1987 only on the point of quantum of the maintenance allowance. The aforesaid application under Section 482, Criminal Proced...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »