Allahabad Court July 1998 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 Prakash Seth Vs. Chandra Shekhar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-28-1998
Reported in: 1999CriLJ284
ORDERS. Rafatalam, J.1. This revision is directed against the order of the learned Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Varanasi, dated 22-7-1998 allowing the revision of the opposite party.2. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and the learned counsel appearing for the opposite party. Both the learned counsel agreed for the disposal of this revision at this stage even without exchange of affidavits.3. It appears that a proceeding under Section 145, Cr. P. C. was initiated on the report of police dated 26-6-95 stating that there is apprehension of the breach of peace between the parties with regard to the possession over the house situate in Kasba and Police Station Phoolpur, district Varanasi. Both the parties appeared on 5-7-95. The second party Chandra Shekhar filed an affidavit stating that the first party Jai Prakash took possession of his house forcibly, whereas the first party Jai Prakash sought adjournment for giving evidence with regard to his possession over the disputed hous...
K. Shailja Bhalla and Others Vs. Secretary, Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-27-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)AWC2227; (1998)3UPLBEC2202
O.P. Garg, J. 1.In spite of the fact that sufficient time has been allowed the respondents have not filed any counter-affidavit. However, the answer books of the present five petitioners have been brought before the Court for perusal.2. Heard Sri V. K. Nagaich learned counsel for the petitioners and learned standing counsel on behalf of the respondents.3. Km. Shailja Bhalla, Km. Monika Dixit, Km. Shristl Agrawal, Km. Archana Ravi and Km. Navnlka Saxena, who are brilliant students and have passed High School examination of the year 1997 in 1st Division have come before this Court with the prayer that the respondent No. 1 be directed to declare their results and Issue them proper and clean mark-sheets and certificates treating them to have passed the High School Examination of 1997 and that the orders which are contained in Annexures-6 to 11. all dated 12.12.1997 communicating to the petitioners that the result of High School Examination of 1997 has been cancelled, be quashed.4. During t...
TIn Manufacturing Co. of India Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-27-1998
Reported in: 1998LC483(Allahabad); 1999(106)ELT310(All)
S.L. Saraf, J.1. It appears that the petitioner-company which is engaged in the business of export of tin containers, imported certain quantity of tin plates waste /waste soluble from United Kingdom against Licence No. P/L/3079530 on 27th September, 1984. As per the duty exemption entitlement certificate dated 1st October, 1984 pertaining to the import licence of the petitioner, the petitioner was required to make the corresponding exports within six months of the first consignment. The finding of the Additional Director General of Foreign Trade, Government of India, is that the petitioner was not guilty of misutilisation of imports effected against the said licence. Further, the lapse of non-fulfilment of export obligation was technical in the sense that the export to the tune of 98 per cent both in terms of quantity and value have been effected thereafter and the export could not have been effected within the prescribed period due to the circumstances beyond the petitioner's control....
Smt. Angoori Devi Gupta Vs. Prescribed Authority/Civil Judge (Junior D ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-24-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)AWC2336
J.C. Gupta, J.1. This writ petition by the landlady is directed against the order dated 11.2.1998 passed by the respondent No. 1 allowing the application of respondent No. 2 moved under Section 28(5) of the U. P. Act No. XIII of 1972, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').2. Counter-affidavit and rejoinder-affidavits have been exchanged and with the consent of the parties counsel, this writ petition is disposed of finally at the admission stage itself.3. According to the petitioner, respondent No. 2 is the tenant in the disputed shop at a monthly rent of Rs. 70. It further appears that the respondent No. 2 served a notice dated 14.1.1992 on the landlady-petitioner calling upon her to repair the roof of the shop within 30 days from the date of receipt of the notice. The respondent No. 2 thereafter on the expiry of notice period and on the failure of the landlady to get the roof repaired moved an application under Section 28 (5) of the Act before the Prescribed Authority. The landlady f...
Girraj Kishore and Another Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-24-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)AWC166; [1999(81)FLR88]
M. Katju, J.1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners.2. The petitioners were appointed on an honorary post. In my opinion a person holding an honorary post has no legal right to challenge the termination order. The petition is dismissed....
Committee of Management, Brahmarshi Sri Ram Krishna Inter College and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-24-1998
Reported in: (1999)1UPLBEC461
Sudhir Narain, J.1. The petitioners filed writ petition seeking writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 26th August, 1997, passed by the District Inspector of Schools, Mau, respondent No. 1 whereby he prepared the list of the members of Bramharshi Shri Ram Krishna Inter College. Walidpur, District Mau (hereinafter referred to as the Institution).2. In respect of the election of the Committee of Management of the Institution two writ petitions were filed numbered 18284 of 1989 and 31252 of 1990. These writ petitions were held to be infructuous as the term of the Committee of Management had expired. The Court dismissed the writ petitions with the following observations :-'In that view of the matter these two writ petitions are dismissed as having become infructuous, with a direction to the District Inspector of Schools to decide the rival claim of membership after scrutinishing the list of members submitted by both the parties, by affording reasonable opportunity of hearing within a ...
Smt. Gangia and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-24-1998
Reported in: 1999CriLJ309
ORDERS.K. Phaujdar, J.1. The matter was heard on 22-7-1998.2. By an order dated 13-1-1997 the Judicial Magistrate, First Court, at Varanasi in Crime No. 435 of 1993 the present applicants were summoned under Section 319, Cr. P.C. on the basis of certain statements made by certain witnesses in their examination-in-chief. The proceeding was initiated on a complaint after examination of the complainant and the witnesses. It was argued that the statements under Sections 200 and 202, Cr. P.C. and those made under Section 244, Cr. P.C. were almost same and when after such evidence the Court had declined to summon the present applicants, such power could not have been exercised at a subsequent stage even under Section 319, Cr. P. C. It was further stated that an action under Section 319, Cr. P.C. could be taken after taking evidence and examination-in-chief could not be read as evidence as it was not complete by cross-examination.3. So far the first objection is concerned, it could only be st...
Ravi Steel Vs. Cegat and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-24-1998
Reported in: 1998(78)LC261(Allahabad)
ORDERS.L. Saraf, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner has filed this writ application challenging the order dated 27th February, 1998 passed by the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, and also the order dated 4th February, 1997 passed by the said Tribunal under Section 35G(1) of Central Excise and Gold Act, 1944.3. The case of the petitioner is that the question of limitation was not decided by the Tribunal which was very much involved in the appeal. It appears from the record that the question of limitation was specifically taken and adjudicated upon by the Assistant Collector, Faizabad Division, vide order dated 18th April, 1995. The matter was taken to the first appellate authority and subsequently before the Tribunal. From the record it does not appear that specific ground of limitation was taken. However, in the order passed by the Tribunal on stay application of the petitioner, where the Tribunal granted a total stay against t...
Umakant Misra Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-23-1998
Reported in: 1998(2)AWC1586
I.P. Vasishth, J. 1. The petitioner prays for a writ of ceniorari quashing the civil court proceedings in Suit No. 42 of 1997 pending before the civil Judge. Hawaii (Junior Division), Lucknow along with a mandamus calling upon the respondent No. 3 to decide his service appeal.2. The gist of the matter is that the petitioner and private respondent no. 6 were working as lecturers in the Institution run and managed by respondent No. 5 in the name and style of Rashtriya Udyog Ashram Inter College, Matlyari, Chinhat, Lucknow. There was a seniority dispute between the two which was settled by the managing committee vide its order dated 17.1.1998 contained in Annexure-7 in favour of private respondent No. 6. Feeling aggrieved against it. the petitioner filed a service appeal under Regulation 3 (1) (f) of the regulations framed under the U. P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 and as the appeal was still pending, the private respondent filed the aforesaid civil suit seeking declaration and perm...
Carlton Hotel (P.) Ltd. Vs. Xth Additional District Judge and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-23-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)AWC1971
I.P. Vasishth, J. 1. The petitioner prays for a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 10.3.1997 contained in Annexure-1 passed by Xth Additional District Judge, Lucknow.2. The gist of the matter is that the private respondent No. 3 was an employee of the petitioner and her services were allegedly terminated on 22.8.1991 in complete disregard of the industrial law. From the employer's point of view, the dismissal was valid and legal. The issue was agitated before the Court in Writ Petition No- 2813 (S/S) of 1991 : but, then, the parties were referred to the prescribed authority under the Payment of Wages Act on the sole ground of availability of alternative remedy : where she was non-suited on the ground of limitation. The matter went in appeal before the learned Additional District Judge who under the Impugned order condoned the delay and directed the prescribed authority to dispose of the case on merit.3. The submission is that since the employee's dismissal was legal and valid,...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »