Allahabad Court August 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.
Atal Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-06-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)AWC341
Binod Kumar Roy and R.K. Mahajan, JJ.1. The petitioner has come up with following prayers :(i) Act Nos. 1 of 1997 and 19 of 1998 amending Section 29 of the U. P. Co-operative Societies Act is illegal.ultravircs, unconstitutional, being against the objective and basic structure of the Cooperative movements and has been passed with a mala fide intention and thus be struck down. (ii) Respondents be restrained from giving effect to Act 19 of 1998. (iii) The order dated 10.7.1998,passed by Deputy Registrar,Co-operative Societies, U. P.,Dareilly Region, Bareilly, ascontained in Annexure-I,superseding the Committee ofManagement headed by thepetitioner and illegallyappointing the DistrictMagistrate, Pilibhit(Respondent No. 4), asAdministrator be quashed. (iv) The Respondent be commanded to provide a time bound opportunity to the pelitioner for conducting the election of the Committee of Management and till the elections are held they be restrained from interfering in his functioning. 2. Mr. K....
Smt. Kamlesh Vs. Iqbal Singh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-06-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)AWC2147
O.P. Jain, J.1. This first appeal is directed against the order passed by Judge Family Court, Meerut, on 25th September. 1995, by which an application filed under Section 25 of Guardians and Wards Act of 1890 (hereinafter called the Act of 1890) has been allowed and the grandfather of the minor has been given the custody of the boy.2. The brief facts of the case are that minor Vicky is the son of appellant Smt. Kamlesh and her husband Raj Singh. They were married 12-13 years before the filing of the application for guardianship. Minor's father (Raj Singh) died of illness on 29th January, 1986. After the death of Raj Singh. his wife Smt. Kamlesh who is the appellant here, has married one Madan Singh and isresiding with him at Shahadara (Delhi). The marriage between Smt. Kamlesh and Madan Singh took place on 25th May, 1993 and the application for guardianship has been filed by the minor's grandfather, iqbal Singh. on 30th August, 1993.3. In this application, it was alleged by the grandfa...
Arun Kumar Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-06-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)AWC2378
B.K. Roy and R.K. Mahajan, JJ.1. The prayer of the petitioner is to declare the Uttar Pradesh Co-operative Societies (Second Amendment) Act, 1998 (U. P. Act 19 of 1998). amending Section 29 (2) of the Uttar Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act. 1965 (U. P. Act No. 11 of 1966), as amended by theUttar Pradesh Co-operative Societies (Amendment) Act. 1997 (U. P. Act No. 1 of 1997) ultra vires and strike it down and to quash the order dated 9.7.1998 passed by the Deputy Registrar, U. P. Co-operative Societies, Azamgarh Division. Azamgarh. (Opposite Party No. 2) (as contained in Annexure-3 to this writ petition).2. We had upheld the vires of U. P. Act No. 19 of 1998 amending subsection (2) of Section 29 of the U. P. Act No. 1 of 1997 in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 22045 of 1998 Dal Singh Yadav v. State of U. P. and another, decided on 16.7.1998.3. The Submissions :The main thrust of the submission of Dr. D. S. P. Slngh. learned counsel for the petitioner is 'that by Act No. 19 of 1998 the Sta...
Kendriya Upbhokta Sahkari Bhandar Ltd., Lalitpur Vs. Addl. District an ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-06-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)AWC2364
J. C. Gupta, J.1. Heard petitioner's counsel.2. This is tenant's writ petition against the order of the lower appellate authority remanding the case for a decision on merits of the application moved under Section 21 (8) of the U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting. Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 by the landlord. The said application was moved before the Rent Control and Eviction Officer, a delegated authority of the District Magistrate, who rejected the application for enhancement of rent merely on the ground that since the accommodation in question is in the tenancy of the petitioner, a registered society, the same was not maintainable under the provision of Section 21 (8) of the Act. The landlord filed appeal against the said order and the same has been allowed by the impugned order.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner tried to support the order of the District Magistrate whereby the application of the landlord for enhancement of rent moved under Section 21 (8) of the Act was r...
Smt. Nazma Khan Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-06-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)AWC465
Binod Kumar Roy and R. K. Mahajan, JJ.1. The prayer of the petitioner is to command respondent Nos. 1 to 6 to protect life, property and privacy of her as well as the members of her family from the hands of respondent No. 7 and his associates by issuing a writ in the nature of mandamus.1.1. A further prayer has been made for restraining the landlord--respondent No. 7 from harassing her peaceful tenancy of the upper portion of the House No. 86/130 Mohalla Lunia, police station Kotwali. town and district Dehradun and for restoration of electrical and water supplies to her aforementioned premises.2. The petitioner asserts, inter alia, that she belongs to the minority community ; she is tenant of the premises on a monthly rental of Rs. 300 since 1980 of respondent No. 7 who resides on the ground floor of the said house ; she is a social worker and the Joint Secretary of U. P. Congress Committee (I) besides Sanyojika of its Mahila Wing ; her husband Sikandar Khan is a renowned contractor an...
Anupam Khad Bhandar Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-06-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)AWC442
D.K. Seth, J.1. On a raid conducted in the shop of the petitioner stock of D.A.P. Fertilisers was detained or seized on 31.12.1997. A first information report was lodged on 24.3.1998 and stop sale notice was Issued on 26.3.1998, to which the petitioner submitted his reply on 28.3.1998. It is alleged by Sri Sunil Ambwani, learned counsel for the petitioner that while detaining and seizing the particular stock, the authority has completely sealed the petitioner's shop. It is also alleged that the petitioner is also dealing in other material and there were stock of fertilisers other than seized. The said seizure was conducted on the ground that the materials were of sub-standard. According to him, the other stocks were not seized or detained. Referring to paragraph 28 of the Fertilizers (Control) Order, 1985, the petitioner submits that Section 28 does not empower the authority to seal the shop or prevent the petitioner from carrying on his business or trade and thereby to take away from ...
Summerking Electricals (P) Ltd. Vs. Cegat
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-06-1998
Reported in: 1998LC481(Allahabad); 1998(102)ELT522(All)
ORDERS.L. Saraf, J.1. From the record, it appears that the Commissioner, Central Excise, Meerut issued show cause notice on the petitioner as to why Central Excise Duty amounting to Rs. 80,72,573.45 be not recovered from them and as to why they be not penalized for contravening the various provisions of the Excise Act and Rules. Subsequently, on 11-3-1998, Central Excise Meerut adjudicated the case vide order dated 11-3-1998 and confirmed the demand duty. Being aggrieved by the said order the petitioners filed an appeal along with the stay waiver application before the Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi. The Tribunal while considering the stay-cum-waiver application held that the Commissioner passed the said order in violation of principles of natural justice. In that view of the matter, it quashed the order dated 11th March, 1998 passed by the Commissioner, Central Excise, Meerut and remanded the matter to the adjudicating authorities for de novo considerat...
Munshi Lal Vs. Additional District Magistrate (F)/R.C. and E.O., Kanpu ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-05-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)AWC2159
J.C. Gupta, J. 1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 23.9.1993, Annexure-9 to the writ petition, passed by respondent No. 1, the Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Kanpur Nagar, declaring vacancy in respect of the disputed accommodation.2. The dispute relates to the ground floor accommodation in premises No. 10/215. Khalasi Line, Kanpur Nagar, whereof admittedly the petitioner is tenant and respondent Nos. 2 to 5 are landlords. It is also an undisputed fact that the petitioner has been in occupation in the said accommodation for the last more than 40 years. In the year 1989, an application under Section 16 (1) (b) of the U. P. Act No. XIII of 1972, was moved from the side of the landlords before the R.C, and E.O. wherein it was alleged that a deemed vacancy has occurred on account of the fact that the petitioner has acquired a residential accommodation in the same city of Kanpur, which has been constructed in plot No- 1072, Nai Basti, Rawatpur, Kanpur. A report from...
Smt. Rekha Rani Chaturvedi Vs. Dr. Pramod Kumar Chaturvedi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-05-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)AWC29
B.K. Roy and R.K. Mahajan, JJ.1. In this appeal under Section 19 of theFamily Courts Act, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), the wife assails the validity of the order dated 28.3.1997 passed by the learned Chief Judge, Family Court, Kanpur Nagar, in Divorce Petition No. 554 of 1995 allowing the application of the husband filed under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, for grant of decree of divorce on the basis of cruelty.2. The relevant facts are in a narrow compass :The respondent-husband asserted to the effect that he and the appellant herein are Hindu by caste and are governed by the provisions of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 : the unfortunate marriage was solemnized on 2.12.1986 at Kanpur Nagar according to Hindu rites and ceremonies which was dowrytess ; he brought home his wife at 18/239-A, Kursawan, Kanpur Nagar, but after a week she was taken away by her parents by way of Chauthi ; after three months he brought her by way of Vida; during her stay the parties cohabi...
Smt. Mahmooda Vs. District Judge, Bahraich and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-05-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)AWC362
S.H.A. Raza, J.1. Besides the other questions which are involved in the present writ petition, which I will deal later on, it will be necessary to dwell into the scope and ambit of the provisions contained in Order XXI. Rule 90, C.P.C. which read as under :90. Application to set aside sale on ground of irregularity or fraud.--(1) Where any immovable property has been sold in execution of a decree, the decree-holder, or the purchaser, or any other person entitled to share in a rateable distribution of assets, or whose interests are affected by the sale, may apply to the Court to set aside the sale on the ground of a material irregularity or fraud in publishing or conducting it. (2) No sale shall be set aside on the ground of irregularity or fraud in publishing or conducting it unless, upon the facts proved, the Court is satisfied that the applicant has sustained substantial injury by reason of such irregularity or fraud. (3) No application to set aside a sale under this rule shall be en...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »