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.
Bata India Ltd. Vs. Addl. District Judge Ii, Gorakhpur and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-19-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)AWC112
J.C. Gupta, J.1. This is tenant's writ petition.2. Heard petitioner's counsel Shri S. N. Verma and Shri M. A. Qadeer, counsel appearing for the contesting respondent.3. It appears that an application for release was made by the contesting respondent landlord under Section 21 (1) (a) of the U. P. Act No. XIII of 1972 thereinafter referred to as the Act). The petitioner is undisputedly tenant in the disputed accommodation for the last many years and has been using the accommodation in question as its godown. The landlord in the release application based his claim on the ground that as he was in service and posted at Mokamah, his wife and children were residing in his ancestral house at Gorakhpur and because of family partition, they required the disputed accommodation for their residential purpose. The claim of the landlord was contested by the petitioner on a number of grounds, one of them being that the accommodation in question is not at all suited for residential purpose, being in th...
Jhabbo Lal (Dead) Through L.Rs. Vs. District Judge, Dehradun and Other ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-19-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)AWC319
J.C. Gupta, J. 1. This is landlords writ petition arising out of the judgment and order dated 13.4.1983 passed by respondent No. 1. The dispute relates to a residential accommodation situate at 22. Subhash Road, Dehradun. In the year 1952 the disputed accommodation was let out to the U. P. branch of the 'Harijan Sewak Sangh' (an organisation looking after the welfare of weaker section), through the Honarary Secretary, respondent No. 2 who besides running the office of theSangh in the disputed accommodation also used a major portion of the same as his residence since the inception of the tenancy and paid rent to the landlord. The Sangh shifted its office lock stock and barrel from Dehradun to Lucknow in the year 1965 and left accommodation in question in the sole occupation of respondent No. 2. With the shifting of the office, the respondent No. 2 who was the Honorary Secretary ceased to have any concern with or interest in the activities of the Sangh but he continued to be in occupatio...
Mithilesh Kumari and Others Vs. Gaon Sabha and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-19-1998
Reported in: 1999(2)AWC1654
Sudhir Narain, J. 1. Thepetitioners seek a writ of certiorari quashing the orders passed by Respondent Nos. 2, 4 and 5 whereby the prayer of the petitioners to decidecertain issues as preliminary issues before deciding the suit was rejected.2. The Collector, Shahjahanpur filed a suit under Section 229B/209 of U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act on behalf of the Gaon Sabha alleging that the land belonged to the Gaon Sabha and the petitioners have no right over the land in dispute and if they are found in possession, they may be evicted.3. The petitioners filed written-statement and claimed that they have a right over the land in dispute. It was further alleged that during consolidation proceedings, the plaintiff could raise an objection in regard to the title and right over the land in dispute and such objection having not raised, the claim of the plaintiff-respondent was barred under Section 49 of U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). It w...
Siddha Gopal Vs. Kanpur Development Authority and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-19-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)AWC2100
B.K. Roy and B.K. Sharm a, JJ.1. The prayer of the petitioner is to quash citation to appear issued under Rule 294A of the U. P. Z. A. and L. R. Act in regard to payment of Rs. 7,925 plus 10% interest thereon (as contained in Annexure-5). A further prayer has been made to command the respondent No. i to withdraw the aforementioned notice.2. The petitioner asserts, inter aha, that he is owner of House No. 12/145 Gwal Toll, Kanpur Nagar, which is a double storey paced building and in possession thereof : under slum-clearance scheme No. XXXVI the house aforementioned was acquired by the Kanpur Development Authority (opposite party No. 1) for the development work ; but the scheme was executed without need of the house ; that a decision was taken (as contained in Armexure-1) under Section 17 of the Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973 to reconvey the house to the petitioner on deposit of Rs. 3,273.09 p. on perpetual lease ; on 1.1.1987 such a lease deed was executed in favour of the pet...
Ahmad Ullah Khan Vs. State of U.P. and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-19-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)AWC2107
Sudhir Narain, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 1.7.1983 whereby the objection, of the petitioner has been rejected by the Prescribed Authority, respondent No. 2.2. The facts in brief are that the proceedings for determination of surplus land were taken against the petitioner under the provisions of U. P. Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act. 1960. The Prescribed Authority declared 12.86 acre as surplus land. The petitioner filed appeal against the said order. The appeal was dismissed. The petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 3353 of 1976. He also filed an application for interim stay order. The Court granted interim stay staying the dispossession of the petitioner on the condition that the petitioner deposits the damages at the rate of Rs. 300 per acre per annum. The petitioner deposited Rs. 3,900 with the Prescribed Authority on 7.10.1976 and again the same amount on 12.4.1978. The writ petition was dismissed by the Court on 17.10.1978. The petitioner p...
Sadri Ram Vs. District Magistrate/Licensing Authority, Azamgarh and Ot ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-19-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)AWC2102
S.R. Singh, J.1. Challenge In the instant petition is to the order dated 24.12.1997 of the District Magistrate, Azamgarh, whereby the petitioner's firearm's licence has been suspended and at the same time, the petitioner has been called upon to show cause why the licence be not revoked/cancelled. The District Magistrate. Azamgarh, purports to have suspended the petitioner's fire- arm licence pending enquiry into cancellation of the licence set afoot on the basis of police report which led the District Magistrate to form an opinion keeping in view the public peace and public security, that the licence of the petitioner was liable to be cancelled and it would be prejudicial to the interest of public to allow him to retain the arms.2. The question canvassed at the bar by Sri Ramesh Ral, counsel appearing for the petitioner was that in view of the Full Bench decision of this Court in the case of C. P. Sahu, v. State, 1984 AWC 145, the licensing authority was not clothed with the jurisdicti...
Bankey Lal Vs. Iiird Additional District Judge, Mathura and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-19-1998
Reported in: 1998(3)AWC2318
J.C. Gupta, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 9.12.1996 passed by respondent No. 2 in the execution proceedings and the order dated 15.4.1998 passed by revisional court, the respondent No. 1.2. Relevant facts may be briefly stated.3. Suit No. 9 of 1989 was filed on Small Cause Court's side by respondent No. 3 against the petitioner for ejectment alleging that the petitioner was tenant in the disputed shop @ Rs. 100 per month which was subsequently enhanced to Rs. 150 per month from 1982. The tenant-petitioner was in arrears of rent since July, 1982, which were not paid despite service of notice of demand. The tenancy was also terminated by means of a notice served under Section 106 of the Transfer of Properties Act.4. The said suit was contested by the petitioner and in the written statement filed by him, the plaintiffs allegations were denied and it was pleaded that he committed no default in payment of rent and the suit was liable to be dismissed. The trial ...
Sobaran Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-19-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)AWC300
R.H. Zaidi, J.1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned standing counsel and also perused the record.2. By means of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner prays for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the show cause notice dated 4.7.1995. Prayer for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents not to proceed further with the departmental proceedings has also been made.3. It appears that a First Information Report (Case Crime No. 825/91 under Section 384, I.P.C.) was lodged at police station Charbagh, Lucknow, in which the petitioner was suspected to be involved. Consequently, the petitioner who was holding the post of police constable was placed under suspension vide order dated 17.7.91 in exercised of powers under Rule 17 (1) (a), U. P. Police Officers of Subordinate Ranks (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991. Thereafter in the aforesaid criminal case, charge-sheet was submitted. In the said c...
Jawed Ahmad and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Other
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-19-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)AWC158; (1999)1UPLBEC655
R.H. Zaidi, J.1. By means of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioners pray for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 23.4.1986. whereby order of appointment of the petitioners dated 19.11.1984 was cancelled by respondent No. 2. Prayer for issuance of a direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to permit the petitioners to work and to pay their salary and allowances, has also been made.2. It has been stated that on 29.10.1984, several posts of Junior clerks and cashiers were sanctioned by the Chief Engineer. Rural Engineering Services. For District Bahraich six posts of Junior clerk and one of cashier were sanctioned. Said posts were advertised on 16.11.84. A Selection Committee, in accordance with the rules, was also constituted under the Chairmanship of respondent No. 2. Executive Engineer. A letter is also stated to have been sent to the employment exchange asking to send the n...
Shailendra Kumar Vs. District Registrar (Indian Registration Act) and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-19-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)AWC396
B. K. Roy and B. K. Sharma, JJ. 1. The prayer of the petitioner, who is a licensed document writer as defined under Rule 2 (c) of the U. P. Document Writers Licensing Rules. 1977 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules for the sake of brevity) framed under Section 69(1)(hhh) of the Indian Registration Act, 1908, is to quash the order dated 17.3.1990 of the District Rgistrar. Deorla (as contained in Annexure-3) cancelling his licence with Immediate effect.2. A perusal of the impugned order shows following facts :(i) The D.I.G. of Police (Special Investigation) U. P., Lucknow apprised while dispatching copy of the Report dated 6.2.1998 of the Deputy Superintendent of Police (Special Investigation), Lucknow that in the sale deed executed by Indra Deo Harijan in favour of Abid Ali Ansari on 5.9.1987 tn regard to 1.60 acres of land of Gata No. 173 of Village Jairam Kaurtya. P.S. Salempur. District Deoria, which was registered, scribed by Shailendra Kumar (the writ petitioner) who was also its...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »