Allahabad Court September 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.
Ugrasen Misra Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-21-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)AWC47
G.P. Mathur, J.1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has been filed praying that the petitioner be not arrested in Case Crime No. 1 of 1997 under Section 3 of the Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act. 1966 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and be not given in custody of respondent No. 2. A further prayer has been made to release Truck No. UTY 4516.2. The documents filed along with the writ petition show that substantial railway property was stolen from near Majhiharl Railway Station on 27.12.1996. Radhey Shyam, accused was arrested at 0.15 hours on 3.1.1997 and at his pointing out, a part of the stolen property was recovered. Subsequently four other accused were also arrested at 12.00 a.m. on 3.1.1997. A case had been registered as Crime No. 1 of 1997 under Section 3 of the Act at the concerned police station. The investigation revealed that Truck No. UTY 4516, which was owned by Surya Bhan Misra, who is father of the petitioner Ugrasen Misra, was used in tran...
Smt. Shashi Shah Vs. Kiran Kumar Shah
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-21-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)AWC211
R.K. Mahajan, J. 1. This appeal raises interesting questions in the context of strained family life of husband and wife. The plea of wife appellant is that she is entitled to the company of husband who is an Engineer at the places of his posting. Her repeated grievance is that she wants company of her husband at Sillgudl where he is presently posted, to enjoy the marital rites. The plea of husband respondent is that the wife should reside at his parents house and he cannot take her at different places of his posting. There is one more factor in this case which come Up during the negotiations held in our Chambers as required under the Statute, that the husband is not ready and willing even to have a separate residential accommodation at Agra where he has settled whereas the wife is ready to live with the husband even in small accommodation. Thus, the main question for determination by this Court is whether in the circumstances narrated above, the conduct of husband amount to desertion a...
U.P. Brick Field Mavi Kalan Vs. Commissioner, Sales Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-21-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)AWC513
M.C. Agarwal, J.1. This revision petition under Section 11 of U. P. Trade Tax Act is directed against the order dated 9.11.1989, passed by Trade Tax Tribunal, Meerut, and the questions involved in the case is whether the order passed by the assessing officer in consequence of the order of remand passed by the 1st appellate authority survived when subsequently the order of remand itself is set aside by the Trade Tax Tribunal disposing of the second appeal against the first appellate order.2. I have heard Sri S.O.P. Agarwal, learned counsel for the revisionist and Sri R.D. Gupta, learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of respondent.3. The proceedings relates to the assessment year 1982-83. The order of assessment was made on 12.4.1985. The dealer revisionist preferred an appeal to the Assistant Commissioner (Judicial) Trade Tax. The appeal was allowed by an order dated 20.7.1985 and setting aside the assessment order the matter was remanded to the assessing officer. In pursuance of...
Yogi Pharmacy Ltd. Vs. Elegant Marbles and Grani Industries Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-21-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)AWC527
A.K. Banerji, J.1. By means of the present application (A-10) filed under Section 442 of the Companies Act. 1956 (in short Act) read with Rule 9 of the Companies (Court) Rules. 1959, M/s. Yogi Pharmacy Limited (Applicant) has, inter alia prayed for the following orders :(1) A protection order to stay the suits and proceedings detailed in Annexure-2 of the application and pending in various Courts : (2) An order of injunction to the Deputy Commissioner of Police. New Delhi (opposite party No. 9) restraining him and the police working under him from proceeding further with the investigation of F.I.R., Crime No. 1022 of 1997 lodged by the opposite party No. 8 against the company and its directors ; (3) The opposite party No. 8 may be restrained from proceeding with the said case. 2. Briefly stated the relevant facts as set out in the application are that the applicant M/s. Yogi Pharmacy Limited was engaged in the manufacturing of Ayurvedic medicines at its factory situate in the district ...
Mohammad Umar Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-21-1998
Reported in: (1999)IIILLJ877All
G.P. Mathur, J. 1. Both these writ petitions are connected and therefore, they are being disposed of by a common order. Writ Petition No. 20072 of 1998 shall be treated as the leading case. 2. Mohd. Umar, Executive Engineer in the Minor Irrigation Department (petitioner in the leading case) has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking quashing of the order issued by the State Government on May 27, 1998 by which he has been transferred from Dehradun to Nainital and Paramjeet Singh, respondent No. 3, who was attached in the office of Superintending Engineer, Minor Irrigation Circle, Pauri was transferred to Dehradun, By the same order Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, Executive Engineer, petitioner in Writ Petition No. 21281 of 1998 was transferred from Nainital to the Head Quarter at Lucknow. 3. We have heard Sri T.P. Singh for the petitioners in both the writ petitions, Sri S.P. Singh for Respondent No. 3 and Sri Sabhajeet Yadav learned standing counsel for the Respond...
Harendra Kumar Singh Vs. District Inspector of Schools and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-21-1998
Reported in: (1998)3UPLBEC2248
D.K. Seth, J.1. Writ Petition No. 10842 of 1992 was filed by one Shri Harendra Kumar Singh who contained that a requisition dated 3.3.1991, signed by the Manager, being Annexure-1 to the writ petition, was notified to the Commission that one Shri Ram Murthy Pandey, holding the post of Lecturer in Sanskrit would be retiring on 30.6.1991, resulting into a substantive vacancy which was required to be filled up. On account of anticipated vacancy an advertisement was issued on 14.3.1991, which is contained in Annexure-2 to the writ petition, inviting candidates for appointment in the said vacancy, for which applications were to be submitted within 23.7.1991. It was also pointed out in the said advertisement that the interview alongwith the original certificates would be held on 14.7.1991 at 11.00 a.m. Thus the advertisement itself contradicts in the matter that the last date for submission of applications was fixed on 23.7.1991 and the interview was fixed on 14.7.1991 viz., before 9 days of...
Smt. Shagufta Sahiba Farooqi and ors. Vs. Chhatrapati Sahuji Maharaj U ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-21-1998
Reported in: (1998)3UPLBEC2229
O.P. Garg, J.1. Heard Sri R.K. Jain assisted by Sri M.M. Khan, learned Counsel for the petitioners, Sri J.N. Verma and Sri S.N. Srivastava appearing on behalf of the respondents.2. Counter and Rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged.3. The petitioners, who are five in number, have appeared in the entrance test for admission in B.Ed. Course for the session 1997-98. An advertisement was made on 21.4.1997 in which the minimum qualification required for appearing in the entrance examination was only Graduation. All the petitioners fulfilled the minimum requisite qualification, inasmuch as they have secured more than 40% marks in Graduation. The petitioners filled in the forms and they were issued admit cadre to appear in the entrance test. Thereafter they appeared in the said test. The result of the petitioners was declared. All the five petitioners were declared successful. After declaring them successful in the said test, they were allocated Institution namely Acharya Narendra Dev Nagar...
Sushil Kumar and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-18-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)AWC764
B. Dikshit and O.P. Jain, JJ. 1. By this writ petition the petitioners have prayed for declaring that the proceedings for acquisition of plot Nos. 2256, 2256/1. 2257, 2259, 2264, 2266, 2269, 2270 and 2272 of village Mawana. Pargana and Tehsil Hastinapur, district Meerut initiated in pursuance of notification under Section 4 of Land Acquisition Act dated 30.9.1998 stood lapsed under Section 11 of the Act. The challenge is on the ground that the award wasnot made within a period of two years from the date of issue of notification under Section 6 of Land Acquisition Act (in short 'Act'). The petitioners have also prayed for issue of writ of mandamus to restrain the respondents from taking over possession of the disputed plots.2. The facts relevant for the purpose of resolving present controversy are that a notification for acquiring disputed land was issued under Section 4 of the Act on 30.9.1989. The acquisition was notified for construction of new market yard of Krishi Ulpadan Mandi Sam...
Dr. Ramesh Chandra Agarwal and Others Vs. District Judge, Hardoi and A ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-18-1998
Reported in: 1999(1)AWC864
Jagdish Bhalla, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the judgment and order dated 2.9.1987, passed by the District Judge, Hardoi, arising out of S.C.C. Revision No. 4 of 1987. The learned District Judge has allowed the revision of the defendant/opposite party No. 2, the judgment of the trial court has been quashed and the suit of the plaintiff has been dismissed.2. The premises in dispute was given on rent by Late Sirish Chandra Agarwal to defendant/opposite party No. 2. Sri Sirish Chandra Agarwal died during pendency of this writ petition. Thereafter, he was substituted by his legal heirs 1/1 to 1/9. The tenancy between the parties is not disputed in the light of the agreement acted upon between the parties. Initially, the rent was agreed to be Rs. 40 per month and the opposite party No. 2 had given an advance of Rs. 1.520 to be adjusted at the rate of Rs. 40 per month. After adjustment, it was agreed upon that the rent would be Rs. 50 per month and all the Government taxes wou...
Jagtar Singh Chopra Vs. Tirlok Chand
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-18-1998
Reported in: 1998(4)AWC65
Dev Kant Trivedi, J.1. This revision is directed against the judgment and decree dated 16th May, 1981 passed by the then IVth Addl. District Judge. Lucknow in S.C.C. Suit No. 8 of 1980, in exercise of the powers of Judge.Small Causes Court.2. It appears that the revisionist was a tenant of the ground floor portion of a house situate at 2 Sarvpalli, Mall Avenue, Lucknow. The landlord-opposite party filed a suit for ejectment on the ground of default In making payment of rent and he also prayed for the amount of outstanding rent, water tax, drainage tax and damages for use and occupation. The revisionist claimed that he was not under an obligation to pay the water and drainage taxes and that he had offered the rent in the month of November, 1979 which was refused by the landlord, that the revisionist claimed that he had deposited a sum of Rs. 2.240 as house tax which he was entitled to adjust, and that he was also entitled to the benefit of Section 20 sub-section (4) and he had made comp...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »