Allahabad Court July 1999 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.
Dr. Smt. Prabha Malhotra and ors. Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-07-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ549
ORDERG.P. Mathur, J. 1. This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by Dr. Smt. Prabha Malhotra. Dr. Narendra Malhotra, Dr. Rajendra Malhotra and Dr. Smt. Jaijit Malhotra for quashing the proceedings of case Crime No. 39 of 1990 under Section 269 IPC pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate (City), Agra.2. The petition was admitted on 29-8-91 and further proceedings in the trial Court were stayed. On the same day, State was given four weeks time to file counter affidavit. However till today neither any counter affidavit has been filed nor anyone has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant P.K. Anand. The Court has, therefore, to proceed on the footing that the averments made in the affidavit are correct.3. P. K. Anand lodged a F.I.R. on 27-1-90 at P.S. Nai Ki Mandi alleging that his wife Smt. Neelam aged about 38 years had four issues. When she became pregnant again she got herself examined in Malhotra Nursing and Maternity Home (hereinafter referred to as the Nurs...
Raj Karan Singh Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-07-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ555
B.K. Sharma, J. 1. This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 23-11-1981 passed by Sri B. D. Agarwal, the then Sessions Judge, Kanpur in S.T. No. 202 (M) of 1981, State v. Raj Karan Singh, whereby he convicted the accused-appellant of the offence under Section 304A, IPC and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for a period of one and half year.2. The prosecution story was that the accused-appellant Raj Kiran Singh, constable Arun Kumar deceased, constables Narendra Kumar injured and Mohd. Ahmad injured were posted in the police station, Collectorganj, Kanpur, that Constable Narendra Kumar injured was Police Mess Clerk in the days of occurrence, that sugar pertaining to the quota of March, 1981 was given to one Constable Raj Karan Singh Yadav due to 13th day's ceremony consequent upon the death of his father, that on March 10, 1981 in the morning the accused appellant constable Raj Karan Singh was on Sentry duty at the police station, that Musket No. 58888 had been issued to him be...
Kurt O John Shoe Components (i) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-07-1999
Reported in: 1999(114)ELT804(All)
M.C. Agarwal, J.1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner challenges an order dated 16-4-1999 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Customs and Central Excise, Ghaziabad whereby on an application moved by the petitioner under the proviso to Section 35F of the Central Excise Act, 1944 for dispensing with the condition of pre-deposit of adjudicated dues, the Commissioner directed the petitioner to deposit Rs. 22 lacs only. The petitioner also challenges the letter of the Superintendent (Appeals) dated 9-6-1999 by which the petitioner's request for modification of the aforesaid order was rejected.2. I have heard Sri Sunil Ambwani, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Surya Prakash, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. No counter affidavit was proposed to be filed and the petitioner has been heard finally at the admission stage.3. The petitioner is a manufacturer of shoe components which are sold to manufacturers of shoes who used tho...
MasuryadIn and Others Vs. Special Judge (E.O.), Allahabad and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-06-1999
Reported in: 1999(3)AWC2491
Yatindra Singh, J.1. This writ petition raises a question about the status of a tenant (of a portion of a house) of a person 'A' during the period when he (the person 'A') had transferred the entire house to the third party 'B1 and he himself (the person 'A') became the tenant of his transferee 'B'. Will the tenant continue to be the tenant of that person 'A' or become the tenant of his transferee 'B'? What will happen if the transferee 'B' re-transfers the house to the person 'A'? Does it mean that the person 'A' continued to be the landlord of the tenant during the period he had transferred the house to the third party 'B'? These questions arise in the following background.FACTS 2. Petitioners are the owners of the House No. 636, Bahadurgang, Allahabad (hereinafter referred to asthe House). There is a shop in this house, which was let out to one Nafis Ahmad (respondent No. 3) at the rate of Rs. 90 per month in 1967. Nafls Ahmad has died during the pendency of the writ petition and is...
Purushottam Das Agarwal Vs. District Inspector of Schools, Allahabad a ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-06-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)AWC2851; (1999)2UPLBEC1609
D.K. Seth, J.1. The petitioner was promoted to the post of lecturer on account of his being the seniormost L.T. Grade teacher in the promotion quota, but his salary for the post of lecturer was not paid to him on the ground that the petitioner did not possess the requisite qualification. By virtue of an interim order dated 5th December. 1997, it is contended by Mr. A. K. Goyal, that the petitioner is being paid the pay in the Lecturer's Grade. In the counter-affidavit, it has been pointed out that the petitioner does not possess the requisite qualification as provided in Appendix A to the regulations framed under the U. P. Intermediate Education Act. 1921, in reference to Regulation 1, Chapter II thereof.2. Mr. K. R. Singh, learned standing counsel has referred to paragraph 5 of the counter-affidavit where such a stand has been taken. Mr. Goyal on the other hand refers to the appendix and points out that for the post of lecturer, the requisite qualification is M.A. in Hindi and B.A.wit...
Sheetla Prasad Tiwari Vs. General Manager, Kanpur Electricity Supply U ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-06-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)AWC2839; (2000)ILLJ284All; (1999)2UPLBEC1554
D. K. Seth, J.1. The judgment was dictated in open Court on 28th January. 1999. At the time of correction of the said judgment, it appeared that there were some grey areas which needed clarification. By order dated 19th February, 1999, an opportunity was given to both the counsel to address the Court on the question of such clarification proposed to be made in the judgment. Mr. S. P. Mehrotra, learned counsel for respondents had expressed his regret that he could not draw the attention of the Court to the fact that the case of the petitioner was not governed by the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act. 1952 (E.P.F. for short) on which the decision was rendered. On account of incorrect instruction, he could not point out that it was Provident Fund Act. 1925 (G.P.F. for short) under which the case was governed. He further pointed out that the pleadings made in the writ petition was not clear. The petition did not disclose the correct situation. which was another fact...
State of U.P. Vs. Pramod Kumar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-06-1999
Reported in: 1999CriLJ4677
Bhagwan Din, J.1. The acquittal of the respondent, Pramod Kumar in a case under Section 18/20 of the N.D.P.S. Act (the Act for convenience), necessitated the filing of this appeal by the State of U.P. assailing the judgment and order dated 26-3-1996 passed by the III Addl. Sessions Judge, Hamirpur holding the respondent not guilty of the offence punishable under Section 18/20 of the Act.2. The facts, which had bearing on the decision of the trial Court briefly stated are, that on 1-10-1992 at about 1.00 a.m. in the dead hours of the night Sri Vishram Singh the S.O. of P.S. Kotwali, Hamirpur with the police party comprised of Sub Inspector Surendra Singh, Head Constable, IndraPal Singh, Constable, Raj Kumar Singh and constable, Kamlesh Kumar Awasthi, was on law and order duty during Ram Lila festival in the city of Hamirpur. It is stated that when the police party on a jeep driven by the Constable, Suresh Singh reached near Laxmi Park, Sri Vishram Singh saw the respondent coming from op...
Ragho Prasad Vs. Special Judge/Additional District Judge and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-05-1999
Reported in: 1999(3)AWC2420
O.P. Garg, J.1. The core question for consideration and determination involved in the present writ petition is whether a notification made by the State Government to declare a particular community as a backward class would have retrospective operation to relate back to the date of election of the petitioner who was elected as Pradhan against reserved seat of Gram Panchayat, Jangal Ahmad Ali Shah Vikas Khand Chargawan, Tahsil Sadar, district Gorakhpur. This controversy has come up before this Court in the context of the following facts.2. The seat of Pradhan for Gram Panchayat Jangal Ahmad Ali Shah Vikas Khand Chargawan. Tahsil Sadar, district Gorakhpur, was reserved for backward class male candidate. The election was scheduled to be held for the said post on 7.4.1995 under the provisions of Uttar Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act. 1947. (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') as well as Rules framed thereunder. The petitioner filed his nomination along with a certificate wherein he was indicate...
Attar Singh Vs. Executive Officer, Municipal Board and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-05-1999
Reported in: 1999(3)AWC2497
D.K. Seth, J.1. The petitioner's service was dispensed with in exercise of Rule 56 of Financial Hand Book, Vol. II, Part II by an order dated 20th July, 1990 containing in Annexure-1 to the writ petition. Mr. A.R. Dubey, learned counsel for the petitioner has assailed the said order on the ground that by reason of the Government Order dated 21st December, 1989, such dispensation of service could be made under the said rule only in accordance with theprocedure laid down therein. According to him, it could be done only after obtaining prior approval of the Commissioner. In the present case, according to him no such approval has been obtained.2. Mr. P.K. Singhal appearing with Mr. Murlidhar learned counsel for the respondents opposes Mr. Dubey. According to Mr. Murlidhar, there is nothing on record to show that the prior approval of the Commissioner was obtained. But however, according to him, the Government Order is not mandatory and, therefore, no observance thereof cannot vitiate the i...
Jaipal Singh Vs. Iind Additional District Judge and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-05-1999
Reported in: 1999(3)AWC2418
Yatindra Singh, J. 1. Is a nominee of the landlord, under Section 17 of U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act. 1972 (the Act for short), a person aggrieved? Can he file a revision under Section 18 of the Act? These are the questions involved in the present writ petition. This is how they arise.FACTS 2. Sri Banwarilal, respondent No. 4 was the landlord of the shop in question. One Sunder Prakash was tenant of the same. Landlord filed a suit for ejectment against the tenant. It was decreed. The landlord had filed an application for release of the shop on 6.8.1979 on the ground that shop is likely to fall vacant. The tenant was ejected and vacancy occurred in the shop in question. Applications for allotment were also filed : Pramod Kumar (respondent No. 3) filed one application on 28.8.1979 ; Jaipal Singh (petitioner) filed another application on 29.8.1979. The landlord did not press his application for release ; it was dismissed as not pressed on 29.2.1980....