Allahabad Court August 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.
Ganesh Shanker Pandey and Co. Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)AWC2889
Sudhir Narain, J.1. The applicant has prayed for appointment of an arbitrator regarding the dispute and differences arising out of the contract between the applicant and the opposite parties.2. The facts in brief are that the opposite parties vide its notification dated 10.4.1995 invited sealed bids from the individual/ association of persons for conversion of 35 kms. long Mathura (Jn.) Achhnera (ex.) section from metre gauge to broad gauge on Build Own Lease Transfer (hereinafter referred to as (BOLT) basis. The bids were to be opened on 29.5.1995 in the office of Chief Administrative Officer, Construction North-East Railway. Gorakhpur, The applicant and another firm submitted their bid documents for doing the aforesaid work. The bids were subject to terms and conditions mentioned in the General Conditions of Contract Regulation and instruction for tenders and these terms were to form part of the contract. The bids were opened. The Chief Engineer (Construction) West communicated to th...
J.S.P. Singh Vs. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)AWC2992; (2000)1UPLBEC548
M. Katju and Krishna Kumar, JJ.1. This writ petition has been filed against the Impugned order dated 5.9.95, Annexure-3 to the petition communicating the adverse entry to the petitioner for the year 1994-95 and also to quash the D.O. dated 30.8.95. The petitioner has further prayed for quashing the orders dated 29.1.1996 and 8.10.96 by which the petitioner's representations have been rejected.2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.3. The petitioner was appointed in U. P. Judicial Service in 1972, He was promoted as Chief Judicial Magistrate in 1981 and as Additional District Judge in July, 1985. It is alleged in para 2 of the writ petition that the petitioner discharged his duties with utmost sense of responsibility, integrity and honesty and at no point of time, the petitioner was communicated any adverse entry.In the year 1993 when the petitioner was posted as Addl. Distt Judge, Palzabad, one advocate O. P. Dwivedi criminally assaulted Sri R. L. Ojha the Addl. District Judge III, F...
Ranno Devi Vs. Board of Revenue and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)AWC2953
Sudhir Narain, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the order of Board of Revenue dated 2.11.1995 whereby it allowed the appeal and set aside the order passed by the Additional Commissioner.2. The dispute relates to the defendants inter se. Briefly stated, the facts are that Bhairo Lal Sahi, Batuk Lal Sahi and Anand Bhairo Lal Sahi filed suit No. 19 of 1962 against twosets of defendants. One Smt. Kallo Devi petitioner (defendant No. 1 in the suit) and the second set Shri Singh. Rameshwar Singh and Saklu Singh, defendant Nos. 2 to 4 alleging therein that the land in dispute was their khudkasht land before the date of vesting and after abolition of Zamindari, they became bhumidhars. It was alleged that defendant No. 1 (petitioner) was engaged by the plaintiffs in year 1367F to look after the crops over the disputed land for one year but she managed to get her name recorded in the revenue papers and took possession in collusion with the Lekhpal over the disputed land in 1367F and h...
Ram NaraIn Singh, Advocate Vs. Special Judge, E.C. Act/Addl. District ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)AWC3016
J.C. Gupta, J. 1. Heard Sri Ravi Kant for the petitioner and Sri A. N. Sinha assisted by Sri Ved Byas Mishra for landlady, respondent No. 3.2. This is tenant's writ petition.3. The dispute relates to a portion in the ground floor of the building known as 'Conniston', situated at Tallital. Nainltal. Petitioner is undisputedly a tenant in the same. Respondent No. 3, the landlady, in the year 1984 moved applications for the release of that portion as well as of another portion in the ground floor which was in occupation of another tenant. Smt. Kushum Lata Kukreti alleging that she bona fide required the entire ground floor accommodation for her personal use as well as of her family members. It was her case that her husband is a retired Naval Officer and he and the family were used to a decent and comfortable living. Before the retirement of her husband, she with a view to settle down at Nainital, along with her sister Smt. Anil Bisht and brother Sardar Amarjeet Singh respondent Nos. 4 and...
Ram Ashis and Another Vs. District Judge, Deoria and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)AWC3024
D.K. Seth, J. 1. Leave is granted to convert the petition into one under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.2. The order dated 24th July, 1999 passed by the learned District Judge. Deoria in Civil Appeal No. Ml of 1999 affirming the order dated 21st July. 1999 passed by the learned Civil Judge. (Senior Division), Deoria in Original Suit No. 33 of 1997 has since been challenged in this writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Initially on 6th February, 1997 notices were Issued in connection with the application for temporary injunction filed by the plaintiff. On 17th February, 1997 in presence of the defendants No. 2. 3, and 4, ad interim injunction was granted. Subsequently defendant Nos. 1, 2 and 5 had filed an application under Order XXXIX, Rule 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The same was allowed by order dated 21st July, 1999 by the Civil Judge (Senior Division). Deoria. The interim order dated 17th February. 1997 was vacated as against the defendant No...
Nand Kishore Gosaeen and Others Vs. State of U. P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)AWC3085
Sudhir Narain, J. 1. The petitioners have challenged the validity of Section 2(bb) of U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting. Rent and Eviction) Act. 1972 (in short the Act) which was inserted by U. P. Amending Act No. 5 of 1995.2. The petitioners are tenants of Shri Krishna Janarn Asthan Sewa Sansthan, respondent No. 2, registered under the Societies Registration Act. 1860. It filed 14 suits in the year 1988 for ejectment of the petitioners after terminating their tenancy. During the pendency of the suit the Uttar Pradesh Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent andEviction) Amendment Ordinance, 1994 was promulgated whereby clause (bb) was added under subsection (i) of Section 2 of the Act. Section 2 of the Act grants exemption to certain buildings from operation of the Act. In view of insertion of clause (bb), the buildings belonging to or vested in a public charitable or public religious institutions shall also be excluded. Respondent No. 2 filed application for amendment of the...
In Re : Harish Agarwal
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)AWC3138
Sudhir Narain, J. 1. The petitioner seeks grant of probate/letters of administration to him with the copy of the Will dated 31.1.1990 annexed with it to the extent of l/3rd share in the property of the testator Shri Raghunath Prasad Agarwal.2. The facts in brief are that Raghunath Prasad Agarwal executed his last Will on 31.1.1990 whereby he bequeathed his property C-15, Surya Nagar, Ghaziabad to his wife and three sons. He expired on 25.9.1995. The petitioner filed this petition on 1st February, 1997 claiming l/3rd share in the property. The notices were issued to his widow, two sons and two daughters. The petition has been opposed by his widow Smt. Sushila Agarwal and two sons, namely, Sri Satish Kumar Agarwal and Sri Rajesh Agarwal. They have admitted the execution of the Will but their objection is that the property was given exclusively to the widow of the testator and only after her death. the property in question was to be devolved on three sons in equal shares. On the contentio...
Smt. Rekha Mehrotra Vs. Xiith Addl. District Judge, Kanpur Nagar and O ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)AWC3515A
Sudhir Narain, J. 1. This writ petition is directed against the order of the Prescribed Authority dated 6.9.1997 releasing the disputed accommodation in favour of the landlord-respondent No. 3 under Section 21 (1A) of U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (in short the Act) and the order of the Appellate Authority, respondent No. 1, dated 4.4.1998 dismissing the appeal against the aforesaid order.2. The facts, in brief, are that respondent No. 3 filed an application for release of the disputed accommodation on the allegation that he was employed in Indian Air Force in the Flying (Pilot) Branch. He retired from service on 31st August. 1994 in the rank of Group Captain from Western Air Command. Subroto Park, New Delhi. He was occupying a Government quarter which he had to vacate prior to his retirement. He wanted to settle in his home town Kanpur in the disputed house of which the petitioner is tenant.3. The application was opposed by the petitioner. ...
Smt. Brahma Devi and Others Vs. Vth Addl. District Judge and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-17-1999
Reported in: 1999(4)AWC3444
D. K. Seth, J.1. The order dated April 29, 1999 passed in Civil Misc. Appeal No. 85 of 1997 passed by the Additional District Judge. Vth Court, Etawah, affirming the order dated October 15, 1997, passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), 1st Court, Etawah in SCC Suit No. 4 of 1980 has since been challenged.2. Mr. K. M. Misnra, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that by an order dated August 30, 1997, an application for substitutionfiled by Avinash Chandra Saxena in the place and stead of Prakash Chandra Saxena was dismissed. According to him, the order is revisable. But the opposite party had filed an application for review of the order dated August 30. 1997. The said review application was allowed by the learned trial court by the Impugned order dated October 15, 1997, since been affirmed on appeal by order dated April 29, 1999. According to him, the trial court could not have assumed Jurisdiction to review the said order after having rejected the application fo...
Shokat Ali and Others Vs. Vith Addl. District Judge, Bulandshahr and A ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-16-1999
Reported in: 2000(3)AWC2227
D. K. Seth. J.1. The order dated 22nd February. 1992, passed by the Additional District Judge, VIIIth Court, Bulandshahr passed in Misc. Case No. 1 of 1992, has been challenged. Mr. Vishnu Sahai, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the appeal was decided on merit without hearing the counsel for the appellant who was absent on the date fixed for hearing. Since Order XLI. Rule 17, sub-rule (2), Explanation provides that nothing in sub-rule (1), shall be construed to empower the Court to dismiss an appeal on merits in the absence of the appellant or its counsel, therefore, even if the appeal was dismissed on merit, yet it was in fact an order under Order XLI. Rule 17, dismissing the appeal in default for all practical purposes. Therefore, the same could have been restored under Order XLI. Rule 19. only after showing sufficient cause for non-appearance of the appellant. In the present case, the application was an application under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. In...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »