Allahabad Court May 2000 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.
Chandra Pal Singh Vs. Prescribed Authority/1st Additional Civil Judge ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-10-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)AWC1982
Sudhir Narain, J. 1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 22.7.1996 passed by the Prescribed Authority, respondent No. 1 allowing the application filed by the landlord-respondent No. 2 for delivery of possession of the disputed shop.2. Priya Dutt, respondent No. 2, the landlord of the shop in dispute filed an application under Section 21 (1) (a) of U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act. 1972 (in short the Act) for release of the disputed shop against the petitioner-tenant with the allegations that he requires the disputed shop bona fide. The petitioner entered into compromise on 16.2.1985 wherein he admitted that the landlord-respondent No. 2 bona fide needs the disputed shop for the purpose of business but he stated that he may be permitted to continue to carry on business for life as he was aged about 62 years and was a patient of diabetes and blood pressure. There was a further clausein the compromise that in case the tenant sub-lets ...
Mrs. Pramila Rawat Vs. District Judge, Lucknow and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-10-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)AWC1938; [2000(87)FLR134]
Pradeep Kant, J.1. The petitioner who was appointed on the post of class-IV employee after selection and fulfilling the necessary formalities vide appointment order dated 4th June, 1993, has approached this Court claiming the relief of continuous service being allowed to her and for consideration of her case for regularizatlon/absorptlon in service. The third and very important question, which has been raised in the petition, is regarding the grant of maternity leave to the petitioner.2. The petitioner was appointed on ad hoc basis by the District Judge. Lucknow and immediately on the receipt of her appointment letter dated 4th June, 1993 she was permitted to join her duties. The appointment letter specifically mentioned that service of the petitioner was only for three months or tilt regular selection is made whichever is earlier. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was appointed against a regular post in a clear vacancy which was filled through select...
Life Insurance Corporation of India Vs. Advani and Company and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-10-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)AWC2054
Sudhir Narain, J. 1. This writ petition is directed against the order of the appellate authority, respondent No. 3, whereby the appeal was allowed and the application filed by the petitioner under Section 5 of Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was rejected.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that respondent No. 1 was tenant in the disputed premises No. 16/98 Mahatma Gandhi Marg, Kanpur. The petitioner entered into an agreement with respondent No. 1 on 6th March, 1965, whereby it was agreed that the petitioner will give to respondent No. 1 one shop after its construction having floor area of about 1113 sq. ft. at monthly rent of Rs. 250 after the tenant vacates the premises under its occupation. It was further agreed that the tenancy of respondent No. 1 shall continue in respect of such newly constructed shop without any break and it shall be entitled to all rights that were available to a tenant of any pre-1951 c...
Pratap Singh Vs. Ixth Additional District Judge, Fatehpur and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-10-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)AWC1995
O. P. Garg, J.1. The controversy canvassed in the present writ petition lies in very narrow compass. It is an admitted fact that one Brij Rani Kakkar was owner/landlady of house No. 3 situate in Mohalla Katra Abdul Gani in town Fatehpur. The petitioner undoubtedly was earlier her tenant in a portion of the said house at a monthly rent of Re. 165. Smt. Brij Rani Kakkar, the original owner landlady sold the house in question in favour of Smt. Prema Awasthi-respondent No. 3 through a registered sale deed dated 15.12.1988. Subsequently, she filed a S.C.C. Suit No. 3 of 1991 against the present petitioner for his eviction from the tenanted accommodation on the ground that he has committed defaultin payment of arrears of rent in spite of service of the notice of demand and quit. Besides the relief of ejectment, arrears of rent and pendente lite mesne profits have also been claimed. The defendant-petitioner denied the title of the plaintiff-respondent No. 3 as well as relationship of landlady...
Mitthan Lal Gupta Vs. District Magistrate, Etah and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-10-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)AWC2019
G. P. Mathur, J.1. The petitioner is a petty diesel dealer and holds a licence under U. P. High Speed Diesel Oil and Light Diesel Oil (Maintenance of Supplies and Distribution) Order. 1981 (hereinafter referred to as 1981 Control Order) for retail sale of diesel. He is a 'dealer' as defined in clause 2 (d) of the Control Order. A sample of diesel was taken from his business premises by an inspection team which consisted of a Sub-Divisional Magistrate, a Supply inspector and some other employees of the supply department on 22.12.1998. A notice dated 12.8.1999 was served upon him stating that the sample taken from his business premises on 12.8.1998 was analysed by Forensic Science Laboratory. Agra, which had submitted a report that the sample did not conform to the standards fixed by the indian Standards institution and was found to be adulterated with kerosene. He was required to show cause why his licence may not be cancelled on the aforesaid ground. The petitioner claims that he gave ...
Niraj Upadhyaya and Others Vs. High Court of Judicature at Allahabad a ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-10-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)AWC2108; (2000)2UPLBEC1758
S. R. Singh, J.1. This cluster of five writ petitions proceeds from selection to the Uttar Pradesh Higher Judicial Service (In short the 'service') pertaining to the recruitment years 1992-1994 held pursuant to an advertisement issued in June, 1996 thereby inviting applications for recruitment against 19 vacancies in the service in the pay scale of Rs. 4,500-5,700 attended with admissible allowances. According to the advertisement. 10 vacancies were earmarked for general candidates, four for Scheduled Castes and five for O.B.C. (Other Backward Classes). The advertisement encapsulated a clause that there might be 'variance' in the number of vacancies without prior notice.2. The petitioners appeared in the written examination as also in the interview, which followed the written examination. The names of the petitioners glow in the select list prepared under sub-rule (4) of Rule 18 Of the U. P. Higher Judicial Service Rules. 1975 (hereinafter referred to In the abbreviated form as the 'Ru...
Ch. Badri Dass (Decd.) Through L.Rs. Vs. Additional District Judge, De ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-10-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)AWC2229
Sudhir Narain, J.1. The petitioner has challenged the Judgment of the trial court dated 23.11.1978, dismissing the suit filed by him. Against the Judgment of the trial court, the petitioner preferred a revision and the learned revisional court vide its order dated 14.2.1983. dismissed the revision against the petitioner. The petitioner filed a S.C.C. Suit No. 39 of 1974 on 9.2.1974, for recovery of Rs. 831.41p. as arrears of rent, ejectment and damages with the allegations that respondent No. 3 was tenant in the disputed premises at the rate of Rs. 73.13p. per month. However, the rent being not paid since 1.9,1972, a notice dated 29.5.1973, was sent to him but inspite of the service of the notice, the rent was not paid and, therefore, he was liable for evictionon the ground mentioned under Section 20(2) (a) of U. P. Act No. XIII of 1972. (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The respondent-tenant filed written statement and claimed benefit of the deposit having been made by him under...
Ramji Lal Varshney and Another Vs. Additional District Judge, Aligarh ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-10-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)AWC2306
Sudhir Narain, J. 1. This writ petition is directed against the order passed by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer declaring the disputed accommodation as vacant on 30.4.1981 and thereafter rejecting the application of the landlord-petitioners for the release of the disputed accommodation on 10.10.1983, and allotting the same to respondent No. 3, on 19,10.1983 and the order of the revisional authority dated 20.7.1984, affirming the said order in revision.2. The dispute relates to House No. 1886, Mendu Gate. Hathras, district Aligarh. One Ram Babu and Smt. Bhu Devi were owners of this property. Har Prasad was a tenant of two rooms of first floor of the disputed house. Ram Babu and Smt, Bhu Devl filed Suit No. 98 of 1975 for recovery of arrears of rent, ejectment and damages against their tenant Har Prasad. The suit was decreed on 3.4.1979 and thereafter the landlords obtained possession of the portion in occupation of their tenant Har Prasad. Klshan Slngh, respondent No. 3 filed an a...
Swatantra Kumar Singh Vs. Gorakhpur Kshetriya GramIn Bank and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-10-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)AWC2354; (2000)3UPLBEC2024
D.K. Seth, J.1. This appeal was preferred against the Judgment and decree dated August 20, 1990 passed by the learned Additional Civil Judge, Gorakhpur in Civil Appeal No. 147 of 1987 reversing the Judgment and decree dated April 8, 1987 passed by Additional Munsif, 7th Court, Gorakhpur in Original Suit No. 575 of 1983. It was decreed and then on appeal it was remanded and thereafter, the said order dated April 8. 1987 passed decreeing the suit. The appeal was allowed only on the question of maintainability on the ground that it was barred under Section 6 of the U. P. Public Services (Tribunal) Act, 1976.2. Mr. Ashok Bhushan, learned counsel for the appellant had contended that an employee under the Regional Rural Bank is not a public servant within the meaning of Section 2 (b) of the U. P. Public Services (Tribunal) Act, 1976 and as such, the suit cannot be held to be barred in view of sub-section (1) of Section 6 of the said Act. Mr. Ashok Bhushan had relied on a decision in the case...
Anoop Baranwal thekma Vs. U. P. Public Service Commission
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-10-2000
Reported in: 2000(3)AWC2347; (2000)2UPLBEC1556
M. Katju and D. R. Chaudhary, JJ.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.2. The petitioner is challenging the advertisement for P.C.S. (J.) examination of the U. P. The main ground which he has alleged is that several persons who are doing LL.M. are also being permitted to appear in the aforesaid examination although they have not attended Courts for three years as lawyers. In our opinion, once a person is enrolled as a lawyer by the U. P. Bar Council, it should be deemed that he is practising from that date and three years' period will be counted from that date. It cannot be expected that for each person, enquiry should be conducted to ascertain whether a particular person is doing practice and attending the Court regularly asan Advocate. The only practicable view can be that the person should be enrolled by the Bar Council as an Advocate and as such. It will be deemed that he has attended the Court as practising lawyer from that date.3. With the aforesaid observations, the writ p...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »