Allahabad Court November 2001 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.
Narendra Tandon Vs. U.P State Road Transport Corporation and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-29-2001
Reported in: III(2002)ACC60
Sudhir Narain, J.1. This appeal is directed against the award dated 16.1.1996 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Aligarh for enhancing the amount of compensation.2. The claim petition was filed by the appellants with the allegations that Ram Narayan Tandon, Smt. Prabha Tandon, Km. Vidhu Tandon, Jugunu Kashyap were going to Haridwar from Kanpur by the Maruti Van No. UP 78/E-730 on 4.7.1992 at about 12.30 p.m. While they were crossing Cable factory near G.T. Road, U.P. Roadway Bus No. UPG-7494 dashed against the Maruti Van, which was rashly and negligently driven by the driver of the U.P. Roadways bus. Ram Narayan Tandon, Smt. Prabha Tandon, Km. Vidhu Tandon and Jugunu Kashyap received serious injuries and later on they expired. Sweta Tandon and Ram Narayan also received injuries.3. The appellants Sona Devi filed Claim Petition No. 320 of 1992 and Narendra Tandon and others have filed Claim Petition Nos. 321 and 322 of 1992. All the claim petitions were partly allowed by the T...
United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Vivek Kumar and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-29-2001
Reported in: II(2002)ACC407
Sudhir Narain, J.1. This appeal is directed against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Etawah dated 21.7.2001 awarding a sum of Rs. 1,10,600/- as compensation to the claimant-respondents.2. The claim petition was filed with the allegation that the claimant-respondent while he was going on foot, Motor Cycle No. UP 75 A 9250 dashed against him, which was driven rashly and negligently by the driver, due to which he suffered fracture on his right hand.3. The Tribunal found that the claimant-respondent had suffered injuries on right hand and he had 20% permanent disability. This order has been challenged by the Insurance Company.4. We have heard Mr. Ashok Kumar Srivastava, Learned Counsel for the appellant.5. The learned Counsel for the appellant contended that the amount awarded is excessive. The injuries suffered by the claimant was a simple injury and there was no justification to award this amount. The Doctor in his report indicated that there was a fracture in right elbow...
Narendra Tandon Vs. U.P. State Road Transport Corporation and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-29-2001
Reported in: 1(2002)ACC515
Sudhir Narain, J.1. This appeal is directed against the award dated 16.1.1996 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Aligarh for enhancing the amount of compensation.2. The claim petition was filed by the appellants with the allegations that Ram Narayan Tandon, Smt. Prabha Tandon, Km. Vidhu Tandon, Jugunu Kashyap were going to Haridwar from Kanpur by the Maruti Van No. UP 78/E-730 on 4,7.1992 at about 12.30 p.m. While they were crowing Cable factory near G.T. Road, U.P. Roadways Bus No, UFG-7494 dashed against the Maruti Van, which was rashly and negligtntly driven by the driver of the U.Pi Roadways Bus, Ram Narayan Tandon, Smt, Prabha Tandon, Km, Vidhu Tandon and Jugunu Kashyap received serious injuries and later on they expired. Sweta Tandon and Ram Narayan also received injuries.3. The appellants Sona Devi filed Claim Petition No. 320 of 1992 and Narendra Tandon and others have filed Claim Petition Nos. 321 and 322 of 1992. All the claim petitions were partly allowed by the T...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Shyama Devi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-29-2001
Reported in: 1(2002)ACC698
Sudhir Narain, J.1. This appeal is directed against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal awarding Rs. 1,50,000/- as compensation to the claimant respondents.2. The claim petition was filed with the allegations that on 19,10.1999 at about 2.15 p.m. when Suresh was returning to his house was crushed by Tata 407 No. U.P. 84/9306. He was aged about 14 years and was studying in Class VI. It was alleged that the accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the vehicle in question.3. The appellant contested the claim petition and it was contended that the accident was not caused by rash and negligent driving of the driver of the vehicle in question. It was further pleaded that the amount claimed was excessive. The Tribunal recorded a finding that, the accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the vehicle in question.4. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that the vehicle in question was not involved i...
Narendra Kumar Roongta Vs. Civil Judge (J.D.) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-28-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)AWC1
A.K. Yog, J. 1. Heard Sri Shashi Nandan on behalf of the petitioner. Perused the record. 2. An application forimpleadment was filed by thepetitioner Narendra Kumar Roongtain order to join the proceedings initiated by landlord of the non-residential accommodation inquestion (subject-matter of therelease application registered as P. A.Case No. 9 of 1989 Inder KumarKeriya v. Madan Lal Roongta, underSection 21 (1) (a) of U. P. UrbanBuildings (Regulation of Letting. Rentand Eviction) Act. 1972, U. P. Act No.XIII of 1972 (for short called theAct'). It is not disputed before theCourt by the learned counsel for thepetitioner that the tenant of theaccommodation in question was Madan Lal Roongta, respondent No. 3, who happens to be father of the present petitioner. 3. The impleadment application was filed by Narendra Kumar Roongta on the ground that his father Madan Lal Roongta has become a sanyasi, hence his civil death and accordingly, petitioner who happens to be his son, acquired tenancy rig...
Anoop Kumar Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-28-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)AWC115
Anjani Kumar, J.1. By means of the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs :(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondent to appoint the petitioner on the post of E.O.T. Crane operator : (ii) Issue any other writ, order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances ;(iii) award the cost of the petition to the petitioner.'2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that it isbecause of the criminal case thatinspite of his being selected, he has not been offered the appointment though it has been categorically admitted that the respondents have postponed/cancelled the process of selection, which might have resulted into appointment of the petitioner. It has nowhere been stated that It is postponement/cancellation of the appointment to the effect that there is a criminal case pending against the petitioner. Pet...
Suresh Chand Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Agra and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-28-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)AWC71; (2002)1UPLBEC570
Anjani Kumar, J.1. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned standing counsel representing the respondent No. 1 as well as Sri V. K. Singh, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 2 to 4.2. Petitioner being aggrieved by the Orders passed by the respondents, firstly punishing the petitioner after holding a regular disciplinary proceeding, which the petitioner has challenged before the appellate authority and appellate authority maintained the Order of punishing authority. Aggrieved by the Order of punishment and the Order of the appellate authority, the petitioner filed a revision before the revisional authority, which refused to interfere on the ground that the petitioner has been afforded full opportunity to defend himself, including the cross-examination of the witness, but he has failed to prove that he is not guilty of the charges levelled against him. The other ground taken before the revisional authority was that during the enquiry proceedings, the c...
Gyan Singh Parihar Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-28-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)AWC137; [2002(92)FLR406]; (2002)1UPLBEC607
D. S. Sinha and Lakshml Bihari,JJ. 1. Heard Shri Mukesh Kumar, holding brief of Shri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner, and Shri V.N. Agarwal, learned standing counsel of the State of U.P., representing the respondent Nos. 1 and 2. 2. By means of instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Shri Gyan Singh Parihar, an employee of the State of U.P., seeks to challenge the order dated 31st July, 1997, a copy whereof is Annexure-5 to the writ petition. 3. The impugned order purports to place the petitioner under suspension pending proposed disciplinary enquiry against him relating to serious charges of fraud, embezzlement, bribery, fabrication of record and datas. 4. Whether an employee should or should not continue in his office during the period of disciplinary enquiry is a matter to be assessed by the concerned authority and ordinarily, the Court should not interfere with the order unless it is demonstrated to be mala fide and wi...
Phulbasi Devi and ors. Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-28-2001
Reported in: I(2002)ACC635; 2002ACJ635; 2002(1)AWC161
Sudhir Naraln and R.B. Misra, JJ.1. The claimant-appellants have filed this appeal for enhancement of the amount of compensation.2. Briefly stated the facts are that on 3rd August, 1987 at about 9.15 a.m. Jagat Naraln Verma, husband of appellant No. 1 and father of appellants 2 to 5, while going on foot, was dashed by Truck No. U.T.E. 1327. He succumbed to his injuries. The claimant-appellants filed Claim Petition No. 75 of 1987 with the allegations that the accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of the truck in question.3. The claim petition was contested by the owner of the truck as well the insurance Company. They denied that the accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the truck. They further pleaded that the amount claimed was excessive.4. The Tribunal, on consideration of material evidence placed before it, came to the conclusion that the accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the truck and...
RamadIn Shakya Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-28-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)AWC208A; (2002)1UPLBEC294
R.R. Yadav, J.1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Manish Goyal at length, Perused the material available on record.2. By way of filing the present writ petition, the petitioner is seeking a relief, of quo warranto removing respondent No. 4 from the office of Pradhan of Village Panchayat, Barkhera, tehsil-Kayamganj, district Farrukhabad on the ground, inter alia, that respondent No. 4 was convicted in the year 1980 and as such, he was not eligible to contest the office of Pradhan. Since the respondent No. 4 was disqualified to contest the office of Pradhan, therefore, he is not entitled to hold the office of Pradhan and by issuing a writ of quo warranto he deserves to be non-seated.3. A pointed question was asked to the learned counsel for the petitioner about interpretation of Article 243O of the Constitution which reads thus :'243-O. Bar to interference by Courts in electoral matters.--Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution : (a) the validity of any law relatin...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »