Allahabad Court December 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.
Phulan Shah Alias Phullu Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-06-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ1520
ORDERU.S. Tripathi, J.1. This revision has been directed against the order dated 31-5-2001 passed by Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Budaun, on Sessions Trial No. 217 of 1990 under Section 302, I.P.C. not convicting the opposite party No. 2 Anar Singh for the offence punishable under Section 302, I.P.C.2. The prosecution story, briefly stated, was that on 11-4-1989 Nem Chand aged about 10-11 years son of the applicant had gone to graze goats along with Anar Singh opposite party No. 2 as usual. He did not return to his house on the said day. The goats also did not return. The applicant started searching for him, but he could not be traced. On 12-4-1989 when the applicant was again searching for his son along with some other persons of the village, the opposite party No. 2 and one Ram Kumar were jointly seen in a wheat crop. Observing the applicant and other persons Raj Kumar left the spot. The complainant and other enquired from Anar Singh, opposite party No. 2 about Nem Chand and his go...
Udaibir S/O Vidhya Nath and ors. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-06-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ1528
ORDERU.S. Tripathi, J.1. This revision has been directed against the order dated 14-8-2001, passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Court No. 5, Muzaffar Nagar, in S.T. No. 1304 of 1998, rejecting the applications (paper No. 117B and 126 B) of the applicants for recall of PWs Amar Pal, Yash Pal Singh, Chand Vir and Lokendra for re-examination.2. The facts giving rise to this revision are that the applicants are facing trial in S.T. No. 1304 of 1998 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307 and 302 I.P.C. relating to P.S. Sitawa, District Muzaffarnagar. During trial the prosecution examined Amar Pal, Chandvir, Yashpal and Lokendra as witnesses. Those witnesses were fully cross examined on behalf of the applicants. Thereafter some other witnesses were examined and the case was listed for arguments. At the stage of arguments the applicants moved applications paper No. 117B and 126 B for recalling the above witnesses on the ground that they had filed affidavit that they gave wrong evidence and the applica...
Gopal Yadav Vs. Special Judge (Anti-corruption) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-05-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)AWC487
A.K. Yog, J.1. Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Faheem Ahmad, advocate on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 and perused the record.2. Gopal Yadav, tenant-petitioner, has approached this Court by filing present writ petition under Article 226, Constitution of India, seeking to challenge judgment and order dated August 22, 2001 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition) passed in S.C.C. Revision No. 17 of 1999 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge, Varanasl, exercising revisional jurisdiction under Section 25, Provincial Small Causes Court Act, whereby the revision filed by landlord-plaintiff/respondent Nos. 2 and 3 was allowed the judgment and order dated 30.1.1999 passed by Judge Small Causes Court in J.S.C.C. Suit No. 18 of 1987, Naseem Ahmad v. Gopal Yadav, was modified and the said suit was dismissed to the extent of the relief sought by the plaintiff for evicting the tenant-petitioner (Annexure-4 to the writ petition).3. The tenant-petitioner...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Upendra Babu Dubey and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-05-2001
Reported in: 2002ACJ1842; 2002(1)AWC813
Sudhir Narain, J.1. This appeal is directed against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal dated 27.8.2001 awarding Rs. 3,00.000 as compensation to the claimant-respondents.2. The claim petition was filed by the claimant-respondents with the allegations that on 13.1.1999. Priyank Dubey along with Om Prakash Sharma and Vinay Kumar Shukla was going on foot from Ajitmal to Raharpur at about 11.15 a.m. and when he reached near the Police Station Ajitmal. Truck No. UAN 9514. dashed against him, with the result he sustained severe injuries resulting in his death.3. Sri Manish Goyal, learned counsel for the appellant has assailed the order of the Tribunal on the ground that the accident had taken place on 13.1.1999 and prior to it, the policy having been cancelled, the appellant was not liable to indemnify the insured under the provisions of Section 149 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (in short the Act).4. Briefly, the facts are that the owner of the vehicle gave a cheque dated 3.10....
Anand Mohan Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-05-2001
Reported in: II(2002)ACC260; 2002(1)AWC819
Sudhir Narain, J.1. The petitioner has, infer alia, sought a writ for declaring Section 129 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') as ultra vires. This section provides that every person driving or riding (otherwise than in a side car, on a motor cycle of any class or description) shall, while in a public place, wear a protective headgear of such description as may be specified by the State Government by rules made by it in this behalf, and different descriptions of headgears may be specified in such rules in relation to different circumstances or different class or description of motor cycles. This condition shall, however, not apply to a person who is a Sikh, if he is, while driving or riding on the motor cycle in a public place, wearing a turban. It also provides that it will be open to the State Government to provide for such exceptions, as it may think fit, by making rules. Section 129 of the Act reads as under :'129. Wearing of protective headgear,...
Shabbir Ahmad Through L.R. Vs. Assistant Director of Consolidation, Az ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-05-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)AWC102
R.H. Zaidi, J.1. By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner (Shabbir Ahmad since deceased, Parvez Ahmad his son) prays for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 27.5.1975 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Azamgarh, allowing the revision filed by Siraj, father of respondent Nos. 3 and 4, in the proceedings under Section 12 of the U. P. Consolidation of Holdings Act (for short 'the Act').2. The relevant facts of the case giving rise to the present petition, in brief, are that the dispute relates to Khata No. 3 of village Bhiti, Khata No. 12 of village Pardaha and Khata No. 4 of village Shahadatpur, Tehsil Mohammadabad Gohna, district Azamgarh. (hereinafter referred to as 'the land in dispute'). In the basic year, land in dispute was recorded in the name of Abdul Halim s/o Abdul Aziz (since deceased). As Abdul Halim was dead and villages where the land in dispute are situate...
Prem Kumari Sharma Vs. Raj Mani Dubey and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-05-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)AWC157
B.K. Rathi, J.1. This revision under Section 25, Provincial Small Causes Court Act has been preferred against the order, dated 6.8.2001 passed by the XVIII Additional District Judge/Small Causes Court, Allahabad in Suit No. 2/2001. by which he rejected the application of the revisionist 15-C under Order 1, Rule 10, C.P.C. for imp leading her as party. The facts of the case are as follows :'The opposite party Nos. 1 and 2 filed the above Suit No. 2 of 2001 against the opposite party Nos. 3 and 4 for eviction from the disputed building and for recovery of arrears of rent. The suit is pending in the Court of the Additional District Judge, who is exercising the powers of the Judge. Small Causes Court for this suit. The revisionist moved an application 15C under Order 1, Rule 10, C.P.C. for her impalement. It is alleged that she is daughter of Dr. Ishwari Prasad who was the owner and landlord of the property in dispute. He, in his life-time, on 29.10.1984 executed a registered Will of the p...
Laxmi Kant Upadhyay Vs. Dev Narayan Mishra
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-05-2001
Reported in: 2002(1)AWC196
B.K. Rathi, J.1. This first appeal has been filed against the judgment and decree dated 24.7.2001 passed by Additional District Judge, Allahabad, in Suit No. 38 of 1986 by which the suit for eviction from the shop in dispute and for recovery of arrears of rent has been decreed. At the time of admission of the appeal, Sri O.P. Gupta, learned counsel for the respondent appeared and raised a preliminary objection that this appeal is not maintainable. On this objection, it was ordered that the record be summoned and thereafter it be listed for admission. The record of the case has been received. 1 also called for the report from the District Judge, Allahabad, regarding the nature of the suit, who has sent a report that this suit was registered as regular suit in register Form No. 3 maintained for regular suits. The original register Form No. 3 maintained for regular suit in the court of District Judge in which it was registered has also been sent, which shows that this suit was registered ...
Dauji Pathak Vs. U.P. Financial Corporation and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-05-2001
Reported in: I(2003)BC250; (2002)1UPLBEC382
G.P. Mathur, J.1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed praying that proceedings for attachment dated 5.9.2001 and the auction held on 20.9.2001 be quashed and a writ of mandamus be issued directing respondent No. 2 not to confirm the auction proceedings conducted on 29.1.2001. A further prayer has been made that a writ of mandamus be issued to the respondents to show ho w the amount of Rs. one crore twelve lacs has been arrived at and how the property worth Rs. 24 lacs was sold for a sum of Rs. 8 lacs.2. We have heard Mr. Puneet Chaturvedi and Mr. B .B. Paul for the petitioner, Mr. Atiq Ahmad Khan for respondent No. 1, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos. 2 and 3 and have perused the record.3. It is averred in the writ petition that the petitioner is sole proprietor of M/s. Sudha Dychani Industries, dated in G-15 UPSIDC Industrial area, Site B, Mathura which was granted a loan of Rs. 15.87 lacs by the U.P. Financial Corporation (for short ...
Anoop Kumar Tiwari and ors. Vs. State of U.P. Through Secretary, Prima ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-05-2001
Reported in: (2002)1UPLBEC433
Anjani Kumar, J. 1. The prayer made by the petitioners in this petition is that though their education from schooling up to the passing of graduation degree of all from the State of U.P. but they have passed their B.P. Ed. and B. Ed. degree from the University, which is not situated in the State of U.P., but duly established by law. They have applied with regard to advertisement issued by the respondents for selection for short training appointment as Assistant Teacher in rural area primary school in the State of U.P. They alleged that their application forms have not been considered only on the ground that the advertisement contains the condition that only such candidate, who have passed their B. Ed/B.P. Ed. C.P. Ed./ D.P. Ed./L.T. degree either from a University situated in State of U.P. or from such institutions, which arc run and managed by the Government of U.P. alone are entitled to apply. The petitioners relied upon a Division Bench decision of this Court reported 'in (2000) 2 U...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »