Allahabad Court September 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.
indraprastha Plastics (P.) Ltd. and anr. Vs. Collector, Allahabad and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-14-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)AWC2841
G.P. Mathur, J.1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has been filed for quashing the recovery certificate dated 10.7.2000 sent by the Executive Engineer. Electricity Distribution Division and also the order dated 16.1.2001 passed by Tehsildar Allahabad.2. The petitioner M/s. Indraprastha Plastics Private Limited is a private limited company duly registered under the Indian Companies Act. The petitioner No. 2Arun Kumar claims himself to be a shareholder of the company. It is averred in the writ petition that the petitioner has a unit over plot No. 977-A, Bamharaull, Tehsil Chail, Allahabad, which is lying closed since 1994. The Executive Engineer, Electricity Distribution Division, U.P. Power Corporation Limited sent a recovery certificate dated 10.7.2000 to the Collector, Allahabad for recovering a sum of Rs. 1,07,208 towards electricity dues from the petitioner No. 1. The Collector was seeking to recover the amount as arrears of land revenue. The premises situate over...
J.P. Sharma Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-14-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)AWC2942; [2001(91)FLR864]
G.P. Mathur, J.1. The question which requires consideration here is whether a person can claim pensionfor the same period from two separate and distinct employers.2. The petitioner was a practising advocate and on 16.9.1977, he joined as Additional District Judge in the U. P. Higher Judicial Service. His date of birth is 1.9.1933 and he would have attained the age of superannuation, which was then 58 years, on 31.8.1991. He applied for and was granted voluntary retirement on 31.12.1989 and, thereafter, joined as Member, Central Administrative Tribunal on 1.1.1990 from where he retired on 31.8.1995 after attaining the age of 62 years. Thereafter, he was appointed as Banking Ombudsman in the State of Bihar and worked on the said post till 31.8.1998.3. The petitioner took voluntary retirement from the U. P. Government Service one year and eight months before the scheduled date of his retirement which was 31.8.1991. He made a representation to U. P. Government that this period of 1 year an...
Shamshul Zama Vs. District Inspector of Schools, Chandauli and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-14-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)AWC2911; [2002(92)FLR482]; (2001)3UPLBEC2181
G.P. Mathur, J.1. The question which requires consideration here is whether a senior most teacher in the Lecturer's grade is entitled to be promoted as an ad hoc Principal of the Institution if he does not possess the minimum qualification prescribed for the said post.2. Shri Jiyut Prasad Yadav, who was the regular principal of the institution retired on 30.6.1999 after attaining the age of superannuation. The appellant Shamshul Zama, who holds a B.Sc. degree and a postgraduate diploma in Zoology, claimed that as he was the senior most teacher in the lecturer's grade, he was entitled to be promoted as ad hoc Principal of the Institution. Lalit Mohan Chaturvedi, respondent No. 4 refuted the claim of the appellant on the ground that as the appellant did not possess the prescribed minimum qualification, he could not be appointed as ad hoc Principal. The D.I.O.S. by his order dated 27.8.1999 directed the Committee of Management of the Institution to appoint respondent No. 4 itt the ad hoc ...
Chandrika Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-14-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ603
G.P. Mathur, J.1. Chandrika has preferred this appeal against his conviction under Sections 323/363/366 and 376, I.P.C. and sentence of 8 months R.I., 4 years R.I. 6 years R.I. and imprisonment for life imposed by Additional Sessions Judge, Gyanpur, district Varanasi by the judgment and order dated 14-6-1991 in S.T. No. 2 of 1990. All the sentences imposed upon the appellant were ordered to run concurrently.2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that at the relevant time PW 6 Smt. Prema Devi was working as Lady Warder in Gyanpur Jail. PW 2 Smt. Adesh Devi is her daughter, Smt. Adesh Devi had three daughters of which two are the victims of this unfortunate incident viz., PW 7 Km. Suman, aged about 6 years and Km. Deepmala, aged about 2 years. Km. Deepmala used to remain constantly ill. Mishri Lal who was the brother of the appellant Chandrika was confined in the Gyanpur Jail. One Indra Devi, resident of village Chhibiya P.S. Koirauna was also confined in Gyanpur Jail. The appellan...
Manni Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-14-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ1510
G.P. Mathur, J.1. Criminal Appeal No. 2736 of 1980 has been preferred by Manni and Criminal Appeal No. 61 of 1988 has been preferred by Buddhu against the judgment and order dated 24-10-1980 of IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Kanpur by which in S.T. No. 258 of 1979 and S.T. No. 267 of 1979 were decided. By the impugned judgment and order, Buddhu has been convicted under Section 302, I.P.C. while Manni has been convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34, I.P.C. They were both sentenced to imprisonment for life.2. The case of the prosecution as set forth in the F.I.R. and as unfolded in the evidence is that the appellants Manni and Buddhu are real brothers. About a month before the present incident, the wife of Buddhu had eloped with someone. Buddhu suspected that she had eloped with Jagannath and that Chhotkan alias Ram Prasad (deceased) who was his friend had helped him in enticing' away his wife. The incident took place at about 12 a.m. on 4-5-1979 when the deceased Chhotkan was...
Girja Prasad Rai and ors. Vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation, Ghazip ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-13-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)AWC2867
R.H. Zaidi, J.1. By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioners pray for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the orders dated 11.4.1975 passed by the Consolidation Officer, 3.2.1976 passed by the Settlement Officer Consolidation and 18.12.1980 passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Ghazipur.2. Dispute relates to plot No. 134 measuring area 2 bighas, 7 biswas and 7 biswansis, for short, the plot in dispute, situated at village Dullahpur, pargana Zamania, district Ghazipur. In the basic year, the name of respondent No. 4 was recorded over the plot in dispute in the revenue papers as sirdar. Petitioners filed an objection claiming that the plot in dispute was their ancestral property. It was the sir land of which the petitioner have become bhumidhar after enforcement of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act; that the plot in dispute was situated on the other side of the river Ganges....
thepar Singh Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-13-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ612
S.K. Agarwal, J. 1. This appeal arises from a judgment and order dated 28-10-1995 passed by Sri R.P. Singh, Sessions Judge, Tehri Garhwal in S.T. No. 37 of 1994 whereby he convicted the appellant under Section 376 I.P.C. and sentenced him to 7 years' R.I. and a fine of Rs. 3,000/-. In default of payment of fine a further sentence to 2 years' R.I. was also imposed on the appellant.2. In brief the prosecution story is as under :On 12-11-1993 Km. Kalini (P.W. 4), daughter of Sunder Singh alias Moosa Singh reported to have pain in her abdomen. She was taken to a nurse by P.W. 1 Bhura Singh and P.W. 2 Kamal Singh. They were told by the nurse that she is carrying a child of 5-6 months in her womb and the pain is due to foetal movements and not for any other reason. The girl was brought back by these witnesses to her father's place. On an enquiry made from her she disclosed that in the month of Asarh in the evening while her parents were away from the house and she was carrying Dhaan for thra...
Pakhandu and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-13-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ1210
J.C. Gupta, J.1. Doubting the correctness of a Single Judge decision in the case of Moahabbat Ali v. State of U.P. reported in 1985 UP Cri R 264 : (1984 All LJ NOC 31), Hon'ble S. Harkauli, J. has referred the following question for consideration by a larger Bench :Whether the view taken in the aforesaid case of Mohabbat Ali is correct ?2. By the order of the Hon'ble the Chief Justice, the matter has been assigned to this Bench.3. Before we start our discussion on the aforesaid question, we may first put in brief facts of this case.4. On an application moved by Smt. Vimala Devi, the Magistrate in exercise of powers under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C. directed the police to register the case and investigate the same. Consequently an F.I.R. under Sections 467/468/419/420/364 and 392, I.P.C. was registered and investigated. On completion of investigation, police forwarded a final report to the Court of the concerned Magistrate. Feeling aggrieved, the complainant Smt. Vimala Devi filed objection...
Vidya Singh Vs. Programme Support Unit Foundation and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-12-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)AWC2916
Janardan Sahal, J.1. Theapplicant in these revisions Smt. Vidya Singh is the landlord of a premises in Varanasi, in the tenancy of opposite party M/s. Programme Support Unit Foundation, which is said to have been running a project for health and sanitation in rural areas sponsored and financed by the Dutch Government. A suit for recovery of rent and damages was filed by the applicant against the opposite party in the Court of District Judge. Varanasi exercising power of Small Cause Court alleging that the Dutch Government has cancelled the project on account of which the business ofthe opposite party has been closed and the opposite party is saddled with liability of paying the salary of its employees apart from rent, etc., due to the applicant. The plaintiff says that apart from moveable properties, which have been mentioned in the plaint in Varanasi and at the Head Office of the Opposite Party at Lucknow, there is no other property available with the opposite party to clear off its d...
Milap Chandra JaIn Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-12-2001
Reported in: 2001(4)AWC2951
B.K. Rathi, J. 1. By means of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has made a request that the definition of 'standard rent' as given in Section 3 (k) (wrongly mentioned in the petition as 2 (k)) and corresponding provisions of Sections 4 (2), 5, 6, 8 and 9 of U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (U. P. Act No. XIII of 1972), be declared ultra vires of the Constitution of India. It is further prayed that it may be declared that the standard rent payable for building is the prevailing market rent relating to similar buildings exempted from the operation of the Act : that it be further declared that on failure to arrive at a settlement of the standard rent, the same be determined by the District Magistrate on the basis of the criterion as may be laid down in this petition. The last prayer made is that the respondent No. 1, i.e., State of U. P. and Food and Civil Supply Department of State of U. P. be directed t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »