Allahabad Court August 2002 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.
Pramod Kumar Srivastava Vs. Smt. Shiv Kumari Devi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-21-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)AWC3284
B. K. Rathi, J. 1. The opposite party filed a suit for eviction of the applicant from the shop in dispute of House No. 23/47/14A, Mohalla Allahpur, Allahabad and for recovery of arrears of rent. The suit has been decreed by the Judge, Small Causes Court (Additional District Judge, Court No. 11, Allahabad) by judgment and decree dated 13.5.2002. Aggrieved by it the present revision has been preferred. 2. I have heard Shri Pankaj Mithal, learned counsel for the revisionist and Shri M. K. Gupta for the opposite party No. 2 and perused the record. 3. It is contended that the suit was filed on the ground of default in payment of rent and it is admitted that U. P. Act No, XIII of 1972, is applicable to the premises in dispute ; That it is also not disputed that the said Act was applicable at the date of commencement of the tenancy of the applicant. That there is no allotment of the shop in favour of the applicant and, therefore, the agreement of the tenancy is illegal and void ab-initio and ...
Het Ram Vs. Dy. General Manager, U.P.S.R.T.C. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-21-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)AWC3293; (2002)3UPLBEC2781
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.2. The petitioner was working as Conductor in U. P. State Road Transport Corporation and was posted at Mathura. He was served with a charge-sheet dated 20.12.1989, for committing certain misconduct. After holding domestic enquiry, the charges against the petitioner were found to be proved. An order of dismissal dated 23.4.1990 was passed by the Regional Manager, U. P. S.R.T.C., Agra and was confirmed by the Deputy General Manager, U.P.S.R.T.C., Meerut Zone, Meerut, vide order dated 28.3.1991.3. This writ petition raises questions of facts which can be adjudicated only after appraisal of oral documentary evidence. This Court cannot sit in appeal over the punishment awarded by the disciplinary authorities and questions of facts can be decided by a labour court or by means of other machineries such as arbitration or conciliation as provided under the U. P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. As held in Chandrama Singh v. ...
Anil Kumar Sharma Vs. Smt. Meena Gangal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-21-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)AWC3283
B. K. Rathi, J. 1. The suit was filed by opposite party No. 1 against the defendant-applicant and opposite party No. 2 for eviction from the disputed shop and recovery of arrears of rent. The defendant-applicant filed written statement, but it was struck off under the provisions of Order XV, Rule 5. C.P.C. That order of rejection was maintained by the High Court. Thereafter, the suit has been decreed by the trial court. Against that decree, the present revision has been filed. 2. I have heard Shri M. K. Gupta, learned counsel for the defendant-applicant and Shri P. K. Jain, learned counsel for opposite party No. 1. 3. It is contended that the main ground taken in the suit is that U. P. Act No. XIII of 1972, is not applicable to the disputed shop and the applicant is liable to ejectment. The only allegation regarding it in the plaint as well as in the replication is that the shop in dispute is newly constructed. It is argued that it has nowhere been mentioned as to when it was construct...
Allahabad Bank Vs. Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-labour C ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-21-2002
Reported in: [2002(95)FLR218]; (2003)ILLJ315All; (2003)1UPLBEC210
S.N. Srivastava, J. 1. Present petition has been filed by the petitioner-Allahabad Bank Kidwai Nagar Branch Kanpur for the relief of quashing the notification dated January 29, 1988 by which the Government of India, Ministry of Labour had referred the dispute of respondents 2 to 5 as a composite reference to the Labour Court vide notification dated January 29, 1988. 2. The employer-petitioner, namely, Allahabad Bank has canvassed the validity of the said notification on the premises that all the persons mentioned in the reference although were the employees of Allahabad Bank, were serving in different branches and the period of cause of action i.e. the date of termination in each case was distinct from each other. The learned counsel for the petitioner canvassed that since all the persons specified in the notification making reference to the Labour Court, were terminated by the different branches of Allahabad Bank in which they were serving and on different dates and therefore, this co...
Santosh Kumar Srivastava Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-21-2002
Reported in: (2002)3UPLBEC2567; (2003)1UPLBEC50
Anjani Kumar, J.1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer :1. To issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent No. 4 to permit the petitioner to appear in the written examination held on 8.9.99.2. To issue any other writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.3. To award the cost of this petition to the petitioner.2. This Court vide its order dated 7th September, 1999 allowed the petitioner to appear in the examination of B.T.C. Training course provisionally and pursuant to the aforesaid interim order, the petitioner appeared in the B.T.C. examination. The respondents have also filed counter-affidavit giving reasons as to why the petitioner was not allowed to appear in the B.T.C. Examination. Since the petitioner has appeared in the examination of B.T.C. under the interim order passed by this Court, the ...
Gauhar Ali (D.) Through L.Rs. and anr. Vs. District Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-20-2002
Reported in: 2003(1)AWC49
S.P. Mehrotra, J.1. This writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed, inter alia, seeking quashing of the order dated 3.4.1989, passed by the learned District Judge, Ballia (respondent No. 1) (Annexure-5 to the writ petition).2. The dispute relates to a house situated in Mohalla Bishunipur, district Ballia. The said house has hereinafter been referred to as 'the disputed house'.3. It appears that the respondent No. 3 filed a release application under Section 21 (1) (a) pf the U. P. Act No. XIII of 1972 against Gauhar Ali and Smt. Zalbunisa for release of the disputed house. The said release application was numbered as paper No. 4C2.4. It was, inter alia, alleged by the respondent No. 3 in the said release application that his need for the disputed house was bona fide and genuine, and that no hardship would be caused to the said Gauhar All and Smt. Zaibunisa in case of their ejectment from the disputed house.while the respondent No. 3 would suffer muc...
Narendra Singh Alias Natey Singh and anr. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-20-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ205
S.K. Agarwal, J.1. These two criminal appeals, being Criminal Appeal No. 829 of 1996 (filed on behalf of Bansh Bahadur Singh and Jat Pratap Singh alias Ram Pratap Singh) and Criminal Appeal No. 776 of 1996 (filed on behalf of Narendra Singh alias Natey Singh) arise from the judgment and order dated 23-4-1996 passed by the then Sessions Judge, Azamgarh. These three appellants were convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life under Sections 302/34, I.P.C. for committing murder of Vinod Singh and Pramod Singh, They were, however, acquitted of the charges under Section 307, I.P.C. read with Section 34, I.P.C, and Sections 504/506, I.P.C. for making an attempt on the life of complainant Ram Kesar Singh. The learned Sessions Judge had also acquitted them for the murder of Smt. Usha Devi wife of Ram Kesar Singh, the first murder in the chain. Since the appeals arise from a common judgment we have heard them together and decide them by this common judgment. It may be noteworthy that no Gov...
Abdul Salam Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-20-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ216
ORDERU.S. Tripathi, J. 1. This petition under Section 482, Cr. P. C. has been filed for setting aside the order dated 5-6-2002 passed in Sessions Trial No. 535 of 2000 State of U. P. v. Bhoora and others summoning the applicant for trial along with other accused.2. An F.I.R. was lodged by opposite party No. 2 against four unknown persons with the allegations that on 28-9-1999 at about 8 a.m. four unknown persons abducted his brother Pramod. On the basis of above F.I.R. a case at crime No. 557 of 1999 under Section 364, I.P.C. was registered at P. S. Deoband, district Saharanpur. After investigation police submitted charge-sheet against three persons namely Bhoora @ Meharban, Munshi @ Mursalin and Usman under Sections 364/120B, I.P.C. The cognizance was taken against above persons by the Magistrate and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions.3. Before Sessions Judge, an application was moved by the prosecution for summoning applicant Abdul Salam in the case for trial along with ...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Farukh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-19-2002
Reported in: 2003ACJ1068; 2002(4)AWC2905
U.S. Tripathi, J. 1. This appeal has been directed against the judgment and award dated 26.4.2002 passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/XIIth Additional District Judge, Ghaziabad, in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 596 of 1999, awarding a sum of Rs. 55,000 to the claimant/respondent No. 1 on account of injuries sustained by him in a motor accident. 2. The claimant/respondent No. 1 filed Claim Petition No. 596 of 1999 against the appellant and respondents No. 2 and 3 for award of Rs. 15 lac as compensation with the allegations that on 15.4.1999 at about 5 p.m., he was standing near bus stand at village Batt on Garh-Delhi Road to cross the road. In the meantime, car No. DL 4C-4379, owned by respondent No. 2 and driven by respondent No. 3, came there and by rash and negligent driving of its driver, dashed against the claimant due to which he sustained head injury as well as injuries on jaw resulting in breaking of teeth. The report of the occurrence was lodged by his uncle. He had t...
Ravi Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-19-2002
Reported in: 2002(4)AWC3279; [2003(97)FLR70]
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.2. The petitioner was appointed on the post of clerk on daily wage basis in District Rural Development Agency, district Deoria vide appointment letter dated 1.11.1989. His appointment was temporary under a scheme known as Jawahar Rozgar Yojna. The services of the petitioner were terminated vide letter dated 28.5.1992 by which the Director, Planning District Gramya Abhikaran, Deoria informed the petitioner that his services are no longer required.3. The petitioner has challenged the aforesaid order of termination dated 28.5.1992 on the ground that Jawahar Rozgar Yojna is still continuing and his services have been terminated illegally and arbitrarily without giving notice and opportunity of hearing to him. It is alleged that instead of regularizing him the respondents have illegally terminated his services.4. So far as the appointment of the petitioner is concerned, it was temporary. There is no mate.rlal on record...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »