Allahabad Court September 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.
Ved Nath and anr. Vs. Indra Vikram Alias Chhote Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-19-2002
Reported in: AIR2003All198
Kamal Kishore, J.1. This is the second civil appeal against the judgment and decree passed by Sri R. N. Sircar, the then learned Additional District Judge, Hardoi in Civil Appeal No. 163 of 1982 setting aside the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial court.The following legal questions have been framed in this appeal :--1. Whether the agreement dated 30-11-1981 which was registered on 18-1-1982 is void?2. Whether the specific performance of contract itself implies the prayer for cancellation of the impugned sale deed?2. I have heard the arguments of the parties counsel and have gone through the record.3. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the plaintiffs are said to have entered into an agreement with Indra Vikram Singh for sale of 'Bhurnidhar' plots with regard to 1/4th of his share and for this Rs. 1200/- were given by the plaintiffs-appellants to Indra Vikram Singh (defendant No. 1) in the village itself and Rs.2800/- were given by the plaintiffs appellants to defend...
U.P. State Electricity Board and anr. Vs. Deputy Labour Commissioner a ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-19-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)AWC1622; [2002(95)FLR846]
Vineet Saran, J. 1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 23.9.1993 of the Deputy Labour Commissioner, Agra, passed under Section 6H (1) of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) directing the Collector, Mathura to recover a sum of Rs. 4,52,994.58p. from the petitioners, U.P. State Electricity Board (hereinafter referred to as the U.P.S.E.B.2. The brief facts of the case are that respondent Nos. 2 to 8 were employed on muster roll in Electricity Distribution Division. Mathura. Their services were dispensed with on 3.4.1976. A dispute was raised under Section 4K of the Act by the said respondents as to whether the U.P.S.E.B. was justified in terminating the services of the workers (respondent Nos. 2 to 8) on 3,4.1976 and as to what relief, if any, were the workers are entitled to. Vide its order dated 10.11.1979 the Industrial Tribunal III, Kanpur, dismissed the case and held that the termination of the workers was valid. Against suc...
Azizullah Alias Azizul Haq Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-19-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ663
S. K. Agarwal, J. 1. This appeal was preferred by appellant Azizullah alias Azizul Haq against his conviction and sentence under Section 302, I.P.C. for life imprisonment and 7 years' R. I. under Section 307, I.P.C. passed by the Additional Sessions Judge III, Mau, in S. T. No. 79 of 1997.2. The brief facts of the case, as disclosed in the F.I.R. are that on 24-10-1996 at about 8.30 P.M. when the informant along with deceased Mohd. Azim went to take betel at the shop of Haridwar Chaurasia, he came across the appellant who was sitting there from before. It is alleged that Mohd. Azim asked the appellant as to why he was searching him for assault. On this an exchange of abuses occurred between them. The appellant suddenly took out a shaving razor (Astura) from his pocket and inflicted injury on the neck of Mohd. Azim, who fell down. Anish Ahmad chased and apprehended him. Appellant freed himself by giving an Astura blow on his abdomen and ran away. The incident was witnessed by the son of...
Assistant Commissioner of Vs. S.S. Pharmaceuticals (P.) Ltd.
Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-18-2002
Reported in: (2003)87ITD119(All.)
1. This appeal by the revenue is directed against the order of the CIT(A), Allahabad, dated 16th February, 1995 for the assessment year 1991-92 on the following grounds : 1. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the cash credits in the names of 5 persons whose identity, genuineness of transactions, credit-worthiness, mode of payment and whether they are on income-tax records were not brought to the notice of the Assessing Officer in spite of specific opportunities allowed to explain the same. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) while deleting the addition for cash credits failed to appreciate that the assessee did not make any compliance to the notices issued and, therefore, addition deleted is highly unjustified and such addition should be restored back. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has also erred in admitting fresh evidences filed before him and thus violating Rule 46A of I.T. Rules. 4. That the order of CIT(A) being bad in law may be set aside and the order of the Assessing Officer be restored.2....
Anima Gupta Vs. Tarun Kumar Gupta
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-18-2002
Reported in: AIR2003All76
ORDERB.K. Rathi, J.1. The opposite party moved an application under Section 25 of Guardians & Wards Act read with Section 6 of the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act for appointment of guardian and custody of minor Abhineet. The opposite party is the father and the applicant is the mother of the minor. The applicant contested the application. She also raised a preliminary objection thatminor Abhineet is ordinarily residing in Gauhati (Assam) and, therefore, the District Judge. Ghaziabad has no jurisdiction to entertain and decide the application. The trial Court decided this matter as a preliminary objection and has held that the application can be entertained and decided at Ghaziabad. Aggrieved by it, the present revision has been preferred. 2. I have heard Sri V. K. Jaiswal, learned counsel for the revisionist and Miss. Usha Kiran, learned counsel for the opposite party. 3. The position is not disputed that Section 9 of the Guardians and Wards Act provide that if the application is ...
Shoib Ullah and ors. Vs. Bhartesh Chandra JaIn and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-18-2002
Reported in: AIR2003All31
B.K. Rathi, J.1. This First appeal from order under Order 43, Rule 1(u) of C.P.C. has been preferred against the order dated 16-7-2002 passed by VIIth Additional District Judge, Allahabad in Civil Appeal No. 27 of 2001. The facts necessary for the disposal of this Appeal are as follows.2. The respondent No. 1 filed the Suit No. 550 of 1998 in the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Allahabad for the following reliefs :--(1) Decree for accounting of the firm M/s. S.U. Builders.(2) Mandatory injunction to restrain the respondents 3 to 6 from taking any payment from respondent No. 1.3. The present appellants contested the Suit. One of the pleas taken by them is that firm M/s. S.U. Butlders is an unregistered firm and therefore, the Suit is barred under Section 69 of the Indian Partnership Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The Trial Court framed an issue on this plea and recorded finding on 19-2-2001 that the Suit is barred by Section 69 of the Act and therefore, dismissed th...
Atique Ahmad (In Jail) Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-18-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ197
M.C. Jain, J.1. The facts, skipping unnecessary details, are that the petitioner is a sitting M.L.A. from Allahabad Constituency. Against him an F.I.R. has been lodged by respondent No. 5 Smt. Urmila Devi on 4-8-2002 at 2.05 p.m., resulting in registering of a case against him under Sections 467/468/471/420/506/384/387, I.P.C. and Section 2/3 of the U. P. Gangsters Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act. He has filed this writ petition, claiming the following reliefs :'(i) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the first information report and further proceedings of Case Crime No. 311 of 2002, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 506, 384, 387, I.P.C. and 2/3 of Uttar Pradesh Gangster Act, Police Station Dhoomanganj, Allahabad, dated 4-8-2002, so far as it relates to the petitioner, (Annexure No. 16 to the writ petition.(i) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus restraining the respondents from taking the petitioner into judicial ...
Saroop Ram Sharma and anr. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-18-2002
Reported in: 2003(3)AWC2216
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners challenging the order of termination dated 1.3.1990, passed by respondent No. 4, Annexure-7 to the writ petition. 3. The petitioners were appointed as Collection Amin by respondent No. 2 in the year 1981 and since then they were working at Tehsll Fatehabad, district Agra. Petitioner No. 1 was made permanent on the vacancy occurred due to retirement of Ramesh Chand on 31.1.1989, who was working as Collection Amin. Petitioner No. 2 was also made permanent due to promotion of Bhawani Singh, Collection Amin. It is submitted that a seniority list of Collection Amins was prepared in the office of Additional District Magistrate (F & R), Agra, respondent No. 2. In the aforesaid list, the name of petitioner No. 1 was placed at serial No. 31 and the name of petitioner No. 2 was placed at serial No. 33. They joined their services since the date of their ap...
Mohammed Ashraf Vs. Sushri Mayawati, Chief Minister and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-18-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ684
M.C. Jain, J.1. Against the petitioner, respondent No.5 Mohd. Ashraf son of Ataullah has lodged an F.I.R. on 22-6-2002 at 2.15 P.M. at P. S. Kareli, district Allahabad which has resulted in registering of a case against him and others under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 504, 506 and 387 I.P.C., Annexure 1 to the writ petition. The petitioner has filed this petition claiming the following reliefs :'i) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing the first information report dated 22-6-2002 in Case Crime No. 156 of 2002, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 504, 506 and 387, I.P.C., Police Station Kareilly, District Allahabad contained in Annexure 1 to the writ petition.ii) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties directing them not to arrest the petitioner in Case Crime No. 156 of 2002 under Secitons 147, 148, 149, 307, 504, 506 and 387, I.P.C. Police Station Kareilly, Allahabad.iii) to issue a writ, order or ...
Virendra Kumar Sharma Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-18-2002
Reported in: [2002(94)FLR763]; (2002)3UPLBEC2379
Ashok Bhushan, J.1. Heard Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel who appears for Respondent No. 1. List has been revised but no one has appeared for Respondents No. 2 to 6.2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner praying for quashing of the order dated 8.6.1995 passed by the opposite Party No. 3. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged between the parties.3. Petitioner's case, in the writ petition, is that he was appointed as Assistant Accountant in U.P. Sahkari Gram Vikas Bank Limited. Petitioner, in Paragraph 7 of the writ petition, has Stated that regulations, namely, U.P. Rajya Sahkari Bhoomi Vikas Bank Employees Service Rules., 1976, has been framed and the same was approved by the Board on 22.2.1977. Reference has also been made to Regulation 100 of U.P. Cooperative Society Employees' Service Regulations, 1975. Petitioner was suspended on 24.2.1979 and a first information report was lodged against the petitioner on which case Crime No. ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »