Allahabad Court March 2003 Judgments
U.P. State Electricity Board Vs. Ashok Kumar Shukla and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-31-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)AWC2266; [2003(97)FLR822]; (2003)IILLJ1013All
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. This writ petition has been filed against the Award of the Labour Court dated July 30, 1996 by which the claim of the respondent No. 1, workman, has been allowed with all consequential benefits along with back wages from the date of reference till the date of Award. In addition cost has also been awarded.2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that respondent No. 1 raised the industrial dispute and the appropriate Government in exercise of its power under Section 4-K of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter called the Act 1947) made a reference as to whether termination of the services of the respondent No. 1 w.e.f. April 9, 1988 was in accordance with law, and if not, to what relief he was entitled to? In pursuance of the said reference, a claim petition was filed by the workman contending that he was engaged as an apprentice under the provisions of Apprentices Act, 1961 (hereinafter called Act 1961), as a Boiler Attendant. Manageme...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Savitri Devi Vs. Civil Judge (Sd) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-31-2003
Reported in: AIR2003All321; 2003(3)AWC1718
Dr. B.S. Chauhan, J. 1. This writ petition has been filed for issuing direction to the respondent No. 2 to attach the properties of the respondent No. 3, including those sold to the respondent Nos. 4, 5 and 6 as described at the foot of the plaint in Suit No. 1586 of 1992 and for quashing the order dated 10.11.1995, passed by respondent No. 2 to the extent that it exempted the property of respondent No. 3 from attachment which has been sold to the respondent Nos. 4, 5 and 6 in contravention of the interim order passed by the trial court. 2. Facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that petitioner and respondent No. 3 are mother and son and that they had inherited the bhumidhari rights in the agricultural land and there was some apprehension of both the sides that the other party may alienate the land in dispute. Suit No. 1586 of 1992 was filed by the petitioner in the trial court, wherein application for interim relief under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil P...
Tag this Judgment!Kisan Seva Sahakari Samiti Ltd. Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court an ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-31-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)AWC1830; [2003(97)FLR995]
Sunil Ambwani, J.1. After several adjournments, this writ petition had come up for hearing on 14.2.2003 and was dismissed in the absence of counsel for petitioner, after hearing Sri Devendra Dahma, counsel for contesting respondent-workman. On an application made by counsel for petitioner pleadings personal difficulties in attending the Court on 14.2.2003, the order, dismissing the writ petition, was recalled on 25.2.2003, and that after hearing counsel for both the parties, the judgment was reserved.2. Petitioner is a society registered under the U. P. Cooperative Societies Act. Respondent No. 3 Lalta Prasad Singh, was appointed as kamdar in the society in the year 1963 and worked as Secretary of the Society from 1972 to 18.6.1977. It is alleged that he misappropriated a sum of Rs. 21,263.78 p. for which a first information report was lodged against him on 8.8.1978 and the same has been registered as case Crime No. 145 under Section 409, I.P.C. The said case was transferred for invest...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Saroj Dwivedi Vs. Additional District Judge/Special Judge (S.C. a ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-31-2003
Reported in: AIR2003All315; 2003(3)AWC1910
Janardan Sahai, J. 1. The petitioner is a landlord of premises No. 124/326B, Govind Nagar, Kanpur. The third respondent is the tenant of the building. The petitioner filed a suit for injunction in the Court of the Civil Judge (J.D.), Kanpur Nagar for restraining the defendant from constructing a roof in the room in the tenancy of the respondent. The application for temporary injunction was also filed by the petitioner. The trial court allowed the application and restrained the tenant from reconstructing the roof making it clear, however, that the injunction would not come in the way of orders being passed under Section 28 of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972. The appellate court has allowed the appeal of the tenant third respondent and has dismissed the application for temporary injunction. The appellate court has relied upon the provisions of Section 108(m) of the Transfer of Property Act for holding that the lessee is bound to keep the tenanted property in good condition as it was at the time...
Tag this Judgment!Ganga Kisan Sahakari Chini Mills Ltd. Vs. Ghasita (D) Through L.R. and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-31-2003
Reported in: AIR2004All15; 2003(3)AWC2014
S.U. Khan, J. 1. Notifications under Sections 4 and 6 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short the Act) were issued on 20.8.1982 and 21.8.1982 respectively and published in Gazette on 23.8.1982 for acquiring 192 bighas, 10 biswas and 6 biswansies of land situate in village Kakrala, Pargana Bhokarheri, Tehsil Jansath, district Muzaffarnagar for establishing the Ganga Kisan Sahkari Chini Mills Ltd., Morana, Muzaffarnagar, the appellant in these appeals. The land of private respondents in all these appeals was included in the aforesaid notifications. 2. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Muzaffarnagar, (S.L.O, in short), by his award dated 18.4.1983, passed in Case No. 4 of 1982 determined the market value of the acquired land on the date of notification under Section 4 of the Act to be Rs. 9,944.57 paise per bigha pakka of the land of the quality of awwal torh and Rs. 8,523.81 paise per bigha pakka of doyam torh quality of land (none of the aforesaid appeals relate to doyam torh quali...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Jai Shri Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-31-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)AWC2536; (2003)2UPLBEC1322
Sunil Ambwani, J.1. Heard Dr. R. G. Padia assisted by Sri Prakash Padla for petitioner and Sri S.P. Singh for respondent No. 4 as well as learned Standing Counsel for rest of the respondents. 2. Sri Bharat Lal, respondent No. 4 was granted a mining lease for excavating building stone, gitti, boulder and mild stones in respect of Plot No. 485 (area 5 acres) for a period beginning on 1.7.1994 up to 1.7.1999. He applied for renewal under Rule 5 of the Uttar Pradesh Minor Minerals (Concession) Rules, 1963(in short the Rules) on 3.10.1998, and deposited Rs. 1,000 as renewal fees on 16.10.1998. The renewal application was registered on 30.10.1998, it was to be disposed of within four months and if it was not disposed of within the said period, the mining lease is deemed to have been renewed for six months from the date of its expiry to commence from the date of expiry of the original lease deed. It appears that no action was taken on this application and as such Bharat Lal approached State G...
Tag this Judgment!U.P. State Electricity Board Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court and o ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-31-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)AWC2572; [2004(101)FLR869]
B.S. Chauhan, J. 1. This writ petition has been filed for setting aside the Award passed by the Labour Court dated 13th November, 1995, by which the learned labour court has quashed the order of removal from service of respondent workman in spite of proving all the 15 charges against him, on the ground that his family members would suffer and directed for reinstatement of the workman with all consequential benefits except the back wages.2. Facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the respondent workman raised the industrial dispute and the appropriate Government vide order dated 5.6.1992 made a reference as to whether termination of the services of the workman w.e.f. 8.3.1977 was in accordance with law, and if not, to what relief he was entitled to? in pursuance of the said reference the workman filed the claim petition submitting that he had been employed as a clerk on daily wage w.e.f, 3rd December, 1973 and he was issued a charge-sheet dated 18/20th September, 1976,...
Tag this Judgment!Anil Kumar Dhawan Vs. Prescribed Authority and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-31-2003
Reported in: 2003(3)AWC2285
S.P. Mehrotra, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, inter alia, praying for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commending the respondent No. 1 (Prescribed Authority, Moradabad) to decide the impleadment Application No. 36 (Ga) filed by the petitioner before delivery of the judgment in P.A. Case No. 4 of 2002.2. The dispute relates to an accommodation, the details whereof have been given in the release application referred to hereinafter. The said accommodation has hereinafter been referred to as 'the disputed accommodation.'3. From the allegations made in the writ petition , it appears that the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 have filed a release application under Section 21 (i) (a) of the U.P. Act No. XIII of 1972 (in the short 'the Act') against Smt. Shyama Dhawan (respondent No. 4) for the release of the disputed accommodation. It was, inter alia, alleged in the said release application that th...
Tag this Judgment!Waqf Mausooma Syed HusaIn and Mst. Wali Begum and anr. Vs. Dillep Kuma ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-31-2003
Reported in: AIR2003All371
ORDERJanardan Sahai, J.1. The facts of this case need not detain us for long.2. The applicants in this revision are the plaintiffs in Original Suit No. 206 of 2001, which was filed on 5-12-2001. It is stated in paragraph 3 of the affidavit filed in support of the stay application that the notice of the suit was served upon the defendant in December 2001 and they appeared in Court on 14-1-2001. It appears that time was repeatedly granted thereafter to the defendants to file a written statement and last opportunity was granted by the trial Court on 29-4-2002 but the written statement was not filed and it was only on 4--12-2002 that an application 52-C was filed by the defendants stating that, the written statement being filed be taken on record and the delay be condoned. The application was opposed by the plaintiffs. By the impugned order dated 30-1-2003 the trial Court condoned the delay and took the written statement on record on payment of costs. This order is under challenge in this ...
Tag this Judgment!Gulab Singh Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-31-2003
Reported in: 2004CriLJ946
K.N. Ojha, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred against judgment and order dated 17-7-1981 passed by Sri S. L.Tripathi, Sessions Judge, Deoria in Sessions Trial No. 359 of 1980 by which appellant Gulab Singh has been convicted and has been awarded sentence of life imprisonment under Section 302, I.P.C.2. According to prosecution the occurrence is said to have taken place in the night of 26/27-7-1980 at about 8 or 9 p.m. in village Belwa Dubauli, Police Station Rudrapur, District Deoria, F.I.R. of which was lodged at police station Rudrapur by Satya Narain Singh, deceased himself on 27-7-1980 at about 3.15 a.m, against Gulab Singh, Khublal, Bhan Singh and Subba. The police station is at a distance of 6 miles from the place of occurrence. Satya Narain Singh injured was alive at the time of occurrence and after lodging the F.I.R. he succumbed to injuries. Scribe of the F.I.R. was Rajendra Singh.3. Post mortem examination on the dead body of Satya Narain Singh was done by Dr. C.V. Singh, M...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »