Allahabad Court November 2004 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.
Smt. Munni Devi and ors. Vs. Iind A.D.J. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-03-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC119; 2005(1)AWC30
Anjani Kumar, J.1. By means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners-tenant have challenged the orders passed by the trial court and affirmed by the revisional authority, whereby the suit filed by the landlord-contesting respondent was decreed and on revision, the revisional court has dismissed the revision filed by the petitioners-tenant.2. In short, the facts of the case are that the landlord-respondent No. 3 filed JSCC Suit No. 69 of 1994 for ejectment and recovery of rent and damages from the petitioners-tenant before the prescribed authority on the ground that the tenant is defaulter in payment of rent and further that the tenant has sub-let the premises in question without permission in writing after terminating the tenancy of the petitioners-tenant by serving a notice. The aforesaid suit was decreed by the trial court on 30th March, 1996. Aggrieved thereby, the tenant-petitioners preferred a revision under Section 25 of the Provinc...
Miss Qudsia Shafqat Vs. Aligarh Muslim University and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-03-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)AWC66
Arun Tandon, J.1. Heard Sri M.K. Gupta on behalf of the petitioner and Smt. Sunita Agarwal on behalf of respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3.2. The petitioner, Miss Qudsia Shafqat, after passing B.U.M.S. Course from Aligarh Muslim University with 67.12% marks applied for being considered for admission to Post Graduate Course (M.D.) in IImul Advia. For the purposes of admission to the said P.G. Course a written examination was conducted. The petitioner appeared in the entrance examination and was also declared successful. A letter dated 26.12.2003 was issued from the office of the Controller of Examinations and Admissions requiring the petitioner to appear before the Dean, Faculty of Unani Medicines at 9.00 a.m. The petitioner appeared before the Dean, Faculty of Unani Medicines on the said date and time along with her original certificates. The petitioner was refused admission to the said M.D. in IImul Advia Course on the ground that the petitioner had not secured 60% or above marks in BUMS in t...
Ram Chhabila Rai Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-03-2004
Reported in: (2005)1UPLBEC331
Devi Prasad Singh, J. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. Since these Bunch of writ petitions involves common question of law and facts, I proceed to decide these writ petitions by passing a present common judgment. The controversy under the present Bunch of writ petitions relates to transfer of petitioner employees by the impugned order to State of Uttaranchal in pursuance to provision contained in U.P. Reorganization Act, 2000 (Act No. 29 of 2000) (hereinafter referred as Act). The Act was promulgated by Parliament on 25th August, 2000 and it was notified in the Official Gazette on 9.11.2000 which is the 'appointed day' for the purpose of bifurcation of State of U.P. into two States, other one is State of Uttaranchal.2. In the State of U.P. the Department of Horticulture and Food Processing was created sometime in the year 1974. Admittedly, petitioners were appointed on the different post of Group 2 and Group 1 in the hill area of State of U.P. At that time there was only one H...
Dinesh Kumar Singh Vs. the Presiding Officer, Labour Court and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-03-2004
Reported in: (2005)1UPLBEC296
Rakesh Tiwari, J. 1. Heard Counsel for the parties and perused the record.2. This petition is directed against an award dated 16.3.2000 passed by the Labour Court, Agra (U.P.) in Adjudication Case No. 338/98.3. The petitioner raised an industrial dispute before the Conciliation Officer alleging that he had been wrongly terminated from service with effect from 26.4.1997. As no amicable settlement could be arrived at between the parties, the following reference was made to the Labour Court, Agra:-^^D;k lsok;kstdksa }kjk vius JfedJh fnus'k dqekj pkSgku iq= Jh dUgh flag pkSgku dq'ky Jfed dh lsok;sa fnukad26-4-97 ls lekIr fd;k tkuk mfpr ,oa oS/kkfud gS ;fn ugha rks Jfed mile@fjyhQikus dk vf/kdkjh gS vkSj vU; fdl fooj.k lfgr 'Whether termination of service by the employers of their workman Sri Dincsh Kumar Chauhan Son of Sri Kanhi Singh Chauhan (skilled labourer) w.c.f. 26.4.1997 is legal and justified? If not, to what damages/reliefs is he entitled to and to what extent?'FACTS OF THE CASE :...
Bhupendra Kumar JaIn (D.) Through L.Rs. Vs. Ist A.D.J. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-03-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC115; 2005(1)AWC47
Anjani Kumar, J.1. By means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner-landlord challenges order dated 13th October, 1987, passed by the appellate authority, copy whereof is annexed as Annexure-14 to the writ petition, whereby the appeal filed by the tenant-contesting respondent under Section 22 of the U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972, against the order passed by the prescribed authority was allowed.2. In short, the facts of the present case are that the petitioner-landlord filed an application under Section 21(1) (a) of the U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972, in short the 'Act', for the release of the aforesaid accommodation in question in favour of the landlord as the landlord requires bona fide the same for his personal requirement, as asserted by him in his application under Section 21 (1) (a) of the Act. The case set up by the landlord is that the accommodation in question is situated on the first floor of the building, whereby the family of the landlord...
Urmila Singh Vs. Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Gorakhpur University and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-03-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)AWC62; 2005(1)ESC39
Arun Tandon, J.1. Heard Sri R.K. Ojha advocate on behalf of the petitioner and Sri Shashi Nandan, senior advocate, assisted by Smt. Sunita Agarwal advocate on behalf of respondents 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. Notices were issued to respondents 6 to 9 by the office, under the orders of this Court, on 6.1.2004. However, nobody has put in appearance on their behalf.2. Urmlla Singh, the petitioner was admitted to LL.B. 3 years degree course in Deen Dayal Upadhaya Gorakhpur University, Gorakhpur (hereinafter referred to as the University) in the year 2000. The petitioner thereafter appeared in the 1st and 2nd semester examinations of the 1st year and was successful. The' petitioner was, thereafter, admitted to LL.B. 2nd year and she cleared 3rd and 4th semesters examinations. The petitioner, thereafter, applied for admission to LL.B. 3rd year and deposited the requisite fee with the University. The petitioner passed her 5th semester examination in the month of April, 2003. The University issued a not...
Smt. Premwati Vs. Jagdish Prasad (D.) Through L.R. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-03-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC153; 2005(1)AWC941
S.N. Srivastava, J.1. Subject matter of impugnment in this second appeal is the judgment and decree dated 18.10.1986 passed by 2nd Addl. Civil Judge, Saharanpur whereby Civil Appeal No. 102 of 1985 was allowed and judgment and decree passed by the trial court dated 30.11.1985 in Original Suit No. 268 of 1982, Premwati v. Jagdish and Ors..2. The dispute erupted and escalated into institution of Original Suit No. 268 of 1982 when defendant No. 1 threatened plaintiff with eviction from the house, i.e., house No. 6/1011 situated in Mohalla Nai Basti. Saharanpur. The plaintiffs case as unfolded in the plaint is that plaintiffs husband namely, Hukam Singh and Jagdish Prasad were full blooded brothers and the house in question was jointly purchased by the father-in-law of the plaintiff. Initially, the entire family were residing in their ancestral village, e.g., Baheda, Sandal Singh and after acquisition of the said property, the entire family shifted to the house in question in the year 1960...
Rajendra Kumar Sharma Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-03-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ESC152; (2005)1UPLBEC615
Vineet Saran, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No. 1 and Sri Avanish Misra, learned Counsel appearing for the contesting respondent Nos. 2 to 4.2. The petitioner joined the service of the U.P. State Road Transport Corporation on 14.6.1972. Admittedly in the service record of the petitioner maintained by the respondent-Corporation, his date of birth was shown as 2.2.1947. On 19.10.2004, an Order was passed by the Service Manager of the Corporation wherein it was provided that the petitioner was to retire on 28.2.2005 on his reaching the age of superannuation. The. petitioner has challenged the said Order by means of the present writ petition and has also prayed for a direction that he may not be retired on 28.2.2005 as according to the school leaving certificate, a copy of which has been filed as Annexure-2 to the writ petition, his date of birth is 2.1.1948. According to the petitioner, he has filed a. representa...
Kishan Lal (Since Deceased) Vs. Iind Additional District Judge and ors ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-03-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC215
Anjani Kumar, J.1. The petitioner-tenant, aggrieved by the order passed by the trial Court hereby the trial Court decreed suit filed by the landlord, approached the revisional Court under Section 25 of Provincial Small Cause Courts Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The revisional Court dismissed the revision filed by the petitioner-tenant, thus this writ petition.2. The plaintiff-landlord filed a suit for arrears of rent and ejectment of the petitioner-tenant on the ground that the petitioner is defaulter in payment of rent and has not paid rent beyond 1st October, 1981. A decree for ejectment and arrears of rent was sought. It is stated that since the construction is the new construction, provisions of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 do not apply. The petitioner-tenant filed written statement and has taken defence that since the construction in question is a new construction, therefore, provisions of Act No. 13 of 1972 do not apply. The petitioner also stated that the petitioner was t...
Subodh Kumar Agarwal Vs. Xth Additional District and Sessions Judge an ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-03-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC177
Anjani Kumar, J.1. By means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner-tenant challenges order dated 4th May, 1987, passed by the Appellate Authority, copy whereof is annexed as Annexure-'5' to the writ petition, whereby the appeal filed by the landlord-contesting respondent against the order passed by the prescribed authority was allowed by which the application filed by the landlord under Section 21 (1) (a) of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972, was rejected by the prescribed authority.2. In short, the facts of the present case are that the contesting respondent-landlord, who died during the pendency of this writ petition, filed an application under Section 21 (1) (a) of the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972. In short the 'Act', to the effect that the respondent No. 2 is the landlord and petitioner is the tenant of the accommodation in question, which is a shop. It is asserted that the aforesaid shop may be released in favour of the landlord, as the landlord b...
- ‹ Prev
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- Next ›
- Last »