Allahabad Court December 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.
Kali Shanker Vs. Wadho Ram
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-17-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC251; 2005(3)AWC2307
Anjani Kumar, J.1. Heard learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner.2. The petitioner-tenant aggrieved by the order passed by the appellate Court dated 25th November, 2004, copy whereof is annexed as Annexure-'1' to the writ petition, approached this Court by means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, whereby an application filed by the petitioner-tenant 70 C purported to be under Section 34 (1) (c) of the U.P. Act No. XIII of 1972 for issuing Commission for the report about the accommodation available to the parties in premises in dispute and also other two premises. Before passing of this order, it appears that the petitioner earlier approached this Court by means of writ petition No. 15442 of 2004, which has been decided by this Court vide its judgment and order dated 16th April, 2004, whereby this Court allowed the application for amendment filed by the petitioner-tenant and issued a direction, which runs as under :-'However, it is cla...
Rakesh Kumar Pandey Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-17-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ESC709
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the appellant and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.2. This special appeal has been filed against the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge dated 7.5.2004 dismissing the writ petition of the appellant/petitioner.3. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the petitioner-appellant, who had been a Roller Cleaner/Driver, was appointed on 17.4.1978. His grievances had been that he had been regularised subsequent to the date persons junior to him had been regularised. Petitioner-appellant had been regularised with effect from 25.2.1997, though three persons namely Awadh Narain, Shri Ram Bahadur and Ramesh Kumar Shukla who had been much junior to him had been regularised with effect from 24.32.1988, 1.7.1990 and 6.12.1990. Being aggrieved he filed the writ petition which had been dismissed on the ground of availability of alternative remedy before the Uttar Pradesh Public Service Commission. Hence, this app...
Tinku Alias Gopal Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-17-2004
Reported in: 2005CriLJ1960
ORDERUmeshwar Pandey, J.1. Heard Sri Manish Tiwary, learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri O. P. Dubey, Advocate, for the complainant and the learned A.G.A. for the opposite party.2. This criminal revision has been directed against the order dated 3-6-2003 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 25 (Fast Track) Allahabad, whereby his petition for his declaration as juvenile under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000, (for short the 'Act') on the date of incident was dismissed.3. A perusal of the impugned order dated 3-6-2003 of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge shows that mainly relying upon the case law of Ramdeo Chauhan alias Raj Nath v. State of Assam, 2001 SCC (Cri) 915: (2001 Cri LJ 2902 : AIR 2001 SC 2231) the Court below has recorded its finding about the fact that the revisinoist-accused on the date of incident in the year 2001 was not juvenile. From the side of the accused, the evidence which had been given in support of his cont...
Managing Director, U.P. State Bridge Corporation Ltd. and ors. Vs. Bar ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-17-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)AWC1543
Ashok Bhushan, J.1. Heard Sri P.N. Rai learned counsel for the petitioner.2. By this writ petition ' the petitioners have prayed for quashing the order dated 3.10.2004 passed by the sole Arbitrator disposing the application dated 22.5.2004 filed by the petitioners questioning the jurisdiction of the Arbitrator to proceed with the adjudication of the dispute between the parties.3. Brief facts necessary for deciding the controversy raised in the writ petition are :U.P. State Bridge Corporation issued a tender notice inviting quotation/tenders for supply of Tor Steal Bars. The respondent No. 1 submitted his tender in response to the notice. By an order dated 12.11.1999 rate contract was given to the respondent No. 1 on the terms and conditions contained in the letter. After execution of the contract orders were given on behalf of the petitioners in pursuance of which respondent No. 1 supplied the materials for which certain payments were also made. Clause 15 of the terms and conditions un...
Budh Singh and anr. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-17-2004
Reported in: 2005CriLJ2005
M.C. Jain, J.1. The appeal in question has been filed by the two accused-appellants (real brothers) against the judgment, and order dated 25-5-1981, passed by Sri Jaswant Singh, the then IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Bijnor. Accused-Budh Singh has been convicted under Section 304, Part I and under Section 323, I.P.C. For the former offence, rigorous imprisonment for ten years and fine of Rs. 1000/- has been imposed. In default of payment of fine, he has to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months. Three months' rigorous imprisonment has been imposed under Section 323, I.P.C. Both the substantive sentences of imprisonment have been ordered to run concurrently. Accused-Baljeet has been convicted under Section 307, I.P.C. and sentenced to three years' rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-. In default of payment of fine, he has to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months. He has also been convicted under Section 25 of Arms Act and sentenced to six...
Chandra Bhan Vs. Smt. Sudha Rani and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-17-2004
Reported in: 2005CriLJ1978; II(2005)DMC324
ORDERRavindra Singh, J.1. Supplementary affidavit filed today, same be taken on the record.2. Heard Sri S.P.S. Rathore, learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. and Sri V. D. Agarwal and Mrs. Sandhya Agrawal, learned counsel for the respondents.3. This writ petition has been filed against order dated 15-1-2004, passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Etah and order dated 6-10-2004, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court N. 7, Etah in Criminal Revision No. 209 of 2004.4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the maintenance allowance was awarded by the learned Magistrate to respondents Nos. 1 and 2 who are wife and daughter respectively of the petitioner. The petitioner moved an application in the Court of learned Magistrate under Section 128, C. P.C., praying therein that the proceedings of the recovery be quashed against him because he has filed a suit in the Court of learned Civil Judge, Etah for declaring him insolvent. ...
J.A. Chisti Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-17-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)ESC1453
V.K. Shukla, J.1. Present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for issuing a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the authorities to prepare pension papers of petitioner and pay pension in the way and manner as has been directed vide judgment dated 3.1.2003 delivered by this Court in the case of Smt. Pratibha Bose v. Union of India and Ors..2. Agro Economic Research Centres have been established in different regions of country, including State of U.P. in pursuance of Government of India policy of promotion and conducting research in Agro Economics problem. By means of Notification dated 28.10.1963 issued by Ministry of Food and Agriculture, Government of India (Department of Agriculture), New Delhi, one such centre was set up in the University of Allahabad known as Agro Economic Research Centre (AERC), University of Allahabad. Petitioner was initially appointed as Office Assistant on 11.6.1965, and thereafter on 20.1.1998 was appointed/adjusted as Office Superintendent, a...
Vidya Shanker Dixit Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-17-2004
Reported in: (2006)200CTR(All)196; [2005]277ITR285(All)
R.K. Agrawal, J.1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following question of law under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), for opinion to this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the penalty for concealment of income was leviable on the assessee ?'2. The reference relates to the assessment year 1975-76.3. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows :The Income-tax Officer had imposed penalty amounting to Rs. 79,136 on the applicant on account of concealment of particulars of his income in respect of the following item :'Inflation of purchase in Lehi and Tilli account Rs. 20,000Unexplained loss and shortage in Tilli account Rs. 9,568Shortage in groundnut account Rs. 10,000____________Rs. 39,568____________4. Feeling aggrieved by the said order, the applicant preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Ap...
Vidya Shankar Dixit Vs. Cit
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-17-2004
Reported in: [2005]144TAXMAN909(All)
R.K. Agarwal, J. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has referred the following questions of law under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for opinion to this Court:-'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the penalty for concealment of income was leviable on the assessee ?'The reference relates to the assessment year 1975-76.Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows:-2. The Income Tax Officer had imposed penalty amounting to Rs. 79,136 on the applicant on account of concealment of particulars of his income in respect of the following item:-'Inflation of purchase in Lehi and Tilli account Rs.20,000Unexplained loss and shortage in Tilli account Rs.9,568Shortage in groundnut account Rs.10,000 Rs.39,568Feeling aggrieved by the said order, the applicant preferred an appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who deleted the penalty relying mainly on h...
Hina Negi (Km.) Vs. the Registrar, C.P.M.T. 2004 (Uttar Pradesh) Chaud ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-16-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ESC667; (2005)1UPLBEC432
Arun Tandon, J.1. Heard Sri R.J. Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Sri Anurag Khanna, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 1, Sri M.P. Singh, learned Counsel for the respondent No. 4, and Sri Piyush Shukla, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent Nos. 2 and 3. Nobody is present on behalf of the respondent No. 5.2. The petitioner, Kumari Hina Negi, was one of the candidate in the entrance examinations conducted for admission to M.B.B.S. Degree Course by Chaudhari Charan Singh University, Meerut, U.P. for the year 2004-2005 with Roll No. 2006455. The said entrance examination is commonly known as 'Combined Medical Test (C.P.M.T.)-2004', The petitioner claims to be a candidate covered by the category of dependent of freedom fighter quota for the State of Uttranchal. The result of the said entrance examination, which was conducted in the month of May, 2004 was declared on 12th June, 2004. The petitioner's name was admittedly at Serial No. 2 of the merit list prepared in resp...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »