Allahabad Court August 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.
Narendra Kumar Sharma and anr. Vs. Rent Control and Eviction Officer a ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-25-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)AWC185
ORDERAnjani Kumar, J.1. The proceedings initiated on the application of respondent No. 2, Mahesh Chand Sharma who inspite of due service of notice has chosen not to appear before this Court the Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Aligarh has passed an order under Section 16 read with Section 12 of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 declaring the vacancy in accommodation in dispute, which is owned by the petitioner. It is admitted case, as would be clear from the assertions made in the writ petition as well as in the impugned order that before passing the impugned order the petitioner, owner/landlord has not been afforded any opportunity of hearing by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer as held in the case in 1984 (2) ARC 7 and 2002 (2) ARC 434 that the District Magistrate while declaring the vacancy or passing an allotment order exercises quasi judicial function, therefore, even if there is no such provision either in the provisions of Section 16 of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 or in the Rules 8 and ...
Gauri Shanker and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-25-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)AWC426
M. Katju, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. This special appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment of the learned single Judge dated 7.8.2004. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have carefully perused the impugned judgment.3. The facts have been given in detail in the judgment of the learned single Judge and we are only referring to the same as and where necessary.4. By the 73rd Constitutional amendment Article 243G was inserted in the Constitution of India. Article 243G reads as follows :'243G. Powers, authority and responsibilities of Panchayats.- Subject to the provisions of the Constitution, the Legislature of a State may, by law, endow the panchayats with such powers and authority as may be necessary to enable them to function as institutions of self-Government and such law may contain provisions for the devolution of powers and responsibilities upon Panchayats at the appropriate level, subject to such conditions as may be specified therein, wi...
Jhanjan Lal (D.) Through L.Rs. Vs. Keshri Chand (D.) Through L.Rs. and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-25-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)AWC556
Anjani Kumar, J.1. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.2. The plaintiff-respondent Keshri Chand filed a suit being Original Suit No. 65 of 1973, impleading Dal Chand and Jhanjhan, the present appellant, as defendants. The relief claimed by the plaintiff in the aforesaid suit was that so far as the defendant No. 1 is concerned, the suit may be decreed for specific performance of contract between defendant No. 1 and the plaintiff to execute sale deed in favour of the plaintiff in respect of the land in suit and for cancellation of the sale deed executed by the defendant No. 1 in favour of the defendant No. 2 on 29th January, 1973. The plaintiff also prayed in alternative for the payment of the consideration of money amounting to Rs. 5,500, which he had paid to defendant No. 1.3. The aforesaid suit was contested by both the defendants. The trial court after considering the pleadings of the parties and evidence on record have arrived at the conclusion that the plaintif...
Municipal Board Vs. Ist A.D.J. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-25-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)AWC574
Anjani Kumar, J.1. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.2. The petitioner-judgment debtor filed an objection under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure which was registered as Misc. Case No. 73 of 1971 and the plaintiff-decree-holder also filed an application under Order XXI, Rule 32 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which was registered as Execution Case No. 30 of 1971, which were heard and decided together. The executing court vide its order dated 3rd May. 1976, dismissed the objection filed by the judgment-debtor and allowed the application, as stated above, filed by the plaintiff-decree-holder with the observation that in case where compensation were provided for disobedience of an injunction, a separate suit is not necessary. The present case appears to be such a case, therefore, the compensation was awarded. Aggrieved thereby the judgment-debtor Municipal Board preferred an appeal before the Additional District Judge, Gorakhpur, which was registered as Civi...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-25-2004
Reported in: (2005)194CTR(All)170; [2005]274ITR340(All)
R.K. Agrawal, J.1. The Tribunal, Delhi, has referred the following questions of law under Section 256(2) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for opinion to this Court ;'1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal was right in law in holding that the amount of Rs. 12,66,429 being excess levy sugar price was not taxable in the hands of the assessee-company in the year under consideration ?2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal was right in law in deleting the interest of Rs. 2,89,026 and also in confirming the deletion of interest of Rs. 1,43,282 on the amount of excess levy sugar price claimed by the assessee-company ?'2. The present reference relates to the asst. yr. 1974-75 for which the relevant previous year ended on 30th Sept., 1973. The assessee is a public limited company engaged in the manufacture and sale of crystal sugar. The Government of India vide notification dt. 15t...
Committee of Management, Sri Kidwai Junior High School and anr. Vs. Su ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-25-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)AWC576
Arun Tandon, J.1. Heard Sri K.C. Shukla on behalf of the petitioner Sri Saurabh Srivastava and I. K. Mishra, holding brief of Sri K. K. Tripathi on behalf of the respondents.2. This writ petition has been filed by the Committee of Management Sri Kidwai Junior High School, Kidwai Nagar, Kanpur through its alleged Manager Sri Uma Kant Pandey against an order passed by the Prescribed Authority under Section 25(1) of the Societies Registration Act, namely the S.D.M., Kanpur Nagar dated 18th May, 1999.3. I have heard counsel for the parties and have gone through the records of the writ petition.4. There is a society duly registered under the Societies Registration Act in the name and style of Sri Kidwai Junior High School Samiti, Kidwai Nagar, Kanpur. The said society has established an institution in the name and style of Sri Kidwai Junior High School Samiti, Kidwai Nagar, Kanpur. The institution at the relevant point of time was only recognized as Junior High School under the provisions o...
Smt. Kamla Devi and ors. Vs. Xth A.D.J. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-25-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)AWC1285
ORDERAnjani Kumar, J.1. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.2. The petitioners-defendants aggrieved by, an order dated 27th March, 2004, passed by the revisional court, copy whereof is annexed as Annexure-4 to the writ petition, approached this Court by means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, whereby the revision filed by the plaintiff-respondent has been allowed and the order dated 30th May, 2001 passed in Misc. Case No. 22 of 2001 was set aside and decree was maintained.3. The facts leading to the filing of present writ petition are that it appears that plaintiff Geeta Rani filed suit No. 21/96 for specific performance of agreement to sell dated 14.6.1985, which has been decreed ex parte vide order dated 26h September, 1998 for payment of Rs. 30,000 plus interest at the rate of 12%. Thereafter plaintiff-respondent filed a review application seeking review of the order dated 26.9.1998, which was allowed by the Civil Judge (Se...
Jamuna Devi (Smt.) Vs. Xiiith Additional District Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-25-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC60
S.U. Khan, J.1. This is landlord's petition arising out of her suit for eviction and recovery of arrears of rent filed against respondent Nos. 3 and 4 Kanpur Nagar Maha Palika (KNMP) and U.P. Board of Basic Education (Board in short) numbered as Suit (SCC Suit) No. 1776 of 1976 on the file of J.S.C.C., Kanpur.2. The suit for eviction was dismissed on 13.7.1979 by J.S.C.C., Kanpur even after recording the finding of default in favour of the landlord on the ground that notice of termination of tenancy was not given to Board. Revision filed by the landlord petitioner against the said judgment and decree being SCC Revision No. 214 of 1979 was also dismissed on the same ground by XIIIth Additional District Judge, Kanpur, through judgment and order dated 27.1.1983, hence, this writ petition.3. J.S.C.C. decided the question of rate of rent in favour of the landlord and held that rate of rent was Rs. 56.25 per month as asserted by landlord and not Rs. 46.25 as asserted by tenant. From the judg...
Dharam Pal Singh Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-25-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ESC566
Tarun Agarwala, J.1. The petitioner was appointed as a Constable on 1.7.1974. The petitioner was found misbehaving under the influence of liquor on 23.9.1996. The petitioner was taken to the hospital where he was medically examined and it was found that he had consumed liquor while on duty. A report to this effect was submitted on 31.10.1996. On the basis of this report dated 31.10.1996, the services of the petitioner was dismissed by an order dated 20.11.1996 exercising the powers under Clause (b) of Sub-rule (2) of Rule 8 of the Uttar Pradesh Police Officers of the Subordinate Ranks (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules). The reason incorporated in the order of termination was that the petitioner after consuming alcohol used to misbehave with the public at large and that he was penalised and punished on various occasions and that he was also in the habit of taking unauthorised leave and therefore, it was not possible to hold a departmental inquiry ...
Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Smt. Sushila Devi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-25-2004
Reported in: 2006ACJ806; 2005(2)AWC1773
ORDERU.K. Dhaon and M.A. Khan, JJ.1. This is an appeal arising out of the judgment and award dated 28.8.2002, passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Lucknow, thereby awarding a sum of Rs. 4,00,000 by way of compensation to the heirs of deceased Amerika Prasad Yadav.2. A claim case was filed before the Tribunal with the allegations that deceased Amerika Prasad Yadav was travelling on 19.6.2001 by Train No. 3010 Dn., Doon Express. He accidentally fell down at a place in between Kanpur-Dariyabad Railway Stations and died on the spot. The claimants are his heirs and have filed the claim petition under Section 124A of the Railways Act.3. The claim case was contested by the Railway administration amongst others on the grounds that deceased Amerika Prasad Yadav was not a bona fide passenger of the train in question and even if he was travelling in the said train, he had endangered his own safety by his negligence and rashness and, therefore, heirs are not entitled to claim any compensation.4....
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »