Allahabad Court September 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.
Murlidhar Tripathi Vs. Chandra Vijai Singh @ Nanhey Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-17-2004
Reported in: 3(2005)ACC53
R.P. Misra, J.1. Heard Mr. Neeraj Tiwari, learned Counsel for the appellant and Mr. R.N. Nigam, holding brief of Mr. Vinai Khare, learned Counsel for the respondents.2. The appellant met with an accident by Jeep No. UTF 4098. After the accident he was hospitalised to the Nursing Home of Dr. Milan Mukherji, Allahabad which is a reputed Nursing Home. He also suffered from fractures and remained in the Nursing Home for two months.3. The findings recorded by the Tribunal are perverse. The appeal is partly allowed. The appellant is entitled to compensation for medical expenses amounting to Rs. 10,000/-, for agriculture income Rs. 5,000/- and for mental agony Rs. 10,000/-. As the appellant is a Counsel and was not able to practise for one year and the monthly income of the appellant was Rs. 1,200/-, the total compensation to which the appellant is entitled is assessed to be Rs. 39,000/-. The appellant will also be entitled for costs which is assessed be Rs. 5,000/-. All the aforesaid amount ...
Rakesh Chandra Misra Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-16-2004
Reported in: (2004)3UPLBEC2671
Pradeep Kant, J.1. The controversy involved in this Bunch of writ petitions being one and the same, is being answered by one common order.2. The petitioners who are the teachers (Assistant Teachers or. Lecturers) appointed directly in different Intermediate Colleges allegedly on short-term vacancies on ad hoc basis have been refused approval of their appointment by the District Inspector of Schools either expressly or impliedly and thus were not being paid salary, which compelled them to file the present writ petitions.3. It is not necessary to give details of the qualifications of the petitioners or their eligibility for holding the post of teachers (Assistant Teachers or Lecturers) nor the seniority or the date of their appointment as all the petitioners were appointed on the post of Lecturers by the Committee of Management of their colleges during the period when the Committee of Management of all the institutions was allegedly bereft of its power to make ad hoc appointments or even...
Sinwah Ahmad Shah and ors. Vs. District Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-16-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)AWC269
S.N. Srivastava, J.1. The dispute in the instant petition revolves round property No. 28/33 situated at Gange Ka Phatak, Kashmiri Bazar, Agra.2. It would appear from the record that the respondent Nos. 3 to 8 were the tenants of the house in question of which petitioner No. 1 is the landlord. The access to the said house, it would further appear, was through the staircase and it is alleged that the landlord locked the door having access to the tenements through the staircase. It would further appear that respondents initially represented to the District Magistrate for opening of the lock but having failed, they instituted O. S. No. 475 of 2004 along with accompanying application for temporary injunction in the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division) Agra. In the ultimate analysis, the trial court passed orders mandating by way of interim injunction to the defendants petitioners to unlock the door barring access to the tenements in question. Aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner de...
Smt. Usha Devi Vs. Chief General Manager, Bina Project N.C.F.L. and or ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-16-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)AWC239
Tarun Agarwala, J.1. The petitioner's husband was appointed as an Electrician. He had taken two days casual leave on 21.1.1992, which was granted. The petitioner did not report for duty w.e.f. 24.1.1992 and accordingly he was charge sheeted on 3.3.92. Since no reply was forthcoming, an enquiry officer was appointed who submitted his report on 27.10.92, on the basis of which the disciplinary authority passed an order dated 22.3.93 terminating the services of the petitioner. The order of termination was subsequently published in the newspaper on 27.3.93.2. The petitioner contended that her husband left for work on 21.1.1992, but never returned after duty. In 1997, the petitioner approached the respondent to give her an employment in order to sustain herself and her family till such time as her husband was found. Since no action was taken on her representation, the petitioner filed Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 11233 of 1998, which was disposed of by an order dated 31.3.98 directing the a...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Kanhaiya Lal and Sons
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-16-2004
Reported in: [2005]273ITR425(All)
1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following question of law under Section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), for the opinion to this court :'Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the assessee was entitled to the registration on the partnership deed dated December 26, 1968 ?' 2. The reference relates to the assessment years 1970-71 to 1973-74. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows ;3. The assessee-respondent is a firm, which was constituted under the partnership deed dated December 26, 1968, and consisted of three persons, namely, Kanhaiya Lal, Smt. Kawlapati Devi and Smt. Rudrani Devi, sharing profit and loss in the ratio of 50 per cent., 25 per cent, and 25 per cent., respectively. The firm applied for registration in the assessment year 1970-71. The partnership deed was filed on Janua...
NaraIn and ors. Vs. the State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-16-2004
Reported in: 2005CriLJ2001
K.K. Misra, J.1. This Criminal Appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 20-5-1981 passed by Shri M.P. Singh, the then IV Addl. Sessions Judge, Etah in Sessions Trial No. 46 of 1980 whereby he has convicted the appellant Narain under Section 302, IPC and Sections 307, IPC and 147. IPC and sentenced him to undergo life imprisonment, ten years R.I. and two years' R.I. respectively. Accused Asa Ram, Sri Ram, Pokhpal and Roshan have been convicted under Section 302, IPC read with Section 149, IPC and Section 307, IPC read with Section 149, IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and ten years' R.I. respectively. Accused Sri Ram and Pokhpal. have been further convicted under Section 147, IPC and sentenced to two years' R.I. Accused Asa Ram has been further convicted under Section 148, IPC and sentenced to three years' R.I. However, all the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.2. The facts narrated in the F.I.R. are that P.W. 2 Ram Dayal, informant was plo...
Mohd. Yusuf Vs. Board of Revenue and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-16-2004
Reported in: AIR2005All199; 2005(3)AWC2268
ORDERS.N. Srivastava, J.1. Petition in hand has been filed assailing the judgment dated 16-7-1996 passed by the Board of Revenue by which it has been held that a Scribe cannot be treated to be attesting witness unless attesting witnesses were dead or were not in a position to be examined.2. It would appear from the record that one Mohd. Hanif was Bhumidhar of land in suit comprising in plot No. 201, admeasuring 2 Bighas, 7 Biswas. He had three sons who are parties to the present proceedings. Mohd. Yusuf one of the sons instituted a suit under Section 229 B of the U. P. Z. A. and L. R. Act claiming himself to be the exclusive Bhumidhar of the land in question on the basis of a Will dated 13-5-1979 which it was alleged was executed by his father Mohd. Hanif in his favour. In the written statement, the other two sons of Mohd. Hanif i.e. the contesting Opp. parties repudiated the plaint allegations and denied exclusive rights as Bhumidhar of the plaintiff over the property in question and ...
Smt. Suman Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-16-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)AWC1789
A.N. Varma, J.1. Through the instant writ petition, the petitioner has assailed the order dated 5.8.2004 passed by the opposite party No. 2, as contained in Annexure-1 to the writ petition, whereby in exercise of powers conferred under Section 95(1)(g) of U. P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947, administrative and financial powers of petitioner, who is the Pradhan of Gram Panchayat Bhanagerl, Tehsil Mohammadi, District Kheri has been ceased pending final enquiry and a three member committee has been constituted.2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Raghavendra Singh as well as Sri D.K. Singh Chauhan, who appears for the opposite parties at some length.3. Sri Singh with great vehemence argued that the impugned order on the face of it suffers from manifest illegality inasmuch as that the charges levelled against the petitioner in the impugned order do not constitute act of either financial or administrative irregularity which can be attributed to her. According to him it was ...
Nihal Vs. District Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-16-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)AWC1781
N.K. Mehrotra, J.1. This is a petition for issuing a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the impugned orders dated 17.5.2004 and 14.7.2004, passed by the Opposite Party Nos. 1 and 2 contained in Annexures-6 and 8 respectively to the writ petition and also for issuing a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the opposite party No. 2 to decide the application for amendment moved by the petitioner afresh.2. I have heard Shri Virendra Mishra for the petitioner and Shri R.K. Sharma for the Opposite Party No. 3.3. It appears that by the impugned order dated 17.5.2004 (Annexure-6), the amendment application of the petitioner-defendant moved for amendment in written statement in S.C.C. Suit No. 8 of 1993 has been dismissed. The petitioner-defendant filed S.C.C. Revision No. 62 of 2004 which has also been dismissed vide order dated 14.7.2004 (Annexure-8).4. After perusal of the document on record, it appears that opposite party No. 3 T.N. Kaul purchased House No. L-III/1 Sector-D, A...
National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Abhiai Raj Singh and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-16-2004
Reported in: IV(2005)ACC542
ORDERR.P. Misra, J.1. Heard Mr. P.K. Mukherjee, learned Counsel for the appellant and Mr. D.S.M. Tripathi, learned Counsel for the respondents.2. The only submission made by learned Counsel for the appellant is that in view of the provisions of Section 95(2)(h)(ii) of the Motor Vehicles Act, the liability of the Insurance Company is only Rs. 5,000 per passenger only.3. In the aforesaid view of the matter the appeal is allowed to the extent that the appellant Insurance Company is liable to pay only Rs. 5,000 to the claimant. The appellant is further directed to pay interest on the aforesaid amount at the rate of 16% from the date of accident....
- ‹ Prev
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- Next ›
- Last »