Allahabad Court October 2005 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.
Ravindra Singh S/O Sri Dharam Pal Singh Vs. Regional Higher Education ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-25-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)AWC988
Tarun Agarwala, J. 1. On the retirement of an employee, a vacancy occurred on a Class-IV post in a Post Graduate College, which is affiliated to Chaudhary Charan Singh University, Meerut. The Principal of the institution sought permission from the Regional Higher Education Officer, Meerut to fill up the vacancy. The authority by an order dated 5.12.2000 accorded approval to the college authority to fill up the post. It transpires that the college advertised the vacancies in two newspapers pursuant to which, 223 candidates appeared and the selection committee recommended the name of the petitioner. The college issued an appointment letter to the petitioner and also forwarded his papers to the Regional Higher Education Officer, Meerut, for grant of financial approval.2. The Regional Higher Education Officer by its letter dated, 14.5.2001 directed the Principal to intimate as to whether the vacancy was filled up after applying the roster as required under the Uttar Pradesh Public Services...
S. Majumdar (D.) Through L.Rs. Vs. A.D.J. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-25-2005
Reported in: 2006(2)AWC1096
S.U. Khan, J.1. This is tenant's writ petition arising out of eviction/release proceedings initiated by Kanti Prasad Maheshwari, landlord respondent No. 2, on the ground of bona fide need under Section 21 of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972. Release application was registered as P.A. Case No. 13 of 1979 and was filed by Kanti Prasad, respondent No. 2 landlord against S. Majumdar, original tenant-petitioner, since deceased and survived by L.Rs. Accommodation in dispute is a house. Landlord stated that his family and the families of his three brothers consisted of 22 members, including seven married couples and they had only ten rooms at their disposal in their ancestral house hence he required additional separate accommodation.2. Prescribed authority held that ten rooms were sufficient for 22 or 23 members, hence need was not bona fide. Question of comparative hardship was also decided in favour of the tenant. Release application was accordingly rejected on 9.11.1979 by the Prescribed Authority/...
Surendra Pal Singh Vs. Chander Parkash and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-25-2005
Reported in: AIR2006All59; 2006(1)AWC938
ORDERAnjani Kumar, J.1. Heard learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the revisionist-plaintiff.2. By means of present revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the revisionist-plaintiff challenges the order dated 7th October, 2005, passed by the trial Court, whereby the trial Court has refused to frame the additional issues as prayed for by learned Counsel for the plaintiff and rejected the application 73 C2 filed by the revisionist.3. The brief facts of the present case are that the plaintiff-revisionist filed suit before the trial Court. The trial Court after hearing learned Counsel for the parties have framed the following issues in presence of the learned Counsel for the parties:1. Whether the plaintiff is owner of the property in suit by way of adverse possession as alleged in para 8 of the plaint ?2. Whether the plaintiff is in possession of the property in suit as alleged in the plaint?3. Whether the constructions and fixtures existing on the property in suit be...
Khalid Noor Khan Vs. Iiird A.D.J. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-25-2005
Reported in: 2006(2)AWC1098
S.U. Khan, J.1. This is tenant's writ petition arising out of eviction/release proceedings initiated by landlord respondent No. 3 Tajammul Hussain (since deceased and survived by legal representatives) against him on the ground of bona fide need under Section 21 of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972. Property in dispute is a shop. In the release application the need set up was to settle the son of the landlord in business. The release application was registered as P.A. Case No. 18 of 1988. Prescribed Authority, Rampur rejected the release application through judgment and order dated 1,3.1990. Against the said judgment and order landlord respondent No. 3 filed Rent Appeal No. 48 of 1990. IIIrd A.D.J., Rampur through judgment and order dated 24.5.1993, allowed the appeal, set aside the judgment and order passed by the prescribed authority and allowed the release application of the landlord hence this writ petition by the tenant.2. The prescribed authority had found the need of the landlord to settl...
Vijay Kumar Son of Baldev Mitra Vs. District Supply Officer/Delegated ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-24-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)AWC833
S.U. Khan, J.1. Respondents 2 and 3, Anil Agarwal and Shrimati Poonam Agrawal, are the landlords. Respondent No. 5 filed an allotment application under Section 16(1) (a) of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 before rent Control and Eviction Officer alleging therein that Baldev Mitra, respondent No. 4, who was the tenant had constructed his own house and had shifted his residence there, hence the house in dispute was vacant. Rent Control and Eviction Officer /District supply Officer, Meerut, before whom the case was registered as Case No. 41 of 2001 Sanjay Gupta v. Anil Agarwal through order dated 29.9.2005 declared the house in dispute to be vacant under Section 12(3) of the Act. Tenant Vijay Kumar, who is son of Baldev Mitra, has filed the instant writ petition, challenging the order of declaration of vacancy.2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that when the house in dispute was given on rent to his father Baldev Mitra, petitioner was also major and hence he also became tenant. Firs...
Ram Bahadur Son of Shankar Lal, Vs. 3rd Additional District Judge and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-24-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)AWC802
S.U. Khan, J.1. Property in dispute consists of two adjoining shops. Western shop numbered as shop No. 1 was owned by Munshi Lal eastern shop numbered, as shop No. 2 was owned by Babu Ram. Respondents Nos. 2 to 8 are legal representatives of Munshi Lal while respondent Nos. 9 and 10 are legal representatives of Babu Ram. According to the landlords respondents western shop was let out to am Bahadur petitioner No. 1 and eastern shop to Hazari Lal-petitioner No. 2. It has further been stated by the respondents that Ram Bahadur was a Government servant hence he asserted that his son i.e. Rajendra Singh - petitioner No. 3 was the tenant of the western shop. Rent of western shop is Rs. 16/- per month and of eastern shop initially it was Rs. 10/- per month however, later on it was enhanced to Rs. 12.50. Petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 Hazari Lal and Rajendra Singh filed an injunction suit being O.S. No. 36 of 1979 against landlords-respondents 2 to 10 seeking to restrain them from evicting the plaint...
Sri Shiv Shankar Awasthi Son of Sri Badri Prasad Avasthi Vs. Additiona ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-24-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)AWC810
S.U. Khan, J.1. This is tenant's writ petition arising out of suit for eviction filed by respondent No. 3 Anand Chand Man Singh (since deceased and survived by Legal Representatives) against petitioner Shiv Shanker Awasthi (since deceased and survived by Legal Representatives). The suit was registered as Suit (S.C.C. Suit) No. 34 of 1981. The main ground taken in the suit for eviction of the tenant was material alteration. Earlier also, an eviction suit had been filed by the landlord against tenant. In the said suit compromise was entered into and tenant delivered possession of a small portion of the tenanted accommodation to the landlord and landlord under the said Agreement constructed a wall to separate the portion which was left in the tenancy occupation of the tenant from other portions in occupation of other tenants. In the suit-giving rise to the instant writ petition, tenant on the one hand pleaded that under the compromise entered into in S.C.C. Suit No. 20 of 1974 tenant was ...
Dr. Jai Kishan Prasad Khandelwal Son of Late Sri Chhotey Lal Gupta Vs. ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-24-2005
Reported in: 2006(2)AWC1316
S.U. Khan, J.1. This is landlord's writ petition arising out of eviction/release proceedings initiated by him against respondents 2 and 3 Dau Dayal and Chandra Bhan, the tenants on the ground of bonafide need under Section 21 of UP. Act No. 13 of 1972. All the parties i.e. original petitioner - landlord as well as both the tenants i.e. respondent Nos. 2 and 3 have died and have been substituted by their legal representatives. Property in dispute is a shop. Release application was filed for the need of one of the sons of landlord who is now one of the petitioners in the writ petition. Release application was registered as P.A. case No. 2 of 1980. Prescribed Authority/1st Additional Civil Judge, Agra through judgment and order dated 26.3.1982 'allowed the release application against which tenants-respondents Nos. 2 and 3 filed rent control appeal No. 32 of 1983. VII A.D.J., Agra through judgment and order dated 27.2.1985 allowed; the appeal set aside the judgment and order of the Prescri...
Surendra Kumar Dwivedi, Vs. the Vth Additional District Judge,
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-24-2005
Reported in: 2006(2)AWC1318
S.U. Khan, J. 1. Respondent No. 3 Bhani Ram filed a suit against Sundar Lal Dwivedi since deceased and survived by the petitioners being SCC suit No. 450 of 1978 on the file of JSCC/Munsiff, Jhansi. In the suit it was stated that defendant was tenant on a room of house No. 130 at the rent of Rs. 15/- per month, he was defaulter in payment of rent and had not paid the rent inspite of notice of demand and termination of tenancy. The defendant Sundar Lal Dwivedi filed written statement stating therein that initially he was the tenant of the entire house on behalf of custodian evacuee property, that thereafter one Sindhi purchased the said house and on his request defendant vacated half of the house and rent was reduced from Rs. 10/- to Rs. 5/- per month, that thereafter respondent No. 3 Bhani Ram alongwith his brother purchased the house in dispute, that the son of defendant Sundar Lal was in the service of firm of respondent No. 3 Bhani Ram hence Respondent No. 3 persuaded the defendant ...
Sudhir Kumar Agrawal Son of Shri Bisheshwar Dayal Alias Bileshwar Daya ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-24-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)AWC1051
S.U. Khan, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Shrimati Seema Agarwal, Learned counsel who has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of landlord respondent. 2. All the facts necessary to decide the point involved are conained in the writ petition and its annexdures, hence there is no need for counter affidavit. Learned counsel for landlord respondent also agrees to the suggestion of the Court for final disposal of the writ petition at the admission stage without any counter affidavit.3. Landlord respondent has filed S.C.C. Suit No. 118 of 1998 against the tenant petitioner which is pending before J.S.C.C. Aligarh. In the suit landlord filed an application for striking off the defence of the tenant. The trial court by order dated 18.97004 struck off the defence of the tenant. The said order was maintained by A.D.J. Court No. 6 Aligarh in S.C.C. Revision No. 84 of 2004, which was dismissed on 9.9.2005. The said orders have been challenged in this writ petition. 4. On 5.10.2005...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »