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.
Arun Kumar Singh Son of Ram Iqbal Singh Vs. State of U.P. Through Secr ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-19-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)AWC1055
Vineet Saran, J.1. The petitioner was granted an arms license in September 2001. His license was suspended in December 2002. After notice to the petitioner, his arms license was thereafter canceled by the District Magistrate, Jaunpur vide order dated 6.3.2003. Against the said order the petitioner filed an appeal, which was allowed by the Commissioner, Varanasi Region, Varanasi on 15.10.2003. After making observations and recording findings in favour of the petitioner, the matter was remanded back to the licensing authority for taking fresh decision. Thereafter by order dated 7.6.2004 passed by the District Maigstrate, Jaunpur the license of the petitioner has again been cancelled. Aggrieved by the said order the petitioner has filed this writ petition. 2. I have heard Sri Ali Hasan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged and with the consent of the learned ...
Laxmi Transport Company Through Its Proprietor Brij Bhushan Sharma S/O ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-19-2005
Reported in: AIR2006All42; 2006(1)AWC916
Sushil Harkauli and Sanjay Misra JJ.1. The petitioners had earlier filed a writ petition No. 55751 of 04, which was disposed of finally by a learned Single Judge of this Court by judgment and order dated 23.12.2004. By that order the learned Single Judge directed the trial Court to decide the application of the petitioners for interim injunction in suit No. 684 of 2004 expeditiously and further directed that till the disposal of the application for interim injunction, the parties shall maintain status quo.2. By this writ petition the petitioners want enforcement of that order of status quo passed by the learned Single Judge If the order has been violated during its continuance,the normal remedy is to file a civil contempt petition before the Single Judge Bench dealing with such contempt matters. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners,such a cival contempt application has already been filed and the same is pending.3. We are of the opinion that normally for an enforcement o...
Sudha Agnihotri Vs. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Additional District ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-19-2005
Reported in: I(2006)ACC11
V.K. Shukla, J.1. Petitioner's husband late Sarvesh Agnihotri met with an accident and died on spot. Aggrieved petitioner filed Claim Petition No. 226 of 2000, Smt. Sudha Agnihotri v. Chandra Mohan and Ors. Said claim petition was partly allowed and a sum of Rs. 1,75,200 (one lac seventy-five thousand two hundred) was awarded as compensation in favour of petitioner and others. Pursuant to said judgment Rs. 20,000 (twenty thousands) was released in favour of the petitioner and the remaining amount of Rs. 80,000 (eighty thousand) which was awarded to the petitioner was deposited in fixed deposit in nationalized Bank of Baroda. Petitioner's entire argument is that she has done beautician course from Mahila Training Centre, Shastri Nagar, Kanpur and in this background on 13.7.2005 petitioner filed an application and requested Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for releasing of the said fixed deposit's amount in her favour. Said application has been rejected. At this juncture present writ petit...
Northern Coalfield Limited, a Government of India Company Incorporated ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-18-2005
Reported in: 2006(2)AWC1642
Yatindra Singh, J. 1. This appeal revolves around interpretation of that part of Tariff order 2000-01, which relates to category HV-2 (Large and Heavy Power) consumer (the HV-2 consumer), who are getting power supply on independent feeder emanating from 400/220/132 KV Sub-station. Such a consumer is assured 500 hours of electric power supply in a month and in case of failure to fulfil this assurance, the consumer is also entitled to rebate. However for this benefit the consumer is liable to pay 15% surcharge on demand and energy charges. The main question in this appeal is, 'Whether such a consumer is further liable to pay additional surcharge of 15%, if it is getting electric power during restricted hours'.THE FACTS2. M/s Northern Coalfield Ltd (the NCL) has coal fields in district Sonebhadra in UP and district Sidhi in MP. It has taken two power connections from the UP Electricity Board (the Board). The first was for 2850 KVA load and was taken on 12.9.1989 for integrated water suppl...
Lakhraj Son of Kamlakant Vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation,
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-18-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)AWC912
S.N. Srivastava, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 26.9.02 of Assistant Settlement Officer Consolidation allowing the appeals, setting aside the order dated 30.6.92 and 5.2.93 of Consolidation Officer and remanding the matter to the Consolidation Officer to decide it in accordance with law on merits after giving opportunity of hearing Jo the parties and a revisional order dismissing revision.2. Learned counsel for petitioner urged that in the present case order of Asstt. Settlement Officer Consolidation is a final order by which the question of compromise entered into between the parties was finally decided and as such it is not a simple remand to decide the matter afresh in accordance with law and cannot be said to be an interlocutory order. Impugned order of Deputy Director of Consolidation is liable to be set aside and matter may be referred back to Deputy Director of Consolidation, Gorakhpur to decide on merit.3. Sri A.K. Tripathi, learned counsel was hear...
Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti Through Its Secretary Vs. Bishan Dass Son ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-18-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)AWC970
R.K. Rastogi, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment and decree dated 19.11.1988 passed by Sri Narendra Singh, then Additional District Judge/Special Judge (E.C.Act), Etawah in LAR No. 76 of 1986, Bishan Das and Ors. v. State of U.P.2. The facts relevant for disposal of this appeal are that on 14.6.76 a Notification Under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act (the Act) was issued by the State of U.P. for acquisition of 33.87 Acres of land situate in village Sirsamau, Pargana, Tahsil and District Etawah for construction of shopping complex of Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti ( the Samiti). The Notification Under Section 6(1) of the Act was also issued on 15.6.76.'The-award was given by the S.L.A.O. Etawah in the above case on 12.10.78 and in that award a. sum of Rs. 3,19,888.79 paise was awarded as compensation.3. An area of 2.40 acres of land situate in plots No. 834, 835, 836, 837 and 838 belonging to respondents No. 1, 2 and 3 was also acquired in the above case. Sri Bishan Das, r...
In Re: Surya Commercial Ltd.; in Re: Nidhi Commercial Enterprises Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-18-2005
Reported in: [2007]137CompCas325(All); [2008]87SCL169(All)
Sunil Ambwani, J.This confirmation petition has been filed by Surya Commercials Ltd., ('transferee company') and Nidhi Commercial Enterprises Ltd., ('transferor company') seeking sanction of the proposed scheme of amalgamation by which Nidhi Commercial Enterprises Ltd., the transferor company, is proposed to be amalgamated in Surya Commercials Ltd., the transferee company, in terms of the scheme of amalgamation, a copy of which has been annexed to the company petition as annexure 1.2. By order dated March 24, 2005, in Company Application No. 4 of 2005, filed on February 2, 2005, both the companies were directed to convene separate meetings of their equity shareholders to consider the scheme of amalgamation, meetings of creditors were not required as the two companies had no creditors. Sri Vikash Chandra Tripathi, advocate was appointed as the chairman and Sri Rajiv Gupta, advocate, as alternate chairman for the said meetings. The notices of the meetings, besides despatch by post under ...
Hari Mohan Agarwal Vs. Divisional Commissioner, Agra Division and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-18-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)AWC1053
ORDERVineet Saran, J. 1. The petitioner was a petty diesel dealer who had obtained a licence from the District Supply Officer, Mathura under the U.P. High Speed Diesel Oil and Light Diesel (Maintenance and Supplies) Distribution Order, 1981. His licence was valid upto 31st March, 2004. Allegedly in an inspection having been conducted by the Supply Inspector and his team on 10.6.2000, certain irregularities were found and consequently the licence of the petitioner had been suspended. Thereafter on 24.7.2000, the District Supply Officer passed an order cancelling the licence of the petitioner. The appeal of the petitioner filed before the Commissioner was also dismissed on 9.7.2003. Aggrieved by the said orders, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.2. I have heard Sri Rajeev Gupta, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as learned standing counsel appearing for the respondents. Counter and rejoinder-'affidavits have been exchanged and with the consent of the learned ...
United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Km. Beenu (Minor) and Two ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-18-2005
Reported in: I(2006)ACC568
ORDER1. This is an appeal against award dated 17.5.2005 awarding Rs. 1,51,000 as compensation.2. We have heard Counsel for the appellant and Mr. R.C. Singh for the respondents.3. It may be mentioned that the petitioner remained admitted in the District Hospital, Gorakhpur, for treatment from 8.10.2002 to 6.11.2002 and then at P.G.I., Lucknow from 8.11.2002 to 16.12.2002.4. The Court below has rightly recorded a finding that a sum of Rs. 1,25,000 was spent as medical expenses. The remaining amount of Rs. 26,000 has been allowed towards expenses on nutritious diet, travelling and stay expenses of the petitioner and her attendants at Lucknow and for professional loss to these attendants and for physical and mental pain and suffering to the petitioner.5. There is no justification to interfere with the impugned award. The appeal has got no merit and is dismissed.However, it is directed that the amount deposited here may be remitted to the Court below....
Ram Briksha Singh Son of Shri Late Sahdeo Singh Vs. Deputy Director Co ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-17-2005
Reported in: 2006(2)AWC1242
S.N. Srivastava, J.1. Challenge in this petition is directed against judgment dated 31.3.2001 passed by Deputy Director, Consolidation.2. The dispute in the instant petition revolves round chak No. 82 belonging to the petitioner. According to the averments in the petition, the respondent No. 3 staked claim for allotment of this Chak before the Deputy Director Consolidation by filing a revision. The case of the petitioner is that the Deputy Director Consolidation allowed the revision without regard being had to the background of the facts and without reckoning with the objection filed by the petitioner.3. The chequered history of the pendency of this writ petition from 2001 onwards in this Court may be noticed before proceeding further. The writ petition having been instituted, the Court granted six weeks' time on 21.5.2001 to file counter affidavit. Sri L.K. Tripathi who filed power to represent Opp. Party No. 3 was further granted two weeks' time to file counter affidavit. On 18.2.200...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »