Allahabad Court November 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.
Vijay Kumar Son of Sri Ram Chandra Vs. District Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-16-2005
Reported in: 2006(2)AWC1433
Bharati Sapru, J.1. These are two writ petitions being writ petitions being writ petition No. 31071 of 1996 and 33097 of 1996 arising out of the same impugned order dated 11.7.1996 passed by the District Judge, Budaun in Civil Revision No. 14 of 1995.2. I have heard S/Sri U.C. Mishra and H.R. Mishra learned Counsel appearing in both the writ petitions and Sri R.P.S. Chauhan who is appearing on behalf of the respondents.3. The facts of the case are that there is a society by the name of U.P. State Co-operative Land Development Bank Ltd., Branch Sahaswan, District Budaun, (hereinafter referred to as the Co-operative Society) which is apex society within the meaning of Section 2(a-4) of the U.P. Co-operative Societies. Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the Act, 1965). Out of the regular business of the Co-operative Society, one of the businesses of the socity is also to give loans.4. The respondent No. 2 Jograj Singh applied and obtained a loan from the Co-operative Society after he h...
National Textiles Corporation (U.P.) Ltd. Vs. Presiding Officer, Labou ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-16-2005
Reported in: 2006(2)AWC1618
D.P. Singh, J.1. Heard Counsel for the parties.2. This writ petition is directed against an order dated 26.6.2001 allowing an application under Section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.3. Swadeshi Cotton Mills Company Limited (here-in-after referred to as Company) owned a Cotton Mill known as Swadeshi Cotton Mills, Kanpur (here-in-after referred to as Mills). The Company also owned majority of shares in Swadeshi Mining and Manufacturing Company Limited (here-in-after referred to as Manufacturing Company) and was controlling .and managing a Sugar Mill at Gorakhpur. The Mills were nationalized under Central Act No. 30 of 1986-with effect from 1.4.1985. The Mills after being vested in the Centnl Government was made a unit of the National Textile Corporation, U.P., Limited, Kanpur (here-in-after referred to as Corporation) and in pursuance of Section 12 of he aforesaid Act, the employees of the Mills became employees of the Corporation with the same right and interest. Prior to ...
Chhotey Badri Prasad Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-16-2005
Reported in: 2006CriLJ711
ORDERK.N. Ojha, J.1. Instant application under Section 482 Cr. P.C. has been moved by Chhotey, resident, of Mohalla Madhiya, Naka, police station Kotwali Nagar, district Banda, to set aside the order dated 30.9.2005 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Banda, in S.T. No. 254 of 2003, State v. Shobhit Chaturvedi whereby application 186 Kha moved by the accused-applicant was rejected and objection 188 Kha filed by learned D.G.C. (criminal) against the application 186 Kha was allowed. Application 186 Kha was moved to recall the order dated 26.7.2005 whereby the learned Sessions Judge suo-motu directed PW 6 Siraj Ahmad, Investigating Officer to be re-examined on some points.2. Heard Sri K.S. Tiwari, learned Counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and have gone through the record.3. The fact of the case is that S.T. No. 254 of 2003, State v. Shobhit Chaturvedi is pending in the court of Sessions Judge, Banda, under Section 302/34 I.P.C. police station Kotwali Nagar, Banda, against the accused p...
Ramesh Chandra Agarwal Vs. Om Prakash Agarwal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-16-2005
Reported in: 2006(2)AWC1481
Sanjay Misra, J.1. Heard Sri Satish Chaturvedl, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and Sri K. K. Dubey, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of respondents No. 1, 2 and 3.2. The instant first appeal from order has been filed against the order dated 7.11.2002, passed by Civil Judge (Senior Division) Jhansi in Original Suit No. 158 of 2002. An application 6 Ga-2 for grant of temporary injunction had been filed by the plaintiff and an ex parte injunction dated 21.5.2002, had been granted to him, a copy whereof has been filed along with affidavit supporting the stay application. While granting the ex parte temporary injunction the trial court has recorded that by virtue of compromise, property in dispute was to go to the share of the plaintiff and therefore, the compromise decree in Suit No. 105 of 1992 between the parties is binding upon them and the tenant (respondent No. 7 Life Insurance Corporation Ltd.) ought to either deposit the rent in the Court or under Section 30...
Smt. Raphia Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-16-2005
Reported in: 2006(2)AWC1226
S.N. Srivastava, J. 1. When the case was taken, this was brought to the notice of the Court that the caveat was reported by the Stamp Reporter when the writ petition was presented for reporting before him, but subsequently he scored out the same.2. Learned Counsel for the petitioner stated that caveat was wrongly reported by the Stamp Reporter, but on his objection to the effect that caveat remains effective for only 90 days, the report was scored out and another report to the effect that no caveat has been filed was made by the Stamp Reporter. Learned Counsel for the petitioner referred Section 148A(5) of the C.P.C. in support of his contention.3. Learned Counsel for caveator, in reply, urged that provisions of C.P.C. will not be applicable with regard to lodging caveat in writ petitions. The only provision under which caveat could be lodged in writ petitions is Rule 5 of Chapter XXII of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952. He further urged that caveat was rightly reported by the Sta...
Ram Kumar Dubey Son of Sri Phool Chandra Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-14-2005
Reported in: [2006(108)FLR1213]
Bharati Sapru, J.1. By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the judgment and award dated 15.3.1989 passed by the Labour Court in adjudication case No. 42 of 1987.2. I have heard Sri Rakesh Pandey learned Counsel for the petitioner, Smt. Kritika Singh learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent company and have perused the record.3. Petitioner was terminated by the order dated 1.3.1983 which clearly reflects that this was not a plain and simple letter of discharge. The reason for terminating the petitioner workman was on account of fact that he was facing criminal charges for having committed offences under Section 395/397 I.P.C. from 13.5.1980 to 22.2.1983.4. It is for this reason, the respondent company stated that it could not keep the petitioner workman in employment as the offences committed by him involve moral turpitude. The respondent company also pleaded that it has lost confidence and terminated the services of the petitioner workman und...
Nanak Chand Narwani Son of Sri Bikh Chand Narwani Vs. State of U.P. Th ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-14-2005
Reported in: 2006(2)AWC1428
Bharati Sapru, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State. Learned Counsel for respondent No. 5 has not put in appearance. 2. The present petition has been filed seeking a writ of certiorari to quash the two orders 20.2.98 and 19.8.98 passed by respondent No. 2 & 1 respectively.3. The admitted fact of the case are that an advertisement was issued by the concerned Department on 1.3.97 by which Khasra No. 302 having an area of 8 acres was advertised for mining. In pursuance of the said notification, the petitioner moved an application for grant of lease of Khasra No. 302, area 8 acres of a place by the name of Gora Machhiya in District Jhansi. The application of the petitioner was made for the plot of Khasra No. 302 having an area of 8 acres. It is the petitioner's contention that the petitioner was the first applicant to reach his application on 2.4.97. Thus, the petitioner states that under the provisions of Rule 9 of the U.P. Minor Mineral...
The Commissioner, Trade Tax Vs. Jagdamba Agencies
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-14-2005
Reported in: [2006]148STC524(All)
Rajes Kumar, J.1. Present revision under Section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') is directed against the order of the Tribunal dated 20th June, 1996 relating to the assessment year, 1990-91by which the Tribunal has set aside the order passed under Section 10-B of the Act.Dealer/opposite party (hereinafter referred to as 'Dealer') was parrying on the business of diesel engines. The assessing authority passed the assessment order on 25th February, 1995 and accepted the books of account and disclosed turnover of Rs. 11,79,200/-, Later on, Deputy Commissioner (Executive) issued notice dated 31st August, 1995 under Section 10-B of the Act. The notice was issued mainly on the ground that on the perusal of the record, it was found that the dealer had opening stock of 47 diesel engines and upto 31st July, 1990 the diesel engines have not been imported and 29 diesel engines imported against Form 31 No. 2227291 crossed Fatehpur Sikri check post on 31.07.1990, ...
Vijay Kumar and Krishna Kumar Sons of Satya Prakash Vs. Iind Additiona ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-14-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)AWC934
S.U. Khan, J.1. Respondents 3 to 10 Smt. Padmawati and Ors. filed a release application in respect of building in dispute which is a shop under Section 12/16 of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972. In the release application it was stated that M/s Kesarmal Mohanlal and Shri Mohan Lal who were the tenants of the shop in dispute had sublet the shop to petitioners Vijay Kumar and Krishna Kumar. In the release application initialy petitioners were not impleaded as parties. However, they appeared in the said proceedings and stated that they were the valid tenants of the shop in dispute. Petitioners prayed for regularization of their tenancy. In the release application respondents 11 to 22 were impleaded as opposite parties and it was stated that they were co-owners but had no interest in being impleaded as applicants in the release application. In the release application the need set up was for Sushil Kumar Gupta - respondent No. 7. It was also stated therein that respondents 11 to 22 had no objection ...
Om Prakash Son of Shri Ram Nath Vs. 10th Additional District and Sessi ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Nov-14-2005
Reported in: 2006(2)AWC1556
S.U. Khan, J.1. Sukh Pal Singh since deceased and survived by respondent No. 3 to 12 filed SCC Suit (Suit) No. 187 of 1976 against petitioner Om Prakash and respondents No. 13 and 14 Rudra Prasad Vajpai and Vishwanath prasad In the suit, it was alleged that defendants 2 and 3 were the owners landlords and Sukh Pal Singh plaintiff was their tenant and that plaintiff had sublet a portion of the tenanted accommodation to Om Prakash hence Sukh Pal Singh was landlord of Om Prakash.2. Relief of eviction was sought on the ground of default in payment of rent and material alteration. The ground of material alteration does not survive as both the Courts below have decided the same in favour of the petitioner.3. One of the owners landlords Vishwanath Prasad defendant No. 3 / Respondent No. 14 appeared as witness in the suit. True copy of his oral statement has been annexed as annexure 6 to the writ petition. He supported the case of chief tenant / plaintiff Sukh Pal Singh. JSCC, Kanpur through j...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »