Allahabad Court February 2005 Judgments
Umesh @ Ummi Son of Jaggu Ahirwar (In Jail) Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-25-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ3043
K.N. Sinha, J.1. Heard Sri. Pulak Ganguli holding brief on behalf of Sri I.K. Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Prashant Kumar holding brief on behalf of Sri Niraj Tripathi, learned counsel for the complainant, learned A.G.A, perused the F.I.R, Post mortem report and rejecting the bail.2. The learned counsel for the applicant has taken me through the F.I.R and statement of informant. According to F.I.R. the fire was suddenly made on account of anger. Thus, this does not contain element of intention. Learned counsel for the applicant has taken me through the statement of informant wherein three lines of bottom were referred. The three lines in the bottom show that after easing out there was some altercation between the deceased and the assailant and they grappled with each other and during this grappling the shot was fired suddenly. It shows that it was only an accident. The learned counsel for the complainant has referred to the order rejecting the bail in which the co...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Krishna Pathak Wife of Late Tarkeshwar Nath Pathak Vs. Vinod Shan ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-25-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)AWC2601; 2005(2)ESC1116
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. This is an application for review of the judgment and order dated 4/3/2004, by which the special appeal filed by the present applicant stood dismissed against the judgment and order dated 21/6/2002 of the learned Single Judge, by which the writ petition of the respondent No. 1 stood allowed, quashing the order dated 30/9/1995, impugned in the writ petition, with a direction to the other respondents to pay the salary to the said respondent No. 1 month by month.2. There has been an inter se dispute between the applicant and Shri Vinod Shanker Tiwari, respondent No. 1 as petitioner had also put her claim for the same post. However, the writ petition filed by the respondent No. 1 stood allowed. Being aggrieved, applicant filed the special appeal, which stood dismissed by the aforesaid judgment and order. Hence this review application.3. We have heard learned counsel for the applicant and have perused the materials available on record.4. This review application has been f...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Pushpa @ Pooja @ Bhawna W/O Shiv Kumar Gautam, D/O Sri Bal Kishan ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-25-2005
Reported in: AIR2005All187; 2005(3)AWC2587
Ashok Bhushan, J. 1. Heard Sri A.T. Kulshrestha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri V.K. Goel and Sri S.R. Verma appearing for the respondents.2. By this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 27.11.2004 passed by the District Judge, Mathura allowing the Civil Revision filed by respondent No. 3 against the order dated 7.5.2004 passed by the Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) allowing an application filed by the petitioner under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act for interim mandamus and litigation expenses. A petition for divorce has been filed by the respondent No. 3 against the petitioner which is registered as Marriage Petition No. 653 of 2002 Shiv Kumar Gautam v. Smt. Puja. The petitioner Smt. Puja filed an application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act for the grant of interim maintenance and expenses for litigation. Learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division) by an order dated 7.5.2004 allowed the application of the petit...
Tag this Judgment!iqbal Ahamad, Vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation,
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-25-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)AWC2423
S.N. Srivastava, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 9.5.2003, passed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Deoria allowing the revision of Gaon Sabha setting aside orders of allotment made by subordinate Consolidation Authorities in respect of Plot No. 757 and further quashing order determining valuation and inclusion of Plot No. 757 in petitioners' Chak No. 15.2. It is borne out from the record that Plot No. 757 area 13 Acre was recorded as Garni in the Khata of Gaon Sabha and was not included in the consolidation scheme, but subsequently by an order of correction passed by Consolidation Officer this plot was included in the consolidation scheme by determining valuation of eight Anna and it was allotted in the chak of petitioners. An appeal preferred by Gaon Sabha against the said order was dismissed vide order dated 13.4.1998 but revision preferred against appellate order was allowed and the plot in question was restored to Gaon Sabha.3. Heard learned coun...
Tag this Judgment!Hemant Singh Son of Sri Ram Pal Singh Vs. Adhyaksha, Zila Panchayat Et ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-25-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ESC1243; [2005(105)FLR498]
Vineet Saran, J.1. The petitioner was initially engaged as a car driver on daily wage basis with Zila Panchayat, Etah on 10.8.1992. He continued to work till 1.8.1994, when the respondent stopped taking work from the petitioner on the ground that the car which was being driven by him had become unfit. Thereafter Zila Panchayat procured a new car in December, 1995 and instead of engaging or appointing the petitioner as a Car driver, it engaged Respondent No. 5 Vijai Singh as a new Car driver. Aggrieved by such action of the respondents, the petitioner raised an industrial dispute and the State Government referred the matter to Labour Court for adjudication. By an award dated 16.10.1997 passed by the Labour Court, the petitioner was reinstated in service with full back wages and continuity of service. The said award was challenged by the Zila Panchayat, Etah in writ petition No. 30805 of 1998 in which an interim order had been initially passed on 12.10.1998 by which it was directed that ...
Tag this Judgment!Kaushal Kishore Son of Gobardhan and ors. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-25-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ3023
M. Chaudhary, J. 1. Both these appeals have arisen out of one and the same judgment dated 20. 4. 81 in sessions trial No. 65 of 1980 State v. Kaushal Kishore and Ors. and sessions trial No. 470 of 1980 State v. Kewal Kishore passed by IV Additional Sessions Judge Fatehpur convicting all the accused appellants under section 396 IPC and sentencing each of them to imprisonment for life thereunder. Co- accused Shanker was acquitted by the court below by the same judgment.2. Since Criminal Appeal No. 799 of 1981 Kaushal Kishore and Ors. v. State of U P Was filed on behalf of all the accused appellants Criminal Appeal No. 901 of 1981 Ram Pal and Ors. v. State of U.P. has become redundant.3. Brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that at 8:00 a.m. on 25.7. 79 Jagat Pal Singh resident of village Lahauri lodged a report at Police Station Hussainganj, District Fatehpur situate at a distance of about seven miles from the place of occurrence contending that at about 7:30 p.m. last evening i.e....
Tag this Judgment!Kaushalya Kanya Inter College Through Its Manager, Sri R.D. Arora and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-25-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)AWC1383; 2005(2)ESC1008; (2005)2UPLBEC1896
Ashok Bhushan, J.1. Heard Sri B.D. Mandhyan, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Satish Mandhyan, for the petitioner, Sri K.A. Ansari, learned counsel, appearing for respondent No. 7, learned standing counsel and Sri Vivek Chaudhary appearing for respondent No. 4.2. This writ petition has been filed by 23 petitioners challenging the order dated 30th December, 1983 passed by Deputy Director of Education, 12th Region, Moradabad by which certain amendments in the scheme of administration of the institutions have been approved.3. Brief facts, necessary for deciding the controversy raised in the writ petition, are; the petitioners are educational institutions in district Moradabad recognised under U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The Act was amended by U.P. Act No. 35 of 1958 by which amendment Section 16-A to 16-I were added in the Act. Section 16-A of the Act provides that there shall be a scheme of administration for every recognised institution. S...
Tag this Judgment!Baboo Lal Vs. Smt. Shiv Kumari and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-25-2005
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC789; 2005(3)AWC2146
Mukteshwar Prasad, J.1. By means of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the tenant has questioned the correctness of the order-dated 12.6.2000 (Annexure-9 to the writ petition) passed by Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Kanpur Nagar (respondent No. 2).2. Counter-affidavit and rejoinder-affidavit have been exchanged between the parties and are on record.3. I have heard Sri Arun Kumar Singh, holding brief of Sri Vipin Sinha, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Shashi Kant Gupta, learned Counsel for respondent No. 2 and have perused the record carefully.4. The following facts are admitted between the parties. Smt. Shiv Kumari, wife of Ramgarib, respondent No. 1, purchased the premises in question bearing House No. 108/65 Gandhi Nagar, Kanpur from Kailash Chandra Pathak. On the ground floor of the said premises one Mahabir Prasad was tenant. After death of Mahabir Prasad and his wife Smt. Cheta, his two sons Baboo Lal (the petitioner) and Basant Lal becam...
Tag this Judgment!Shree Talkies Vs. Labour Court and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-25-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ESC1075
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. These three writ petitions relate to same matter i.e. an ex parte award for issuance of an order for recovery in pursuance of the award and order for recovery of amount due to the petitioner after adjustment of the amount paid by the petitioner in pursuance of the ex parte award.2. Writ Petition No. 16152 of 1999 has been filed challenging the validity and correctness of the ex parte award dated 25.5.1993 in Adjudication Case No. 360 of' 1991 passed by the Labour Court, U.P. Gorakhpur. By the impugned award, the Labour Court has decided the reference regarding termination of services of respondent No. 2, Chandra Prabhakar from the post of operator and has held that he is entitled to reinstatement with continuity of service with back wages as the termination of his services were illegal and unjustified.3. Since the connected writ petitions arise out of the impugned award challenged in Writ Petition No. 16152 of 1999, they are being decided together along with writ pe...
Tag this Judgment!Gulam Mohammad Son of Munna Through Power of Attorney Holder Mohd. Irf ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-25-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)AWC2593
P. Krishna, J.1. The petitioner, Gulam Mohammad, through power attorney holder Mohd. Irfan who is defendant No. 15 in suit No. 244 of 1997, has filed the present writ petition against an order allowing the amendment: of the plaint in a suit for partition filed by the respondent No. 1.2. The facts giving rise to the present writ petition for the purposes of its disposal briefly stated are as follows:-The respondent No. 1 filed suit No. 244 of 1997 impleading 14 persons as defendants for partition of two properties described in the plaint. He claimed 4/9 share in the property No. 1 and 2/9 share in property No. 2. The present petitioner was not initially impleaded as one of the defendants in the suit. It appears that the present petitioner was subsequently impleaded as defendant No. 15 in the suit and he filed a written statement and also claimed partition of his 2/3 share in the property No. 1 and pleaded that he has become the owner of the property No. 2 by adverse possession. The part...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »