Allahabad Court February 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.
Riyaj Fatma (Smt.) Vs. Special Judge/Additional District Judge and ors ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-25-2005
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC850; 2005(3)AWC2208
Mukteshwar Prasad, J.1 . This is landlord's petition for quashing the judgment and decree dated 16.9.1998 (Annexure-13 to the writ petition) and judgment and decree dated 22.7.1997 (Annexure-9 to the writ petition) passed by respondent Nos. 1 and 2 respectively.2. Counter-affidavit and rejoinder-affidavit have been exchanged between the parties and are on record.3. I have heard Sri Dev Raj, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri J.P.S. Chauhan, learned Counsel for respondent No. 3 and have gone through the record carefully.4. It appears that the landlady filed a suit against respondent No. 3 for recovery of arrears of rent and damages and for eviction from the shop in dispute mainly on the ground that the provisions of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 (in short the Act) do not apply and the tenant had sub-let the disputed shop to Raghubir Singh and Raju. The tenant paid no rent w.e.f. 1.1.1991 and did not pay house tax also. The landlady sent a notice determining the tenancy by registered p...
Ram Mohan Srivastava Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-25-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ESC1436
V.K. Shukla, J.1. In these bunch of writ petitions, claim of Class III employees and claim of Class IV employees of recognised institution of Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad, U.P. at Allahabad is for issuing writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to enhance the age of superannuation of the petitioners from 60 to 62 years in same way and manner as it has been extended qua the teaching staff of the institution in terms of Government Order dated 4.2.2004.2. Brief facts of the case as has been disclosed by the petitioners in the aforementioned writ petitions is that they have been appointed as Class III employee and Class IV employees at duly recognised institutions of Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad, U.P. at Allahabad. Contention of the petitioners is that in terms of Regulation 21 of Chapter III of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 age of superannuation of teachers and employees has been provided to be 60 years and once decision has been taken to enhance the age of superannua...
Gulnar Begum (Smt.) and ors. Vs. District Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-25-2005
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC836; 2005(3)AWC2115
S.N. Srivastava, J.1. By way of this petition following reliefs were claimed:-'(i) Issue of writ, order or direction to quash the entire proceedings of regular Misc. Case No. 84/2004 Syed Mohd. Sajid and Ors. v. Smt. Gulnar Begum and Ors. pending in the Court of District Judge, Aligarh.(ii) Issue a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 9.4.2004 passed by District Judge, Aligarh in the aforesaid Misc. Case.(iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of prohibition commanding the Opposite Parties not to proceed further in pursuance of the aforesaid Misc. case.(iv) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Opp. Parties not to interfere with petitioners rights and interests over the land.(v) Issue any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.(vi) Award the cost of the petition to the above named petitioners.'2. From a perusal of record, it would appear that on 5.4.2004,...
Syndet (India) Private Limited Vs. Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribu ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-25-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ESC1239; [2005(105)FLR393]
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard Counsel for the parties and perused the record.2. This writ petition has been filed against the ex parte award dated 31.8.2000 which was published on the notice board on 15.11.2000.3. An application for recalling the ex parte award was moved on 14.1.2001 which was rejected on the ground that the Labour Court become functus officio after 30 days of the publication of the award in terms of Section 6-A of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.4. It appears from the order rejecting the application for setting aside the ex parte award that the Labour Court has held that the summons sent by the Labour Court had been served on the petitioner on 8.5.2000. However, this fact has been denied by the learned Counsel for the petitioner and it is submitted that the summons were never served on the petitioner.5. The Labour Court has not given any finding when and on whom the summons were served. The Post Master has also not been examined. The question as to who has received...
Ashok Singh and ors. Vs. Nizamul Islam Alias Musa and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-25-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)AWC2086
S.N. Srivastava, J.1. The appellants who were arrayed as defendants in O.S. No. 276 of 1967 in the Court of Munsif City, Azamgarh, has preferred the instant second appeal assailing the judgment and decree dated 11.11.1975 passed by lower appellate court whereby it affirmed the judgment and decree dated 23.1.1973 passed by the trial court.2. The dispute in the suit instituted by the plaintiff before the Munsif City, Azamgarh was for the relief of partition and for permanent injunction in relation to property situated in village Harbanspur District Azamgarh. The property in question was originally owned by Sanwaroo who died and was survived by Smt. Muneshwari his widow and three daughters namely, Manuri, Chandauti and Chanati. In the property in question which is a dwelling house, Sanwaroo had half share while half share devolved on Banshi, his brother. It was claimed in the plaint that the property of the deceased to the extent of 1/2 share was inherited by his heirs and out of them, Sm...
Ramesh Rai Vs. Chairman, S.K.G. Bank and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-25-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ESC1594
1. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the circular dated 30.11.2004 which provides for minimum qualifying marks for promotion to be made on the basis of seniority-cum-merit and for quashing the promotion list (Annex. 5) by which the respondent Nos. 3 to 26 stood promoted.2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the petitioner had been working as a Branch Manager, Scale-II in a Bank (which has not been impleaded as a respondent). Further, promotion to Scale-Ill was to be made on the basis of the seniority-cum-merit as provided under the promotion policy dated 29.7.1998. On 30.11.2004, a circular was issued that the Board of Directors have given their approval for filling 26 vacancies of Scale-Ill in consonance with the promotion policy and it further fixed the minimum marks for promotion. The interviews etc. of all the candidates were held on 15.12.2004. Petitioner was also interviewed along with others but could not get promotion. However, the respon...
Dr. Bheem Rao Ambedkar Degree College Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-25-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ESC2162
Devi Prasad Singh, J.1. In these bunch of writ petitions a common question of law and facts are involved, hence, I proceed to decide finally by present common judgment.These bunch of writ petitions have been filed against the impugned Government order dated 9.9.2004, a copy of which has been filed as Annexure-1 to the writ petition by which the State Government has taken a decision that 85 per cent seats of the professional courses shall be filled up by 'Single Window System' appointed by an agency authorised by State Government. Rest of 15 per cent seats have been left over to be filled up by the Committee of Management in accordance with the provision which has been duly approved by the University concerned to whom the said College has been affiliated. This system has been made applicable to the un-aided professional Colleges. So far as minorities institutions are concerned, the quota of management has been extended to 50 per cent subject to fulfilment of other conditions provided by...
Cit Vs. Smt. Sanjeeda Begum
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-25-2005
Reported in: [2006]154TAXMAN346(All)
ORDERThe Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi has referred following question of law under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for opinion to this Court:'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was legally correct in upholding the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner that because the land was situated beyond 8 kms., of municipal limit and being agricultural land no capital gains tax was eligible while all the facts of the case were not fully appreciated by the ITAT ?'The reference relates to the assessment year 1983-84.2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present reference is as under :The respondents assessees are individuals. They owned 1/3rd share each in the land measuring 10 bigha 15 biswas and 19 biswansis in Village Pinjora Baroon, Pargana and Tehsil Saharanpur having acquired the same by inheritance on 16-8-1976. They sold land measuring 2,888 sq. yards during the assessment years in qu...
Cit Vs. Ajmani Industries
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-25-2005
Reported in: [2006]153TAXMAN43(All)
ORDERBy the Court 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad has referred following question of law under section 256(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for opinion to this court :'(1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Tribunal was, in law, justified in agreeing with the D.C. (Appeals) that the assessee firm is an industrial undertaking and the assessee was entitled to relief under section 80J of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ?'The reference relates to the assessment year 1983-84.2. The assessee is a rice miller and it has claimed for deduction under section 80J which was not allowed by the assessing authority as the assessee has failed to prove that more than 10 persons were engaged by it in manufacturing process. The said claim, however, has been allowed by the Assistant Appellate Commissioner as well as by the Tribunal.3. Heard Sri A.N. Mahajan, learned counsel for the revenue. None has appeared on behalf of the...
Vijay Bhan Singh Kasana, S/O Sri Kedar Singh Vs. the State of U.P. Thr ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-24-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ESC1249; [2005(106)FLR846]; (2005)2UPLBEC1781
Ajoy Nath Ray, C.J. and Ashok Bhushan, J.1. This is for admission of Special Appeal from an order of Hon'ble Mr. Justice D.P. Singh dismissing the appellant's writ petition filed in the Court below. The writ petitioner-appellant had been provisionally selected on 7.12.2001 as a constable in the Provincial Armed Constabulary and he had filed an affidavit at that time stating that he was not involved in any criminal case. That affidavit was false he was involved in three eases. After about one and a half years on 5.5.2003 he tendered the second affidavit stating about his involvement in the criminal cases and that he had mistakenly not mentioned it earlier. Within three days of that second affidavit, i.e., on 8.5.2003, the authority pointed out that a police verification had already revealed his involvement in the criminal cases. As such on 20.5.2003 his provisional selection was cancelled.2. The learned Single Judge has written in the judgment that the second declaration of 5.5.2003 was...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »