Allahabad Court April 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.
Javed Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-05-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ESC1533
1. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the directions contained in the communication dated 11.2.2005 sent by the Principal Secretary, Government of U.P. to the Divisional Commissioners/District Magistrates and for a direction to the Nagar Palika Parishad, Khatauli, district Muzaffarnagar to execute the agreement of Tehbazari for the year 2005-2006 in favour of the petitioner.2. The petitioner has brought on record the communication dated 11.2.2005 sent by the Principal Secretary. Government of U.P. It has been pointed out that the State Government after a careful consideration has taken a decision that the yearly contracts of Tehbazari for Nagar Palika Parishad/Nagar Panchayats should be stopped and that the same should be collected through their own officers. This policy is being sought to be challenged on the ground that the State Government had no power to regulate the procedure of collection of Tehbazari.3. We have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the lea...
Jaiswal GraIn Agency and anr. Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-05-2005
Reported in: AIR2005All359; 2005(3)AWC2989
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 2.1.2005, passed by respondent No. 2 and for a direction to the respondents to pay interest on the amount received by the respondents towards the sale of goods after confiscation of the same under provisions of Section 6A of The Essential Commodities Act, 1955, (hereinafter called 'the Act 1955').2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the petitioner No. 1 is a proprietary firm engaged in the business of purchase, sale and storage of goods/grains having a licence under the provisions of U. P. Food Grains Dealers (Licensing and Restriction on Hoarding) Order, 1976. The petitioners had purchased huge quantity of grains, i.e., fine rice in 1985. However, 120 bags of the said consignment had been confiscated by the authorities under Section 6A(1) of the Act, 1955. The said rice had been sold for an amount of Rs. 17,600 on 5.1.1986 and the amount was retained by the respondents. Petiti...
Cantonment Board Vs. Madho Prasad Yadav
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-05-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)AWC453
P.K. Chatterji, J.1. This appeal has been filed under Section 100, C.P.C. against the judgment and decree dated 29.11.1988 in Civil Appeal No. 402 of 1981, Madho Prasad v. Cantonment Board, Faizabad, passed by Sri O. P. Verma, Second Additional Civil Judge, Faizabad allowing the appeal of the respondent with costs and setting aside the judgment and decree dated 22.10.1980 passed by Vth Additional Munsif, Faizabad in Regular Suit No. 74 of 1979 by which the suit of the respondent was dismissed with costs.2. Facts of the case are that the respondent, Madho Prasad Yadav was appointed initially on 11.2.1970 till 19.10.1970 on the post of Octroi Moharrir which used to be sanctioned from time to time. During the period commencing from 11.2.1970 to 21.7.1974 his services were terminated several times and appointed afresh. In the last, the sanction had expired on 21.07.1974 and the post was not sanctioned further and the respondent was not given further appointment. The respondent filed a suit...
Suresh NaraIn Tripathi S/O Devi Dayal Tripathi, Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-04-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ3479
M.C. Jain, J.1. These two appeals are connected with each other having arisen out of judgment 22.1.2000 passed by Sri A.K. Mishra, Addl. Sessions Judge/Special Judge (DAA), Lalitpur in Sessions Trial No. 126 of 1993. The represented appeal has been filed by the three accused appellants, namely, Suresh Narain Tripathi, Bhuvaneshwar Kumar Nautiyal and Ramji Dubey against their conviction under Sections 436 and 201 I.P.C. Instead of being sentenced to imprisonment, they have been released on probation of good conduct for a period of three years. The Government Appeal has been filed by the State against their acquittal under Section 409 I.P.C.2. The background facts may be noted. The incident occurred in between the night of 30.9.1992/1.10.1992. A fire broke out in P.C.F. Godown situate at Bighakhet within P.S. Kotwali, District Lalitpur in which Tendu leaves had been stacked. The F.I.R. was lodged by the accused Bhuvaneshwar Kumar Nautiyal (Godown Officer) on 1.10.1992 at 2.40 P.M. Tendu ...
Sameer Ahmad, Son of Shri Ameer Ahmad Vs. State of U.P. Through Princi ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-04-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)AWC2992
R.K. Agrawal, J.1. By means of the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, Sameer Ahmad, seeks the following reliefs:-'(a) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to permit the petitioner to sell his unsold stock of country liquor for the excise year 2003-04 in the current year.(b) to issue any such other suitable writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.(c) to award the costs of this petition to the petitioner.'2. By way of an amendment which has been allowed vide Court's order dated 14.12.2004, another relief No. (d) has been, added, as follows:-'(d) to issue a writ, order or (direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the orders dated 9.8.2004 (Annexure '6' to the writ petition) and the order dated 11.8.2004 (Annexure '7' to the writ petition) passed by the District Excise Officer, Aligarh, respondent No. 4.'3. As ...
State of U.P. Vs. Abdul Sharif Son of Mulayam Khan and Mulayam Khan So ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-04-2005
Reported in: II(2005)DMC166
M.C. Jain, J.1. The State has preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 10.6.1999 passed by Sri Puran Singh, the then Special Judge (E.C. Act), Etawah in Sessions Trial No. 395 of 1993, acquitting the accused respondents Abdul Sharif (husband) and his father Mulayam Khan (father-in-law) of the deceased Fahiman of the charges under Sections 304B, 498A and 494 I.P.C. The accused respondent Mulayam Khan died during the pendency of the appeal and the same abated respecting him under order dated 17.9.2003.2. The facts may be stated briefly. The incident took place in between the night of 6/7.1.1990 in village Senganpur, P.S. Ajitmal, District Etawah and the report was lodged on 9.1.1990 at 2.30 P.M. by Suleman PW 2 (brother of the deceased). Fahiman was married with respondent No. 1. The accused respondents started treating her with cruelty, pressurising her to bring money from her parents. The informant and other members of his family tried at their level best to dissuade them but t...
Mohabbat S/O Pyare Lal Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-04-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ3238
Umeshwar Pandey, J.1. This jail appeal arises out of the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 26.3.2001 passed by the Special Judge (D.A.A.), Etah. 2. The brief facts of the case, which has led to prosecution of the appellant, are that on 5.10.1994 at about 4.00 P.M. PW 1, the prosecutrix - Smt. Chakrawati was scrubbing gross in the field. The accused Mohabbat along with: another approached her. He thereafter grounded her in the field and committed rape, whereupon she raised alarm which attracted the witnesses PW 2 Meghnath and PW 3 Raja Ram. The accused Mohabbat noticing the witnesses approaching him snatched her silver chain and golden earrings and ran away. In the process of force used for commission of rape, the prosecutrix as per the F.I.R. received injuries in her right leg. The report oh the incident was lodged on the same day at 9.55 P.M. at the Police Station and the case was registered against the accused.3. Smt. Chakrawati later on was sent for medical examina...
Sri Gurbux Singh Vs. the Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-04-2005
Reported in: (2005)198CTR(All)598; [2006]280ITR465(All)
Prakash Krishna, J.1. The present reference under Income Tax Act (here in after referred to as the Act is at the instance of the assessee. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following question of law under section 256(1) of the Act for opinion to this Court.'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was legally correct in holding that the assessee was not totally blind in keeping in view the clear finding of the Doctor that the assessee is a blind person.' 2. The reference relates to the assessment years 1982- 83. The assessee is a partner in M/s Bombay Motor Stores and enjoyed share income from the aforesaid firm. The deduction of a sum of Rs.10,000/- was claimed by the assessee under Section 80U of the Act which was refused by the income tax Officer art the ground that the assessee was not ' totally blind'. It may be stated here that the assessee in support of his claim for deduction under section 80U the A...
Aditya Dev Singh Vs. Registrar, Chhatrapati Sahuji Maharaj University
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-04-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)ESC1434a
Janardan Sahai, J.1. The petitioner appeared in B.A. III examination of the Chhatrapati Sahuji Maharaj University, Kanpur, 2004. The grievance of the petitioner is about the marks awarded to him in Sociology Papers I, II and III and Ancient History I, II and III papers. The answer books were produced by Sri Neeraj Tewari counsel for the University and they were also perused by counsel for the petitioner. It is common ground between the counsel for the petitioner and Sri Neeraj Tewari counsel for the University that Sociology II and III papers consisted of three Sections A, B and C and in Section B there were 15 questions each carrying two marks but the examiner has not awarded separate marks in each of the 15 questions but has awarded consolidated marks at the end of the questions. The evaluation therefore made is not proper.2. As regards Ancient History Papers I and II, the grievance is similar. Section B in these two papers also consists of 15 questions each carrying two marks but it...
Smt. Rajpati Devi Vs. Ram Sewak Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-04-2005
Reported in: 2005(2)AWC2050
S.N. Srivastava, J.1. The defendant-appellant has preferred this review petition in which is impugned the judgment of this Court dated 28.12.2004, rendered by Hon'ble B. K. Rathi, J, whereby second appeal was dismissed holding that no substantial question of law arose for decision.2. Initially, a preliminary objection was brought to bear assailing the jurisdiction of this Court which was a Court presided over by a Judge other than the Judge who decided the second appeal and therefore, arguments were heard and the preliminary objection was disposed of by means of order dated 31.3.2005 in which plea was upheld that review was maintainable. The case was set down for hearing on merit on sustainability of review petition on grounds as envisaged in Order XLVII, Rule 1, C.P.C. for today. It is today that the matter has been heard on merit at prolix length.3. A brief resume of necessary facts is essential for proper appreciation of the dispute involved in this case. It would appear that a suit...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »