Allahabad Court July 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.
Prem Jeet Singh Gujral S/O Late Avtar Singh Vs. Debt Recovery Appellat ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-20-2005
Reported in: AIR2005All351; 2005(4)AWC3858-O; II(2007)BC561; [2006]130CompCas438(All)
Arun Tandon, J.1. Heard Sri Sashi Nandan, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Anurag Jauhari, Advocate on behalf of the petitioner, and Sri Sanjeev Singh, Advocate on behalf of respondent No. 2.2. The Bank of Baroda, Fatehpur Main. Branch though its Branch Manager (respondent No. 2), which is a banking company duly constituted under the Banking Companies (Acqisition and Transfer of Undertakings), Act, 1970, filed a civil suit in the Judgeship of Fatehpur in the year 1995 for a money decree of Rs. 28,41,263/-, against the principal-borrower,Sri Guru Bachan Singh as well as against the guarantor Sri Prern Jeet Singh Gujral. The suit was registered as Original Suit No. 84 of 1995. During the pendency of the said suit proceedings, a Tribunal was constituted under Section 3 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institution Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the 1993 Act) at Jabalpur Accordingly the proceedings were transferred to the said Tribunal at Jabalpur. However, a Tribun...
The Chairman, U.P. State Road Transport Corporation and the Regional M ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-20-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)AWC211
Arun Tandon, J.1. Heard Sri Samir Sharma Advocate on behalf of the petitioner.2. U.P. State Road Transport Corporation, Lucknow through its Regional Manager has filed this writ petition with the prayer that the order dated 03.07.2004 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Ghaziabad in Execution Case No. 4 of 2004 as well as recovery proceedings initiated against the Corporation under the Motor Vehicles Act in pursuance of the award dated 19.12.2003 passed in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 76 of 2003 be quashed.3. Respondent nos. 2 to 5 filed Motor Accident Claim Case No. 76 of 2003 before the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Ghaziabad claiming compensation due to the death of one Rakesh because of rash and negligent driving of the Corporation's Bus.4. The Motor Accident Claim Tribuinal by means of award dated 19.12.2003 awarded Rs.4,15,000/- as compensation payable to the claimants. During this period vide Notification dated 17.10-.2003 the U.P. State Road Transport Corporation was...
Prem Prakash Maheshwari Vs. Gyaneshwar Sharma
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-20-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)AWC3184
Anjani Kumar, J.1. These two writ petitions, namely, Writ Petition No. 34544 of 2001 filed by Prem Prakash Maheshwari and Writ Petition No. 34545 of 2001 filed by Smt. Keshar Bai Jain and another, since raise common questions of fact and law which have been decided by the appellate authority under the provisions of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) by a common judgment. The tenants having felt aggrieved by the order passed by the appellate authority, whereby the appeals filed by the landlord were allowed by the common judgment dated 18th August, 2001, have approached this Court by means of these writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. The two petitioners in the two writ petitions are tenants of two shops and the respondent, Gyaneshwar Sharma, is the landlord. The landlord-respondent filed two applications against the two petitioners for release of two shops under the provisions of the Act for the purpose of bona fide requirement whic...
NaraIn Shankar Sharma Vs. Smt. Asha Asthana
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-20-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)AWC3859E
Anjani Kumar, J.1. By means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner-landlord challenges the order dated 13th December, 2004, passed by the appellate court, whereby the lower appellate court dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner against the order dated 9th August, 1995, passed by the Judge, Small Causes Court by which the trial court has allowed the claim of the petitioner-landlord in part.2. The facts leading to the filing of the present writ petition are that the plaintiff-landlord, petitioner in this writ petition, filed a suit against the respondent-defendant, who is tenant of the accommodation in dispute after terminating his tenancy from the accommodation in dispute for recovery of arrears of rent and ejectment. At the time of the disposal of the case, the suit filed by the petitioner was transferred to the Court of Judge, Small Causes Court, Bulandshahr, who after hearing the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the parties...
Surendra Kumar JaIn Vs. Prescribed Authority/Civil Judge (Senior Divis ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-20-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)AWC639
Anjani Kumar, J.1. The petitioner-tenant aggrieved by the order passed by the prescribed authority under the provisions of the U.P. Act No. XIII of 1972, whereby the prescribed authority rejected the application of the tenant-petitioner with a prayer to accept the written statement filed by the tenant-petitioner, approached this Court by means of present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.2. The brief facts leading to the filing of the present writ petition are that the respondent-landlord filed an application under Section 21(1)(b) of the Act before the prescribed authority on the ground that the accommodation in dispute may be released in favour pf the landlord, as the building in Which the accommodation in dispute is situated is in dilapidated condition, which requires demolition and reconstruction. This application has been filed by the respondent-landlord on 26th July, 2002. On 12th March, 2004, an application was filed by landlord before the prescribed a...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Ema India Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-20-2005
Reported in: [2008]296ITR510(All)
1. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad, has referred the following question of law under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') for the opinion of this court:Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in holding that the value of work-in-progress was to be taken at the cost of raw material consumed and no part of direct labour, overheads was allocable to it and that the ratio laid down in CIT v. British Paints India Ltd. : [1991]188ITR44(SC) did not apply to the case?2. The present reference relates to the assessment year 1986-87.3. The brief facts of the case are as follows:On facts, the assessee is a company engaged in the manufacturing of electronic induction heating equipment. The Tribunal found that the assessee had admittedly been manufacturing goods which were tailor-made for the specific requirements of its customers and unless the whole of the machinery was complete, the work-in-progress ...
New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Laxmi NaraIn S/O Sri Raghubir Sin ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-19-2005
Reported in: IV(2005)ACC83; 2006ACJ1730; 2005(4)AWC3426
R.K. Rastogi, J.1. Both these appeals have been filed against two awards passed in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 233 of 1988. Laxmi Narain v. Balbodh Misra and Ors., the former having been filed against the award dated 3.9.1994 in the aforesaid case and the latter against the award dated 29.8.1998 in the same case.2. The facts giving rise to both these appeals are that the claimant Laxmi Narain, (respondent No. 1 in both the appeals) had filed M.A.C.P. No. 233 of 1988 against the appellant (Opposite Party No. 3 in the M.A.C.P.) and respondents No. 2 and 3 ( Opposite Party Nos. 1 and 2 In the M.A.C.P. ) with these allegations that on 21.2.1988 he was going from Orai to Konch in Truck No. MBO 1765 owned by M/S Kataria Transport Corporation, opposite party No. 2. At about noon this truck collided with Bus No. UTK 2575 owned by Balbodh Misra, opposite party No. 1. Consequently, Laxmi Narain received injuries in this accident. His age was 26 years at that time and he was earning Rs. 700...
The Senior Divisional Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India Vs. ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-19-2005
Reported in: [2006(106)FLR1075]
D.P. Singh, J.1. Pleadings are exchanged and the counsel for the parties agree that this petition may be disposed off finally under the rules of this court2. Heard Learned Counsel for the parties.3. This Writ Petition is directed against an award of the labour court dated 19.7.1996 holding that the dismissal of the workman was illegal and as such he was entitled for reinstatement with full backwages.4. Hira Lal Srivastava, the respondent workman, while working as Section Head in the Life Insurance Corporation of India was placed under suspension and served a charge-sheet listing five charges of financial irregularities. After due enquiry, the Enquiry Officer found charges 1 to 3 proved while charge No. 4 was partly found to be proved. On the strength of the Inquiry report dated 18.10.1979, the senior Divisional Manager issued a show cause notice on 16.4.1980 whereafter vide order dated 28.6.1980 the service of the workman were dispensed with. The termination led to a reference under Se...
Lalitesh Chandra Pathak Son of Shri Harish Chandra Pathak Vs. Special ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-19-2005
Reported in: [2005(106)FLR1071]
Sunil Ambwani, J.1. Heard Sri B.B. Paul learned counsel for the petitioner. Sri Amit Sthelkar for the District Judge, Aligarh and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents 1 & 3.2. By this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to quash the order dated 29.1.2003 passed by the Special Secretary, Government of U.P., in pursuance of directions issued by this Court on 15.4.2002 in Writ Petition No. 1254 of 2002, for deciding the petitioner's application for condonation of delay with representation for compassionate appointment.3. The compassionate appointment to the dependants of the deceased Government servant dying in harness, is provided in the State under U.P. Recruitment of the Dependants of Government Servants, Dying in Harness Rules, 1974. These rules were amended by a Notification dated 13.10.1973 inserting a proviso to Rule 5(1), providing for relaxation of the period of five years in making the application. The amended Rule 5(1), with the proviso is quoted as...
Raghubir Prasad Son of Gokul Chandra, Head Constable, Railway Protecti ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-19-2005
Reported in: [2005(106)FLR1074]
Tarun Agarwala, J.1. Heard Sri Anil Kumar Aditya, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Govind Saran, the learned counsel for the respondents.2. The petitioner was transferred from Bareilly Division to Moradabad Division by an order dated 30.4.2004. The petitioner, being aggrieved by this transfer order, filed a representation before the authority concerned and thereafter approached this Court by filing writ petition No. 19520 of 2004, which was disposed of by an order dated 19.5,2004, directing the respondents, to decide the representation of the petitioner. The authority concerned, rejected the representation of the petitioner. The petitioner thereafter, again filed writ petition No. 23214 of 2004, and the Court, by a reasoned judgment dated 3.5.2005, dismissed the aforesaid writ petition. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed Special Appeal No. 674 of 2005 which was also dismissed by a judgment dated 6.7.2005.3. Upon the dismissal of the writ petition, the respondents issued an o...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »