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.
Vinod Kishore Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-14-2005
Reported in: II(2005)DMC556; 2006(1)crimes307
K.N. Ojha, J. 1. Instant revision has been preferred against judgment and order dated 12.8.94 passed by learned Judge, Family Court, Kanpur in Case No. 523 of 1993, Smt. Usha Dixit v. Vinod Kishore Dixit, whereby a direction was made to the revisionist to make payment to respondent No. 2 Smt. Usha Dixit @ Rs. 500/- per month, as maintenance allowance. 2. Heard Mr. A.C. Nigam, learned Counsel for the revisionist and Mr. Hardev Singh, learned Counsel for the respondent and have gone through the record, 3. The facts as revealed from the record is that Smt. Usha Dixit filed a complaint against revisionist Vinod Kishore Dixit under Section 125, Cr.P.C. for maintenance @ Rs. 500/- per month to her and the same amount for her daughter Km. Jyoti. Her claim for maintenance (c) Rs. 500/- per month was decreed on 12.8.94 by the Family Judge, Kanpur Nagar but it was dismissed in respect of Km. Jyoti. 4. According to Smt. Usha Dixit she was married with Vinod Kishore Dixit on 11.12.88 according to...
Kanpur Electric Supply Company Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court-iv ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-14-2005
Reported in: [2005(107)FLR889]
D.P. Singh, J.1. Pleadings are complete and the parties agree that the petition may be finally disposed off under the Rules of the Court.2. This petition is directed against an award of the Labour Court dated 31.3.1999 rendered in adjudication case no. 91 of 1997.3. The respondent-employee claiming to have been appointed as an Apprentice Clerk (General) in the petitioner organization worked as such from 20.10.1984 to 19.10.1985, where-after she was not allowed to continue. After about 11 years, she made an application dated 1.12.1996 before Conciliation Officer claiming that though she was appointed as an apprentice but. in fact she was a workman and her disengagement was in violation of the provisions of U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, therefore, she should be reinstated with back wages.4. After submission of a failure report, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court, IV Kanpur which registered it as adjudication case no. 91 of 1997. The parties filed their relevant pleadings which ...
Atul Traders Vs. Income Tax Officer
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-14-2005
Reported in: (2006)200CTR(All)71; [2006]282ITR536(All); [2006]152TAXMAN129(All)
1. M/s Atul Traders, petitioner, in the above noted three writ petitions, is a registered partnership firm engaged in the business of sale of Dhan Bhoosi and filed returns for the asst. yrs. 1978-79, 1979-80 and 1982-83 under the IT Act. Books of account maintained in normal course of business were also produced showing certain loan taken from one, J.P. Bajpayee (Karta of HUF) and also payment of interest accrued thereon. Assessment orders were passed by the concerned AO.2. M/s Atul Traders, being aggrieved, challenged the above assessment orders by means of appeal No. CIT(A)/6/Etawah/1989-90 pertaining to the asst. yr. 1978-79 decided by the CIT(A) on 3rd March, 1992 (Annex. '5' to the Writ Petn. No. 812 of 1993). Against assessment order of year 1982-83, M/s Atul Industrial Corporation filed appeal No. CIT(A)/5/Ward-I/Etawah/1989-90 before CIT(A), Agra, which has been decided by means of the impugned order dt. 3rd March, 1991 (Annex. '5' to the Writ Petn. No. 820 of 1993). Another or...
Smt. Sukhraji Devi Vs. Babu Ram Kanaujia and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-14-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)AWC3862E
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 5.6.2005 (Annexure-18) passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Gyanpur, Sant Ravidas Nagar, holding an enquiry and till then to maintain status quo regarding possession, over the property in dispute.2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the petitioner on the one hand and the respondents No. 4 and 5 on the other, have a dispute in respect of a particular piece of land. The petitioner claims that she had been granted a patta in respect of the said land under the scheme of Family Planning and she is in possession thereof. Respondents No. 4 and 5 claim ownership over the said land and filed a Civil Suit No. 525 of 2004 for permanent injunction against the present petitioner. However, their application for interim relief under Order XXXIX, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter called the 'C.P.C.') is still pending and no order has yet been passed. The respondents No. 4 ...
Rajani Pandey Daughter of Sub. Ganesh Pandey Vs. the Chief of the Army ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-13-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)AWC3448
Sunil Ambwani, J.1. Heard Sri Sanjai Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri H.R.S. Bist for respondents 1, 2 and 3. Sri A.K. Misra appears for respondent No. 4 and 5. He had put appearance in the year 2002 but has not filed any counter affidavit. His request for adjournment was not accepted.2. The petitioner was an applicant for the two posts of stenographers advertised by Rajput Regimental Centre, Fatehgarh along with other posts, The publication declared the posts to be in the pay scab of Rs. 4000-6000/-; the age of the candidate to be between 18-25 years and qualifications to be matriculate with shorthand speed of 150 word per minute, and typing spied of 40 word per minute(English) The note appended to the advertisement required applications along with testimonials to reach the Quarter Master, Rajput Regimental Centre, Fatehgarh, U.P. by 15.2.2002. The petitioner had passed Secondary School Examination in the year 1994 from Central Board of Secondary Education and ha...
Kripal Singh Son of Sri Sone Lal Vs. State of U.P. Through Secretary, ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-13-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)AWC205
S.N. Srivastava, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the judgment and order dated 28.9.2004 of Assistant Collector, Bharthana, District Etawah rejecting petitioner's application refusing to provide benefit of Section 122-B(4-F) of the U.P. Z.A. & L.R. Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) in allotment of land involved in Suit. A revision preferred by petitioner against the said order was also rejected by the judgment dated 14.3.2005.2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel as well as learned counsel for Gaon Sabha.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner urged that the order passed by the authorities below are vitiated in law. As petitioner was an landless agricultural labourer belonging to the Scheduled Caste in actual possession of the land in dispute on 1st May, 2002, he will acquire rights under Section 122-B(4-F) of the Act. He further urged that the findings of the authorities below to the contrary are unsustainable in law and the impugned ord...
Mangu and ors. Vs. Viiith Addl. District and Sessions Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-13-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)AWC3669
D.P. Singh, J.1.Pleadings have been exchanged and the counsel for the parties agree that the writ petition may be finally disposed of under the Rules of the Court.2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.3. This writ petition is directed against the orders dated 7.12.1993 and 2.11.1996 by which the application of the petitioner for enlargement of time to make payment has been rejected.4. It would be appropriate to notice the relevant pedigree for a proper understanding of the dispute. Sunda | |-------------------------------------------| | | Kaley Tota | | |---------| | | | Bhunda Shami Nagli | | |-----------------------------------------------------| | | | | | Mangu Jai Chandra Dharam Pal Krishna Jagwati Devi Devi5. From the above pedigree, which is admitted between the parties, it is evident that Sunda was the original owner of the disputed dwelling house and was survived by his sons, namely, Kaley and Tota. Tota left behind his son Bhunda while Kaley was succeeded by Shami and Nagl...
Chandra Mohan Vs. Xiv Addl. District Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-13-2005
Reported in: AIR2005All365; 2005(4)AWC3863K
ORDERD.P. Singh, J.1. This petition was taken up in the revised list yesterday and was heard at length, but none appeared for the respondents. As the hearing could not be completed, it was directed to be taken up today. Today again none has appeared for the respondents. On the request of the Court, the learned Standing Counsel has assisted it. The Court has also perused the counter-affidavit.2. This petition is directed against an order dated 30-9-1994 by which an application under Order XXI, Rule 2 of CPC has been allowed and the order of the trial Court rejecting it has been set aside.3. The predecessor in interest of the petitioner filed a money suit No. 451 of 1977 against the predecessor in interest of the respondent which was decreed vide judgment and order dated 24-8-1979 for a sum of Rs. 17.250/- along with cost. The decreetal amount was to be paid in installments and in case of default, the petitioner was free to recover the amount through execution. As the amount was not paid...
Subhash Yadava Alias Pappu and anr. Vs. Estate Officer and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-13-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)AWC62
D.P. Singh, J.1. Pleadings are complete and the counsel for the parties agree that the petition may be finally disposed of under the Rules of the Court.2. Heard counsel for the parties.3. This writ petition is directed against an order dated 12.4.2001, directing the petitioners to remove the illegal constructions and structures from the public premises namely Government class B4, part of survey No. 183/735 situated at BC, Bazar, Meerut Cantt.4. General Land Register Survey No. 183/735 shows land admeasuring about 41.929 acres situated in the civil area of the Cantonment at Meerut is registered as a class B4 land under Rule 3 of the Cantonment Land Administration Rule, 1937. This land is situated towards south side of House No. 144-1. Sri Krishna Murari Lal son of Sri Jagdish Murari Lal was the alleged owner of property No. 144-1 which he sold to Smt. Harjeet Kaur. It is alleged that Smt. Harjeet Kaur had already applied for conversion of her old grant into free hold. As the petitioners...
Raj Bahadur, Vs. Commissioner, Agra Division,
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-12-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)AWC3321
1. This High Court possess unique system of obtaining adjournments on account of purported illness. One can handover slip to the officer of the court and gets adjournment as a matter of course. No matter how many occasion it is. This is the fourth occasion when illness slip has been produced, we have already granted time making certain observations so that one can engage fresh counsel or make alternative arrangement in the meantime particularly when a counsel seems to be perpetually ill on the basis of the illness slips. Observation was made by the court irrespective of engagement of more than one counsel in the matter. Inspite of the same if time is sought in fourth occasion then the court have any other alternative but to proceed with the matter. We can not have any conflict with the judgment of the supreme court reported in AIR 1999 SC 3080 (Rais Ahmad v. State of U.P and Ors.). Such judgment speaks about tradition of the court to which we can not have any differences of opinion. Le...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »