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.
Ram Krishna Dhandhania and anr. Vs. Civil Judge (Sr. Division) and ors ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-12-2005
Reported in: AIR2005All291; 2005(3)AWC2751
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. This writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kanpur Nagar to expedite the trial of the Suit No. 378 of 2000, Ram Krishna Dhandhania v. Prem Shanker Pandey, which is not taking any progress in view of the objections raised by the defendant-respondents in respect of the payment of Court-fees.2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the petitioners are purchaser of the property in dispute in which the defendants 2 and 3 had been tenants. At the time of purchasing the said property, petitioners entered into an agreement with the said defendant-respondents to allot them the area equivalent to 50% of the total area which had been in their possession prior to purchase of the said property. Certain amount of security has been deposited with the said defendant-respondents till the construction is completed and the possession is handed over to them after reconstruction. In that agreement, it was men...
State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Satya NaraIn Tiwari @ Jolly Son of Ghanshya ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-12-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ3684
M.C. Jain, J.1. It is a case of bride's unnatural death within seven years of her marriage. The incident occurred on 3.11.2000 at about 12'o clock in the noon in her Sasural in the city of Farrukhabad. She (bride- Gita) was married to the accused respondent No. 1 Satya Narain Tiwari alias Jolly nearly three years before. The accused respondent No. 2 Smt. Rani alias Bhuvaneshwari is her mother-in-law. Both the accused respondents have been acquitted for the offences under Sections 498A/304B I.P.C. and 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act by the Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (D.A.A.), Farrukhabad by judgment and order dated 18.6.2003 passed in Sessions Trial No. 172 of 2001. The State has filed the instant Government Appeal against acquittal and the complainant Surya Kant Dixit (father of the deceased Geeta) has also challenged the judgment of acquittal through Criminal Revision No. 1797 of 2003 which has been clubbed with the Government Appeal. The Government Appeal and the Crimin...
Jawahar Prasad Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-12-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)AWC3169
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.2. The petitioner has prayed for a writ of certiorari quashing the impugned orders dated 16.12.2003 and 19.7.2004, passed by the Up-Ziladhikari, Sadar, Maharajganj and the Commissioner (Food and Supplies), Gorakhpur Division, Gorakhpur, respectively besides a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to allow the petitioner to run his fair price shop.3. The petitioner was allotted a fair price shop in village Gohana, Post Mansoolganj, Tehsil Sadar, district Maharajganj on 27.9.1991.4. On a complaint made by the Gram Pradhan with regard to irregularities in the distribution of essential commodities the Gram Panchayat Vikas Adhikari recommended suspension of the fair price shop of the petitioner on the said complaint from the Gram Pradhan. Even before suspension of the fair price shop of the petitioner a resolution for allotment of the fair price shop in favour of one Sri Ram Manohar was passed. The licence of the...
Kamta Prasad Vs. Jan Mohammad and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-12-2005
Reported in: II(2006)ACC199
Mukteshwar Prasad, J.1. Heard Mr. S.D. Tiwari holding brief of Mr. Sabhapati Tiwari, learned Counsel for the appellant, Mr. Anand Kumar Srivastava, learned Counsel for claimant-respondent No. 1, Mr. Raj Nath Yadav, learned Counsel for respondent No. 2 (driver) and Mr. Ashok Kumar Srivastava, learned Counsel for respondent Nos. 3 and 4 and perused the record.2. This appeal has been filed by owner of offending vehicle against the judgment and award dated 17th July, 1997 passed by the District Judge/M.A.C.T., Basti in claim petition No. 182 of 1995. whereby the Tribunal allowed the claim petition partly for recovery of Rs. 15,000 with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of presentation of the claim petition. The owner of the vehicle was directed to pay the amount of compensation to the claimant.3. A cross-objection has also been filed by the claimant for enhancement of the amount of compensation.4. Learned Counsel for the parties have submitted that the accident took place...
Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Gorakhpur University and ors. Vs. Urmila Singh an ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-11-2005
Reported in: 2005(3)ESC2097
1. Above intra-Court Special Appeals, as provided under Chapter VIII of Rules of Court, arise from common judgment and order dated 3.11.2004 passed by learned single Judge in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 34 of 2004 (Urmila Singh v. Deen Dayal Upadhaya Gorakhpur University through V.C. Gorakhpur and Ors.). 2. To appreciate the controversy raised in Special Appeals, salient facts of the case may be recapitulated.3. Following events and dates relevant to decide the issues raised in this case are not disputed and given below :30.11.1998 Enrolled as Research Scholar for Ph.D.28.1.2000 LL.B. 1st year (1999-2000)appeared as Ex-Student.Passed I and II Semester17.4.2002 LL.B. II year (2001-02)Passed III and IV SemesterBook Let 'shoodh'27.11.2002 Thesis submitted27.3.2003 Admission LL.B. III year (2002-03)27.5.2003 Appointed Teacher8.9.2003 Ph.D. Awarded9.12.2003 Book-let Noti.For 6 Semester R.N.1642312.1.2004 Petitioner missed-1 papers High Court directed provisional appearance w.e.f. 2.1.2004...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Zam Zam Tanners
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-11-2005
Reported in: (2005)197CTR(All)221; [2005]279ITR197(All)
Rajes Kumar, J.1. The Tribunal has referred the following question under Section 256(2) of the IT Act (hereinafter referred to as 'Act') relating to the asst. yr. 1985-86 for opinion to this Court :'Whether the Tribunal was justified in confirming the view taken by the CIT(A) holding that Sub-clause (a) of Expln. 4 appended to Section 271(1)(c) of the IT Act, 1961, was applicable only if there was a positive income of an assessee and not applicable where even as a result of the detection of concealment or furnishing of inaccurate particulars of income, loss shown by such assessee got reduced or waived off ?'2. The brief facts of the case are as follows.The assessee-opposite party (hereinafter referred to as the 'assessee') is a registered firm deriving income from business of tanning raw hides. The assessee had filed a return of income showing a profit of Rs. 3,57,454 but subsequently the same had been revised to Rs. 5,01,579. After allowing deductions under Section 80HHC, even the rev...
Guman Ahmad @ Manna and Arman Ahmad Both Sons of Late Sri Saiyad Hussa ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-11-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ4191
Poonam Srivastava, J.1. Heard Sri Daya Shanker Mishra Advocate for the applicants, Sri Raj Kumar Khanna Advocate appearing on behalf of the complainant and Sri Jai Prakash, learned A.G.A. for the State.2. This application has been filed on behalf of the accused challenging the orders dated 6.10.2004, 1.11.2004 and 6.1.2005 in case Crime No. 1156 of 2004, Police Station Amroha, under Sections 307, 302 I.P.C. State v. Guman Ahmad alias Manna and Anr. The orders challenged in this application are in respect of the proceedings initiated against the applicants under Sections 82, 83 Cr.P.C. The applicants are the accused in a murder case. Initially the case was registered under Sections 307, 504 I.P.C. Later the injured died and the case was converted under Sections 302, 506 I.P.C. The F.I.R. was registered on 13.10.2004 but the applicants have not surrendered till date. The order dated 16.10.2004 which is Annexure-1 to the affidavit, is an order issuing non-bailable warrants on an applicati...
Rajdhar Son of Vijyanand Vs. State of U.P. Through Its District and Se ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-11-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ3679
Poonam Srivastava, J.1. List is revised. No one is present for the applicant. Learned A.G.A. appears for the State.2. The applicant Rajdhar has filed this application invoking inherent powers for quashing the order dated 15.4.1999 passed by the Sessions Judge Chitrakoot in Session Trial No. 33 of 1993 under Section 302 I.P.C. The First Information Report was registered on 24.5.1991 at 7:40 a.m. against the five accused namely Rajdhar s/o Vijyanand, Premika s/o Vijyanand, Vishnu Dayal s/o Raghuman, Hemraj s/o Mahesh and Dhanpat, s/o Raghuman, According to the narration of the F.I.R., the husband of the complainant Malkhan @ Bulbul was done to death in the middle of intervening night 23-24.5.1991. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was submitted against three accused Lavelesh s/o Khuraki, Dafola @ Raja Bhai and Mohan s/o Mahesh Chaubey, all of them were not named in the F.I.R. The Session Trial commenced against the said three accused under Sections 302, 120 I.P.C. Smt. Chan...
Sanjib Dhawan Son of Sri Surendra Kumar Dhawan Under the Provisions of ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-11-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)AWC3861-O
Rajes Kumar, J.1. In the present writ petition petitioner has sought the following relief:'i. To issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling for the records of the case and quash the impugned order dated 15.4.97 passed by the respondent No. 2 contained in annexure'7' to the writ petition;ii. to issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents not to realise any amount on the basis of the impugned order dated 15.4.1997 and also not to give effect to the recovery memo No. 289 dot 5.5.97 issued pursuant to the order, aforesaid;iii. to issue any other such order or direction which may deems fit and proper under the circumstances of the case;iv. award costs to the petitioner.'2. Brief facts of the case are as follows:Petitioner being encouraged by the incentive scheme dated 21.07.1986 issued by the State of U.P. submitted an application before the Licensing Authority under Rule 3(1) of the U.P. Cinematography Rules, 1951 for raising...
Shami Ullah Khan S/O Shri Abdul Hamid Khan Vs. Dhruve NaraIn S/O Indra ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-11-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)AWC3436
Poonam Srivastava, J.1. Heard Shri R.C. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri H.N. Singh, learned counsel for the plaintiff respondent2. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged between the parties. Counsel for the parties have agreed that the writ petition may be decided finally at the stage of admission itself. Accordingly, arguments on behalf of petitioner and the contesting respondent was advanced.3. The petitioner, Shami Ullah Khan has filed this writ petition with a prayer to issue writ of certiorari quashing the entire proceeding in Civil Revision No. 27 of 2001, and the orders dated 31.8.2001, 4.10.2004 passed by the Revisional Court/District Judge Mahrajganj, annexed as annexures 9 and 14 to the writ petition.4. The petitioner claims his right through Smt. Ran Rati widow of Ganesar (Lal Chand) viz. a viz. contesting respondent No. 1 Dhruv Narain. Pedigree of Ganesar has been detailed in para 4 of the writ petition. The pedigree is given below5. Brij Mo...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »