Allahabad Court October 2006 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.
Sadhna Yadav Alias Babli Vs. Rent Control and Eviction Officer/Addl. D ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-18-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)AWC1312
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard Sri Vishwa Ratna Dwivedi, counsel for the petitioner.2. This writ petition arises out of release order dated 11.7.2006 passed by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer/Additional District Magistrate (VI), Kanpur Nagar-respondent No. 1, appended as Annexure 7 to the writ petition releasing premises No. 109/70, Nehru Nagar, Kanpur Nagar in favour of the landlord-respondent No. 2.3. The facts of the case, as placed by counsel for the petitioner, are that the petitioner is tenant of ground floor accommodation of house No. 109/70, Nehru Nagar, Kanpur Nagar comprising of one covered Verandah, two rooms and other common amenities. Sri Anand Kumar Misra is the landlord.4. Sri Anand Kumar Misra-.respondnt No. 2 moved release application, registered as Case No. 31 of 2005 under Section 15 (1) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') in respect of the accommodation, in dispute.5. On the directi...
Virendra Kumar Pant Son of Sri D.D. Pant Vs. Joint Director of Educati ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-18-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)AWC1808
Pradeep Kant and Sanjay Misra, JJ.1. This Special Appeal has been filed against the order passed by the learned Single Judge dated 27.3.2000 by means of which appellant's challenge to the termination of his services has been rejected. The appellant was temporarily appointed by order dated 21st March, 1998 on the post of Assistant Clerk. However, his services were terminated by an order of simpliciter discharge, vide order dated 8.9.1998. The petitioner challenged the aforesaid order of termination but his writ petition has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge, after considering the pleadings and taking the view that since the petitioner was a temporary employee and had worked for six months, his services having been terminated by an order of simpliciter discharge, do not suffer from any illegality.2. Sri Ashok Pandey, while assailing the aforesaid order of the learned Single Judge, strenuously urged that the learned Single Judge failed to appreciate that the appellant was singled...
Anand Mohan, Social Activist/Humanist/Environmentalist (Anti - Corrupt ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-17-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)AWC24
A.K. Yog, J.1. Re: Defacement of Private/Public Buildings vis-a-vis Student Elections:The petitioner, during pendency of the present Writ Petition (Public Interest Litigation relating to 'ecology' and 'environment' of the City of Allahabad) has filed Civil Miscellaneous Supplementary Application, dated 6-3-2006 raising issue of 'public-nuisance'- as a consequence of use of 'Loud Speakers' beyond permissible 'volume' and damage/defacement of buildings/boundary walls, public-boards. Traffic-indicators, Electric Poles, Vehicles etc.- both inside/outside educational institutions during 'Union-Elections' of the students in the City. It refers to an Article published in March 2006 issue of 'PRATIYOGITA DARPAN' (Annexure S/A-2 to the the said Application) questioning relevance of existence of 'Students'- Union' in Colleges and Universities in view of the their up-to-date experience and their past 'track-record'. 2. Even before application dated 6.3.2006 was filed this Court had taken cognizan...
Angad Yadava Son of Sri Ram Badan Vs. Election Commission of India Thr ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-16-2006
Reported in: AIR2007All72
B.S. Chauhan, J1. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 8.4.2004 rejecting the nomination papers of the petitioner for contesting the election of the Parliament and declaring him disqualified for a period of six years from the date of his release from the jail.2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that petitioner was elected as an M.L.A. in 1989, in 1991, and again in bye-election in 1993. He also remained the Minister of Forest and Small Scale Industries in U.P. During the said period, he was tried in a Criminal Case under Section 302/304 I.P.C. in Police Station Hazrat Ganj, Lucknow. The competent Court convicted and sentenced him for life imprisonment vide judgment and order dated 17/18.11.2000 and a fine of Rs. 20,000/- was also imposed. The Appellate Court granted him bail and suspended the sentence also by a further order dated 9.1.2002. The petitioner filed the nomination papers before the Returning Officer, Azamgarh on 5.4.2004, fo...
Ram Lal Gupta Vs. Civil Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-16-2006
Reported in: AIR2007All54
ORDERS.U. Khan, J.1. At the time of arguments no one appeared for the contesting respondents, hence only the arguments of the learned Counsel for the petitioner were heard.2. This is plaintiffs writ petition. Plaintiff filed Original Suit No. 21 of 1978 against respondent No. 3, Jagdish Kumar Verma. The said suit was dismissed under Order XVII, Rule 3, C.P.C. against which decree petitioner filed Civil Appeal No. 117 of 1979. Civil Judge Banda through judgment and decree dated 29-1-1980 allowed the appeal, set aside the ex parte judgment and decree passed by the trial Court on payment of Rs. 50/- as costs payable in 15 days. It was however, provided that in case cost was not paid within 15 days then the appeal would be deemed to have been dismissed.3. According to the petitioner, he paid the amount of cost to the clerk of his counsel, who could not deposit the same within time and an objection to that effect was taken by the respondent No. 3 before the trial Court. Thereafter on 15-2-1...
Smt. Chanchal Katyal Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-16-2006
Reported in: (2007)207CTR(All)154; [2008]298ITR182(All)
1. The Tribunal, Allahabad has referred the following questions of law under Section 256(1) of the IT 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 Tribunal was justified in law in coming to the conclusion that the assessee got reasonable opportunity to meet the case in respect of accrual of interest on advances made to M/s Mohan General Trading Co., Calcutta and M/s Malik & Co., Kanpur ?Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in coming to the conclusion that interest @ 18 per cent per annum accrued to the assessee on the advances made to M/s Mohan General Trading Co., Calcutta and M/s Malik & Co., Kanpur ?Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the advance made to M/s Malik & Co. was not a business advance ?Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tr...
S.P. Builders, Through Its Proprietor, Sri S.P. Singh and ors. Vs. Cha ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-13-2006
Reported in: AIR2007All77; [2007]137CompCas292(All)
Sudhir Agarwal, J.1. The petitioners have approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India aggrieved by the order dated 21.11.2005 passed by respondent No. 1, Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal whereby setting aside the order of the Debts Recovery Tribunal Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as 'DRT, Allahabad'), it has remanded the matter transferring it to Debts Recovery Tribunal, Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as 'DRT, Lucknow') for disposal afresh.2. In brief the facts giving rise to this case are that the respondent No. 2. Bank of Baroda (hereinafter referred to as the 'Bank') filed an application under Section 19 of the Recover of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institution Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act' in short) against the petitioners for recovery of Rs. 35,91,746.17 along with cost and interest pendente lite and future. The aforesaid application was filed before DRT Allahabad and registered as TA 5/02. The petitioner opposing the aforesai...
S.P. Builders and ors. Vs. Chairman, Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-13-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)AWC14
Sudhir Agarwal, J.1. The petitioners have approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India aggrieved by the order dated 21.11.2005 passed by respondent No. 1, Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal whereby setting aside the order of the Debts Recovery Tribunal Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as 'D.R.T., Allahabad'), it has remanded the matter transferring it to Debts Recovery Tribunal, Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as 'D.R.T., Lucknow') for disposal afresh.2. In brief the facts giving rise to this case are that the respondent No. 2. Bank of Baroda (hereinafter referred to as the 'Bank') filed an application under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act' in short) against the petitioners for recovery of Rs. 35,91,746.17 along with cost and interest pendente lite and future. The aforesaid application was filed before D.R.T., Allahabad and registered as TA 5/02. The petitioner opposing ...
Lcl Jewellery Ltd. and ors. Vs. Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal and ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-13-2006
Reported in: (2007)1CompLJ133(All)
S.K. Singh, J.1. When the matter was first taken up, on behalf of opposite party, i.e., respondent bank, Smt. Archana Singh, learned advocate, appeared who was granted time to get instruction from the bank official and to file an affidavit in view of the observation as made in the order of this court dated 4 October 2006 upon which Smt. Singh got a short counter affidavit filed by Sri Jai Pal Arun, the senior manager of the concerned Bank. Sri Agarwal, learned advocate, has filed rejoinder affidavit to the aforesaid.2. After the aforesaid as the issue between the parties appears to be very small although the stakes appears to be high, as jointly submitted/agreed, keeping the matter pending may not serve any purpose to either of the side, the matter has been heard and is being finally decided.3. In the matter of recovery of dues payable by the petitioner, having been initiated by the respondent bank, against the order of the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Lucknow, in T.A. No. 137/2002, an appe...
Mohammad Haneef S/O Mohammad Umar Alias Pyare Miyan Vs. the State of U ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Oct-13-2006
Reported in: 2007CriLJ1373(FB)(All);
M.C. Jain, J.1. The present appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 31.8.1979, passed by Sri R.P. Pandey, the then Sessions Judge, Bahraich, whereby he convicted the accused appellant Mohammad Hanif under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentenced him to imprisonment for life in Sessions Trial No. 12 of 1979.2. A Division Bench comprising of Hon'ble D.K. Trivedi and Hon'ble Kundan Singh JJ heard it and delivered separate judgments. There was difference of opinion between Hon'ble Judges as to whether the appellant was a child at the time of the occurrence, though both of them upheld his conviction. Hon'ble D.K. Trivedi J. was of the opinion that he was a child on the date of incident and was entitled to the benefit of U.P. Children Act whereas Hon'ble Kundan Singh, J. was of the opposite view. So, the difference of opinion between the two Judges centred around this question. Hon'ble Kundan Singh J. also passed an additional order for constituting larger Bench as per the proviso of...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »