Allahabad Court December 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.
Smt. Jadid Un Nisa Alias Kallo Begum W/O Late Sri Asgar Ali Khan and o ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-08-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)AWC928
Sunil Ambwani, J.1. This second appeal filed on 05.10.2006 arises out of judgment and decree dated 01.9.2006 passed by Addl. District Judge, Court No. 3, Rampur in Civil Appeal No. 8 of 2006 by which he set aside the judgment in Original Suit No. 46 of 1997, Smt. Firasat Jahan Begum v. Smt. Jadid-Un-Nisa Begum and Ors. and decreed the suit for specific performance of agreement dated 4.4.1988, on receipt of Rs. 55000/- within three months failing which the sale deed will be executed through Court.2. I have heard Shri B.D. Mandhyan, learned Counsel for the defendant appellants and Shri M. Islam for the plaintiff respondent.3. The plaintiff respondent filed the suit for specific performance of registered agreement dated 04.4.1988 by which after receiving Rs. 20,000/- defendant No. 1 had agreed to sell 488 sq. yards of land situate in Mohalla Baradari Mahmood Khan, Rampur to the plaintiff, on receipt of balance sale consideration of Rs. 55,000/-. The agreement recorded a condition that the...
National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Smt. Madhulika Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-07-2006
Reported in: 2007ACJ2091; 2007(1)AWC475
V.M. Sahai and Sabhajeet Yadav, JJ.1. The short question that arises for our consideration in this appeal is where an insured has not preferred an appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act') against an award given by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, is it open to the insurer to prefer an appeal against the award by the Tribunal questioning the quantum of the compensation, as well as finding as regards the negligence of the offending vehicle in absence of permission under Section 170 of the Act granted by the Tribunal?2. This appeal is preferred by the insurance company/insurer of the offending vehicle under Section 173 of the Act against the award dated 5.5.1999 passed by Motor Accident Claim Tribunal/Special Judge, Essential Commodities Act, Bareilly in M.A.C.T. No. 340 of 1993, whereby Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rupees 10,80,000 (Ten lacs eighty thousand) as compensation alongwith 8% (eight per cent) interest thereon from the date...
Pragi Lal (Mate) Son of Bhikhari and ors. Vs. State of U.P. Through Se ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-07-2006
Reported in: [2007(112)FLR1208]
Sudhir Agarwal, J.1. Heard Sri Ram Kihore Gupta, learned Counsel for the petitioners and perused the record.2. The petitioners have approached this Court by filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution against the order dated 18.12.2003 passed by the Executive Engineer, Provincial Division. UPPWD, Hamirpur rejecting their representation claiming regularization on Class-IV post in U.P.P.W.D. on the ground that neither the petitioners have worked continuously for 240 days in any year nor have worked continuously for three years and, therefore, are not entitled for regularization as per the Engineer-in-Chief's letter dated 4.4.1989.3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners vehemently contended that it has been admitted by the respondents in para 16 of the counter affidavit that the petitioner -1, Pragi Lal, has worked between 1987 to 1990 for a total 479 days, the petitioner No. 2, Dalpat, has worked between 20.11.1985 to 13.7.1990 for a total 426 days, petitioner No. 4, D...
Roop NaraIn Mishra S/O Ram Sanehi Mishra Vs. State of U.P. Through Pri ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-07-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)AWC1000
Barkat Ali Zaidi, J.1. Petitioner and three others are being prosecuted in Case Crime No. 571 of 1993, Police Station Chhibramau District Kannauj by C.B.C.I.D. and his case is presently pending in the Court of chief Judicial Magistrate, Kannauj.2. Subsequent to filing of the charge-sheet and before the Magistrate could take cognizance, the petitioner came in Section 482 Cr.P.C. (No. 1007 of 1998) for termination of the proceedings against him and also sought the stay of the proceedings on which, the Hon'ble High Court on 1.2.1999 passed the following order:Heard Sri Pradeep Chauhan, learned Counsel appearing for the applicant.On completion of the investigation in Crime No. 571 of 1993, the C.B.C.I.D. submitted the charge-sheet in the Court. Before the Magistrate could take cognizance of the offences against the accused-applicant under the orders of the State Government theC.I.D./CIS, Lucknow branch has been deputed to investigate further into the matter.It is submitted by the learned C...
Pappoo Yadav Alias Rajesh, Bhayyan Alias Surendra Both Sons of Gauri S ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-07-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)AWC803a
Barkat Ali Zaidi, J.1. Against an order of summoning by the Magistrate, Jhansi under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(i)(x) of S.C./ ST. Act, the three petitioners have come to this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking quashing of summoning order.2. I have heard Sri S.K. Chaturvedi counsel for the petitioners and Sri R.S. Maurya Addl. Government for the State.3. All possible kind of pleas irrespective of their applicability and oblivious of their properiety have been adopted in an indiscriminate manner, as will appear from the grounds in the memo of petition, and for this purpose, the grounds in the memo of petition may be quoted which are as Under. (I) Because, the learned Additional Sessions Judge illegally failed to see that cognizance of case was taken by the Magistrate who was not competent to take the cognizance.(II) Because, the learned Sessions Judge failed to see that the charge-sheet was Wed by the officer who is not competent and authorize...
Subhlaxmi Rice Mills Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner, Trade Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-07-2006
Reported in: (2009)20VST844(All)
Rajes Kumar, J.1. Present revision under Section 11 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as, 'the Act') is directed against the order of the Tribunal dated December 31, 2005 relating to the assessment year 1998-99.2. The applicant was engaged in the manufacture and sales of rice. Paddy is the raw material. Paddy was liable to tax at the point of first purchase under Section 3D of the Act. Applicant purchased the paddy and paid the tax being first purchaser and out of the paddy manufactured rice. During the year under consideration, applicant has sole rice to RFC for Rs. 1,17,42,042 during the period April 1, 1998 to December 22, 1998 and for Rs. 76,79,298.70 during the period December 23, 1998 to March 31, 1999. For the aforesaid period, rice was admittedly liable to tax at the rate of 2.8 per cent and 3.2 per cent respectively in the hand of the applicant. The total liability of tax on the aforesaid sales to RFC was Rs. 5,74,514.71. Under Section 15(c) of the Centr...
Sri Gopal Maheep S/O Sri Chaudhary Jaggu, Assistant Commissioner Excis ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-06-2006
Reported in: [2007(112)FLR596]
Amitava Lala, J.1. The Challenge has been thrown in this writ petition in respect of the order of suspension dated 1st November, 2006. From the order impugned, we find that the petitioner was found prima-facie guilty for certain charges in the nature of insubordination and dereliction of duties. Whether such charges will ultimately lead to major or minor punishment would be reflected from the charge sheet. Thus, this is not the appropriate stage where we justify the cause of suspension of the nature of punishment as to whether it is major or minor punishment and that too only on the basis of the probabilities. It appears that on the basis of certain alleged misconducts which consistently happened in the case of the petitioner and in consequence thereof the authority concerned issued order of suspension against the petitioner upon being prima-facie satisfied about the guilt. 2. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner by citing a Division Bench decision of this Court rendered...
Sunil Prakash Sharma S/O Late Suraj Prakash Sharma Vs. Central Bank of ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-06-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)AWC1194; [2007(113)FLR88]; (2007)2LLJ1005All
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. This Special Appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 4th October, 2006 of a learned Judge of this Court, by which the writ petition filed by the present appellant for issuing a direction upon the respondents to grant him permission to have a lawyer as a defence nominee in disciplinary proceedings, has been dismissed.2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the petitioner-appellant, who is working as Head Cashier Category 'E', had been served with a charge sheet on 01.04.2006 and the respondent No. 5 had been appointed as Inquiry Officer. The petitioner-appellant made a representation before the respondent No. 4, the Disciplinary Authority, requesting him to accord permission to seek assistance from a lawyer. However, the said representation kjwas rejected vide order dated 28.04.2006. Being aggrieved, the petitioner- appellant challenged the said order by filing an appeal before the Appellate Authority and the Appellate Autho...
U.P.S.R.T.C. Through the Regional Manager Vs. the Presiding Officer, L ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-06-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)AWC943
S.N. Srivastava, J.1. This writ petition is directed against an award dated 2.3.2000 published on 5.12.2000. This Court by an interim order dated 9.4.2001 stayed operation of the award, provided the petitioner reinstates respondent No. 2 within one month and pays his salary regularly for the period he works. It is stated that petitioner reinstated respondent- workman. The matter came up for consideration before this Court and this Court by an order dated 9.4.2006 while clarifying the interim order dated 1.9.2006 directed that respondent-workman shall be paid salary/wages which the other counterparts working on the same post are getting. It was also directed that the current salary shall be paid to the respondent No. 2 regularly month by month from October, 2006. The arrears of salary/wages from the date of reinstatement till September, 2006 shall be paid within six months from the date of order.2. Respondent-workman approached this Court with an application stating therein that the int...
Arun Kumar Pandey Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-06-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)AWC522
A.K. Yog and R.K. Rastogi, JJ.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel representing the respondents.2. The petitioner seeks to challenge the impugned order dated 15.11.2006 (Annexure-2 to the writ petition) passed the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Bansdih, Ballia (respondent No. 2) cancelling fair price shop licence/agreement in favour of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner is not the resident of Gram Sabha Sarank Block Bansdih district Ballia but he is resident of village Khanpur Dumariya. The argument of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that requirement for allotment of fair price shop that the person should be resident of the concerned village for which licence is being granted was Introduced by means of Government Order No. 2714/29.6,2002-162-Sa/2001 dated 17.8.2002, whereas no such requirement was contemplated in the relevant Government Order No. F-3967/XIX-Khadya-6 dated 3.7.1990 on the basis of which the petitioner was grant...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »