Allahabad Court May 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.
Bhaiya Ajeet Singh Son of Late Bhaiya Parmeshwar Singh Vs. State of U. ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-05-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)AWC3242
Sanjay Misra, J.1. The petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court by alleging that the Urban Area Zamindari has been abolished in 12 acres of agricultural land situate within the Municipal limits of the city of Ballia and the rest of the land being 268 acres within the said limit is Non-ZA and therefore, the State respondents cannot interfere in the rights of the petitioner and other Zamindars in the Non-ZA areas. He has filed this writ petition also for the benefit of other Zamindars. The petitioner alleges that he is Lambardar and co-sharer with other Zamindars. The Nagar Palika, Ballia was constituted under Section 3 of the U.P. Municipality Act, 1916 and the entire land of the villages Middhi and Bishunipur was included within the Municipal limits in the year 1916. The Zamindars are recorded in the khewat No. 3 and 5 of the year 1409F to 1412F. An agreement dated 23.1.1885 was executed in favour of the ancestors of the petitioner by the erstwhile Zamindars. The peti...
Ajai Kumar Kashyap Vs. District and Sessions Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-05-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ2954
ORDERR.C. Deepak, J.1. Heard Sri Satish Trivedi, learned senior counsel assisted by Sri S.S. Giri and Sri Krishan Ji Khare, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Sri S.L. Kesarwani, learned Counsel for the State and perused the record.2. Affidavit by the State and written argument by the learned Counsel for the petitioner filed be taken on record. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have already been exchanged.3. The petitioner-accused Ajay Kumar Kashyap has filed this criminal miscellaneous writ petition against the opposite par-ties for quashing:(a) orders dated 13-9-2005 and 27-9-2005 of the Sessions Judge, Ghazipur vide Annexures-5 & 6 respectively attached to the writ petition;(b) the criminal proceedings of the criminal case No. 359 of 2005 (State of U.P. v. Ajay Kumar Kashyap) pending in the Court of 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Ghazipur arising out of case crime No. 1070 of 2005 punishable under Sections 8 & 21 of the N.D.P.S. Act;(c) the charge-sheet dated 28-7-2005 relating to t...
Mohd. Anwar Khan Vs. Harish Chandra and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-05-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)AWC3222
ORDERS.P. Mehrotra, J.1. By the order dated 18.11.2005, passed on Civil Misc. (Substitution) Application No. 72804 of 1998, notice was directed to be issued to the defendants-respondents on the said application. Ten days' time was granted to the applicants in the aforementioned substitution application for taking requisite steps for issuance of notice by Registered Post A.D.2. Further direction was given to supply a copy of the aforementioned substitution application to the learned Counsel appearing for the respondents.3. The case was, thereafter, listed before the Court on 24.1.2006 with the office report dated 23.1.2006, inter alia, stating that the learned Counsel for the applicants in the aforementioned substitution application had not taken steps.4. On 24.1.2006, Sri Rajesh Dwivedi, holding brief for Sri Radhey Shyam, learned Counsel for the applicants in the aforementioned substitution application submitted that copy of the said application had been served on the learned Counsel ...
Om Prakash Jaiswal Alias Lalloo and ors. Vs. Shiv NaraIn Chaudhary (D) ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-05-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)AWC3411
Prakash Krishna, J.1. This Is tenant's revision under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Causes Court Act, against the judgment and decree dated 28.9.1991, -passed by 4th Additional District Judge, Allahabad In S.C.C. Suit No. 192 of 1980. The trial court has decreed the suit for eviction of the applicants and also for recovery of water taxes, arrears of rent and damages etc.2. The plaintiff landlord (opposite party) Instituted the suit on the pleas inter alia that the plaintiff Is landlord and owner of the shop Nos. 9, 10 and 11 with their back galleries situate In premises No. 17/33A, Mahatma Gandhi Marg, Allahabad, on a monthly rent of Rs. 720 besides water taxes payable as part of rent at the rate of 14 per cent wherein the defendants No. 1 and 2 are carrying on the business under the name and style of 'Mercury'. The shops were let out for the purposes of opening of dry cleaner shop. The defendants are in arrears of rent since January, 1980 and the tenancy has been terminated by se...
Javed Jameel Vs. Distt. Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-05-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)AWC4184
Rakesh Sharma, J.1. Heard Sri J.N. Pandey, learned Counsel for the petitioner. Sri Saurabh Lawanla has put in appearance on behalf of Smt. Hafsa Mahmood, opposite party No. 3.2. The petitioner has assailed the judgment and order dated 20.4.2004 passed by the Prescribed Authority/Civil Judge, Mohanlalganj (Senior Division), Lucknow as also the judgment and order dated 15.9.2005 passed by the District Judge, Lucknow. The learned courts below have recorded concurrent findings of facts and the application of the landlady for release of House No. 116/153, Ghasiari Mandi, Kaiserbagh, Lucknow, hereinafter referred to as the premises, has been allowed. The order passed by the prescribed authority for release of the premises has been upheld by the learned appellate court, District Judge, Lucknow.3. It emerges from record that Smt. Hafsa Mahmood, opposite party No. 3 moved an application for release of the premises under Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent a...
Sanjay Chaurasia Son of Sharda Prasad (In Jail) Vs. State of Uttar Pra ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-04-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ2957
Ravindra Singh, J.1. This revision he a been preferred by the revisionist Sanjay Chaurasia against the judgment and order dated 27.06.2005, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Meerut In Criminal Appeal No. 46 of 2005, (Sanjay Chaurasia v. State of U.P.), whereby the prayer for ball of the revisionist being a juvenile under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 has been refused in Case Crime No. 893 of 2004 under Section 364A I.P.C., P.S. Singhani Gate, District Ghaziabad.2. In this case, time of four weeks was granted to learned A.G.A. to file a counter affidavit and notice was issued to opposite party No. 2 Sri Vimal Kumar Saini to file a counter affidavit within the same period. The office report dated 23.12.2005 and the report dated 12.9.2005 sent by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad shows that the notice sent to opposite party No. 2 has been served on him but neither opposity party No. 2 nor on his behalf any counsel has appeared before t...
Jamil Ahmad Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-04-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ3337
ORDERK.N. Sinha, J.1. The present application under Section 407 Cr.P.C. has been moved to transfer the Special Trial No. 3 of 2003 (State v. Jamil Ahmad) from the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Mainpuri to the Court of Special Judge (N.D.P.S. Act) where it is available near the District Mainpuri.2. The facts of the case, as detailed in the accompanying affidavit, are that police of Bichhawa District Mainpuri has shown the false recovery of Smack from the possession of the applicant and he was challenged under Section 18/20/29 of The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as Act). After investigation, charge sheet was filed against the applicant in the Court of Sessions Judge, Mainpuri. The Sessions Judge, Mainpuri transferred the case to the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, Mainpuri and trial of the case started before the said court, which has recorded the statement of witness Sattar on 21.11.20053. According to Section 36A of the Act...
Bechchu Lal Son of Late Guljari Vs. Ixth Additional District Judge,
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-04-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)AWC3467
S.U. Khan, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. This is landlord's writ petition arising out of eviction/ release proceedings initiated by original landlord petitioner Bachchu Lal since deceased and survived by his widow on the ground of bonafide need under Section 21 of U.P Act No. 13 of 1972 in the form of Rent Case No. 170 of 1975.3. In the release application, it was stated that landlord required the shop in dispute for himself (as he had retired) and for settling Ghanshyam one of his five sons. Prescribed authority/ Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar through judgment and order dated 28.10.1991, allowed the release application. However prescribed authority awarded twenty months rent amounting to Rs. 625/- as damages to the tenant. Against the said judgment and order original tenant respondent No. 3 Baij Nath filed Rent Appeal No. 218 of 1991. Rent Appeal was allowed by IX A.D.J Kanpur Nagar on 24.12.1994 hence this writ petition.4. During pendency of writ peti...
Ranju Chaturvedi Daughter of Ram Sarikh Chaubey Vs. State of U.P. Thro ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-04-2006
Reported in: III(2006)ACC873
K.N. Sinha, J. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.A.2. The present petition has been filed for quashing of the order dated 9.3.2006 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Mau and order dated 22.12.2005 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mau.3. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner is owner of the vehicle bearing registration No. U.P.-54/B-6559 which was registered before respondent No. 2 and one time road tax was duly paid. The copy of the registration certificate and tax receiving are annexure-1 to this writ petition. On 19.9.2005 the petitioner had gone to Mau for treatment of newly born baby, the vehicle was seized by respondent No. 2. The false dues and taxes have been imposed by respondent No. 2 against the petitioner amounting to Rs. 1,10,000/-. The petitioner moved an application for release of vehicle before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mau, who rejected the same on 22.12.2005. The petitioner filed a criminal revision No. 3 of 2006 again...
Smt. Shahnaz Vs. Judge Small Causes Court and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-04-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)AWC3036
Anjani Kumar, J.1. This writ petition by the petitioner-tenant under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenge the orders passed by the Judge Small Causes Court dated 21.11.2000, whereby the suit filed by the respondent, namely Small Causes Suit No. 113 of 1999 has been decreed for the arrears of rent, damages, eviction of the petitioner and the order passed by the revisional court dated 6.9.2002, whereby the revisional court dismissed the revision filed by the petitioner-tenant under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act.2. The brief facts are that the respondent-landlord filed suit in question being Suit No. 117 of 2000, Waqf Masjid v. Smt. Shahnaz, on the ground that defendant-petitioner is the tenant at the rate of Rs. 8 of House No. 38/41, Mohalla Katla, Meerut City and the plaintiff-respondent is the owner and landlord of the said premises. It is further submitted that the plaintiff is a waqf registered with the Sunni Central Board, Lucknow at No. 527/357, ...
- ‹ Prev
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- 12
- 13
- Next ›
- Last »