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.
Dharam Singh Vs. Kairaj Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-17-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)AWC3218
Umeshwar Pandey, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner.2. An ex parte decree in a suit for specific performance of contract was passed against the petitioner on 30.4.1993 and an application preferred under Order IX, Rule 13, C.P.C. for setting aside the such decree by the petitioner was dismissed by the trial court on 10.12.1993. Petitioner's appeal against the said dismissal order was also dismissed on 28.7.1998 whereafter no challenge against the ex parte decree was made before any Court or competent forum and that decree has become final.3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that after the dismissal of petitioner's appeal there was some compromise in a panchayat between the parties on 20.10.1998 but admittedly that compromise was not brought to the notice of the Court. The decree holder respondents thereafter approached the executing court through an execution application dated 2.11.1998 and that matter is still pending. The petitioner gave an application dated ...
Pankaj Mishra Son of Late Jagdish Prasad Mishra and Smt. Ansuiya Devi ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-17-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ3766
R.K. Rastogi, J. 1. This is an application under Section 482 Cr. P. C. for quashing the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1254 of 2003, Smt. Jaya Mishra v. Pankaj Mishra and Anr..2. The facts relevant for disposal of this application are that the complainant opposite party No. 2 filed a complaint against the accused applicants under Sections 406, 504, 506 I.P.C. with these allegations that her marriage had taken place with the accused Pankaj Mishra on 16.2.1997 and sufficient dowry valuing several lacs of rupees was given. However, her husband and her mother in law ( present accused applicants ) were not satisfied with dowry and they asked the complainant that she should get a house transferred to their names from her father. Her father expressed his inability to do so, and therefore the accused started to commit atrocities upon her and on 9.6.97 they forced her to leave the house . They also kept with them the entire items of dowry which were her Stridhan. She therefore filed a complai...
Ram NaraIn Mathur Vs. Prem Kishor Srivastava and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-17-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)AWC3335
Anjani Kumar, J.1. This writ petition arises out of an order passed by the appellate authority under the provisions of U. P. Act No. 13 of 1972 (in short 'the Act'), whereby the appellate authority allowed the appeal filed by the respondent-landlords by its order dated 27th February, 2004.2. Brief facts are that the petitioner is the tenant of House No. 107/99, Jawahar Nagar, Kanpur Nagar. The accommodation in the tenancy of the petitioner consists of two rooms, courtyard, latrine-bathroom and kitchen on the first floor and the petitioner is paying rent at the rate of Rs. 80 per month. The contesting respondents are landlords of the aforesaid accommodation who filed an application under Section 21(1)(a) of 'the Act' before the prescribed authority under 'the Act' on the ground that the accommodation available with the landlords is insufficient for their need and considering the large families of the landlords, the landlords bona fide require additional accommodation to accommodate the ...
Sukh Sancharak Company Vs. Bank of Baroda
Court: DRAT Allahabad
Decided on: May-16-2006
Reported in: IV(2006)BC69
1. This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 30th April, 2003 passed by the then Presiding Officer, D.R.T., Lucknow in M.A. (T) No. 26/03, whereby and whereunder the application filed under Section 22(2)(g) of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter shall be referred to as the RDDBFI Act) for setting aside ex parte judgment dated 29th April, 1999 in Original Application No. 89 /98 has been rejected.2. The case of the appellant is that although they took loan from the respondent Bank, but proceeding before the D.R.T., Lucknow or at D.R.T., Jabalpur was never known to them as no notices had ever been served on the appellants in Original Application No. 89/98. It is further case of the appellant that the judgment dated 29th April, 1999 was served on the appellant on 9th July, 1999 and then and then only they came to know of the proceedings in Original Application after making inquiry in the office of the D.R.T., Lucknow through th...
Kshetriya Shri Gandhi Ashram Vs. Punjab National Bank and ors.
Court: DRAT Allahabad
Decided on: May-16-2006
Reported in: IV(2006)BC101
1. This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 15th July, 2004 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, D.R.T., Allahabad in case No. M.A. 11/04, whereby and whereunder the restoration petition filed by the appellant-defendant No. 1 for setting aside ex parte decree passed on 11th January, 2002 by the Tribunal in Original Application No. 56/2000 has been dismissed.2. The brief facts of the case is that the respondent-PNB filed the Original Application No. 56/2000 for recovery of a sum of Rs. 52,38,938.14 against three defendants, who were arrayed in the following manner: 1. Kshetriya Shri Gandhi Ashram situated at Chowk Fatchpur through its Secretary. 2. Kshetriya Shri Gandhi. Ashram situated at Fatehpur through its Administrator, 359, Mutthiganj, Allahabad. 3. Khadi and Village Industries Commission having Regional Office at Lekhraj Market, Faizabad Road, Indira Nagar, Lucknow.3. The borrower according to the Bank was Kshetriya Shri Gandhi Ashram unit situated at Fatehpur,...
Rambriksh Rai Vs. Bank of India
Court: DRAT Allahabad
Decided on: May-16-2006
Reported in: IV(2006)BC270
1. This appeal has been preferred by the above named defendant No.2-appellant against the order dated 12th July, 2005 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, D.R.T., Allahabad in M.A. No. 123/03, whereby and whereunder the restoration application filed by the appellant under Section 22(2)(g) of the RDDBFT Act for setting aside exparte judgment dated 29th November, 2002 in T.A. No. 1583/2000 has been dismissed.2. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent-Bank /i.e. Bank of India filed an Original Application against seven defendants including the appellant as defendant No. 2 for realization of Rs. 49,42,468.85 together with interest, future and pendente lite and also other usual reliefs and the said case was registered as Original Application No. 417/94 before the D.R.T., Jabalpur. After D.R.T., Allahabad was formed, the case was transferred to D.R.T., Allahabad and was renumbered as T.A. No. 1583/ 2000. In that original case from D.R.T., Allahabad notices were sent to all t...
P.C.C. Construction Company and Vs. Oriental Bank of Commerce and anr.
Court: DRAT Allahabad
Decided on: May-16-2006
Reported in: I(2007)BC18
1. This appeal has been preferred by the above named defendant-appellants against the order dated 5th May. 2005 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, D.R.T., Jabalpur in Original Application No. 189 of 2000, whereby and whereunder the application filed by the appellants to cross-examine the respondent's witness Shri S.K. Shah as there were anomalies and alleged falsity in the affidavit with regard to the documents (vouchers filed) has been rejected.2. On previous occasion also, another such petition was filed by the appellants for cross-examination of Mr. S.K. Shah on the basis of his earlier affidavit, but the said application was rejected by the predecessor of the previous Presiding Officer vide order dated 15th January, 2002 holding that at that stage cross-examination was disallowed but at the time of final hearing, if it could be found that cross-examination was necessary, then the same would be considered in its proper perspective. Against such order dated 15th January, 2002 ...
Umesh Chand, Vs. Sub-divisional Officer,
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-16-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)AWC3519
S.N. Srivastava, J.1. In the matter of directions contained in order dated 11.8.2005 the text of which was that revenue courts would hold courts for 4 days in a week, and also to adhere to the court hours i.e. between 10 a.m. to 5 p.m., the case was taken up on 1.5.2006 on which date, order was passed calling upon the Chairman Board of Revenue to formulate guidelines capable of enforcing obedience to the directions of the Court. The operative portion of the said order is excerpted below.In view of the above, the Chairman Board of Revenue may formulate guidelines capable of enforcing obedience to the directions of the Court and also propose action in case the direction of the Court remain un-acted upon. 2. On 15 May 2006, learned Chief Standing Counsel appeared to convey that Chairman Board of Revenue was not able to attend the court but at the same time, he has apprised that the Chairman has formulated requisite guidelines to enforce compliance of the order of the Court in the strictes...
General Manager, U.P. State Sugar Corporation Ltd. (Now U.P. State Sug ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-16-2006
Reported in: III(2006)ACC784; 2007ACJ633; 2006(3)AWC2518; [2006(110)FLR318]
Barkat Ali Zaidi, J.1. The respondent's husband Mohd. Hanif, aged about 39 years, drawing monthly wages of Rs. 3549.50 paise, died on 25.5.1998 in the appellant's sugar mill at Rampur due to an injury caused in the course of employment to him. The appellant- employer, who was obliged to pay compensation equal to 50% of the monthly wages of the deceased workman multiplied by the relevant factor, as soon as the compensation fell due, deposited it's less than half Rs. 74,7607- with the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Rampur on 4.7.1998 after about one and half month of the accident.2. Ultimately, the respondent widow of the Mohd. Hanif filed a claim against the appellant-employer before the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Rampur on 31.12.2001, claiming an amount of Rs. 1,86,900/- and the interest thereon. During the pendency of the claim petition, the appellant-employer deposited the residual amount of compensation Rs. 1,12,140/- on 15.4.2002, which he had not deposited even aft...
Munna Ram Son of Late Bal Kishun Ram Vs. State of U.P. Through Secreta ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-16-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)AWC3032; [2006(110)FLR499]
A.P. Sahi, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and Sri H.K. Yadav for the Respondent No. 5.2. Affidavits have been exchanged between the parties and, as such, the same is being proceeded with with the consent of the parties for final disposal.3. The petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 5.2.2005 (Annexure-11 to the writ petition) and the order dated 19.2.2005 (Annexure-12 to the writ petition) whereby the Respondent No. 5 has been given the benefit of appointment on compassionate basis after the death of his father Late Bal Kishun Ram and the representation moved by the petitioner objecting to such appointment has been rejected.4. From the records, it is evident that Late Bal Kishun Ram died on 6.12.2001 in harness. The petitioner is younger to the Respondent No. 5 who is the eldest son of Late Bal Kishun Ram. The Respondent No. 5 moved an application for appointment under the compassionate appointment R...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »