Allahabad Court July 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.
Madhya Pradesh State Through Collector Vs. District Judge,
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-14-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)AWC4205
Arun Tandon, J.1. Heard. Shri R.P. Tewari on behalf of the petitioner, Shri V.K. Burman, Senior Advocate on behalf of the respondents No. 2 and 3, Standing Counsel on behalf of respondent No. 1.2. The property described as Bagh Bundela situate in Vrindavan City at Mathura comprising of a house and vacant land more precisely described in the plaint, was the property of princely state known as Datia State situate in the State of Madhya Pradesh. After India was declared independent the ruler of the Datia State signed an instrument of accession of the State to the Dominion of India. At that stage Inventories describing personal property of the ruler of Datia State and the state properties were finalized. According to the petitioner the property in dispute was the state property hence under the agreement dated 26,12.1949 it vested in the State of Madhya Pradesh. The petitioner as such was in possession over the same through its tenant. The property has been recorded as state property in the...
Sagari Leathers (P) Ltd. Through Director P.K. Gupta Vs. Presiding Off ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-14-2006
Reported in: [2006(110)FLR1043]
Rajes Kumar, J.1. By means of present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order/award dated 30.05.2002 (published in Gazette dated 21.11.2003) passed by the Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal, U. P. Agra in Case No. 93/97.2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:The petitioner is a Private Limited Company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1956. The petitioner's Company is a manufacturer of Leather Tops for the Shoes. It is a government recognized Export House mainly engaged in exporting the Leather Tops of Shoes. It's registered Office is located at 17 Kucha Chodhary Opposite State Bank Building, Chandani Chowk, Delhi and has a branch Office at 164 F. M. Cariappa Road, Babuganj, Agra. In the petition, it is, stated that the Company engaged several workers for the preparation of Leather Tops for the Shoes. These Shoe Tops are made on orders received from foreign Countries. To supervise the manufacturing of these Shoes Topes, few supervisors are also enga...
U.P.S.R.T. Corpn. Ltd. Vs. Rajendra Prasad and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-14-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)AWC3810
Rajes Kumar, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the judgment and award dated 26.4.2002 passed by Presiding Officer Labour Court, Gorakhpur, which was published on 28.5.2003.2. Brief facts of the case giving rise to the present petition are that the respondent No. 1 was the employee of the petitioner and was working on the post of conductor attached with Deoria depot. He has been dismissed from the service on the ground that he was conductor of the bus No. UAA-9643 on Lar-Deoria route. On 25.10.1994, Traffic Inspector Shri S.N. Tripathi checked the aforesaid bus near Salempur Bale and found that out of 30 passengers, 24 passengers were travelling without ticket and from the blank book a consolidated ticket of 24 passengers was prepared for Rs. 72. The entry of the said tickets was made in road paper and the checking details were mentioned and after writing the remark in the road paper when Sri S.N. Singh, Assistant Traffic Inspector was going to put his signature, Rajendra Pras...
Om Sharma S/O Late Dr. Harivansh Lal Sharma Vs. Rajesh Kumar Srivastav ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-14-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ4288
M.C. Jain, J.1. The appellant-Om Sharma seeks to prefer this contempt appeal under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 against the order dated 2.5.2006 passed by Hon'ble Sunil Ambwani, J. on Application No. 782 of 2006 in Contempt Petition No. 820 of 2002, Rajesh Kumar Srivastava v. A.P. Verma. The relief prayed for is for setting aside the said order dated 2.5.2006. The appellant also prays that his application for registration of Hari Eye Hospital, Agra Road, Hathras be allowed.2. We have heard Sri P.N. Saxena, learned Senior Advocate for the appellant and have carefully gone through the record. The background be taken note of. The impugned order came to be passed while monitoring the directions issued by the Supreme Court in the case of D.K. Joshi v. State of U.P. : (2000)5SCC80 . The matter pertains to the methods adopted by quacks in dodging the authorities in carrying out their activities in medical field. An application was filed by Sri Hari Eye Hospital, Agra Road, H...
Chandra Kishore and anr. Vs. Ram Babu and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-14-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)AWC3669
D.P. Singh, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. This contempt petition has been filed with the allegation that in spite of the order dated 10.11.1992 in Writ Petition No. 40493 of 1992 the opposite parties have made constructions over the disputed land.3. The applicants preferred Suit No. 88 of 1992 against the opposite parties for permanent injunction restraining them from raising any construction over the passage and road existing towards north of the applicants 'bazar'. An application for interim injunction was also made. An interim injunction was granted on 28.5.1992 and Commissioner's report was also called upon who vide report dated 2.9.1992 found that the disputed land was vacant and was being used by the applicant and also by his tenants and shopper for ingress and egress to his 'bazar'. However, the trial court rejected the injunction which was subjected to challenge in a Civil Appeal where also interim injunction was granted and continued till the appeal was dismiss...
Dharam Pal (D) Through L.Rs. Vs. Addl. Commissioner (Judicial) Allahab ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-14-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)AWC4203
Rajes Kumar, J.1. By means of the present writ petition, petitioners have challenged the order of the Additional Commissioner (Judicial), Allahabad Division, Allahabad dated 9.7.2003 by which the Revision No. 86/6-2002-03 against the order of the Additional District Magistrate (Finance), Kaushambi dated 30.7.2002 has been rejected.2. The petitioners purchased plot No. 72 measuring 0.352 hect., which is claimed to be an agricultural plot from his brother, Mool Chand for Rs. 22,000 against the sale deed dated 12.6.2002 and had paid the stamp duty on the amount of Rs 25,000. A proceeding has been initiated against the petitioners for the deficiency of stamp duty under the Indian Stamp Act on the basis of the report of the Lekhpal in which it was reported that there was one diesel pumping set and one pucca room on the plot, which has not been valued and the stamp duty on the said amount has not been paid. The value of the said asset has been determined at Rs. 1 lac. In pursuance of the not...
City Montessori School Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-14-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)AWC1072
Pradeep Kant and R.P. Yadav, JJ.1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has been filed by the City Montessori School, through its founder-director Smt. Bharti Gandhi, challenging the notification issued under Section 48 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, denotifying the land' In question vide Government order dated 5.11.2004. The area of the land In question, which has been denotified, is 6000 sq. ft. of plot No. 11 situated at Station Road, Mohalla Chhitwapur, Lucknow.2. In brief, the necessary facts which have given rise to the issuance of the aforesaid notification, and the pleadings of the parties are being narrated as under:A land comprising 23000 sq. ft. situated at 11, Station Road, Lucknow, was acquired by the State Government vide notifications dated 7.9.1976 and 6.10.1979, issued under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, for the purpose of expansion of one of the branches of City Montessori School, running a chain of schools in different parts of...
U.P. Sunni Central Waqf Board Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-14-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)AWC440
Rajes Kumar, J.1. By means of present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 29.4.2003, passed by the Vth Additional District Judge, Shahjahanpur in Misc. Case No. 5 of 2002, Sunni Central Waqf Board v. Harsh Dev Gupta rejecting the application under Section 151 of C.P.C. filed by Sunni Central Waqf Board for recalling the order dated 16.5.2000, passed by the Additional District Judge, Shahjahanpur in Civil Misc. Appeal No. 61 of 1992, Harsh Dev Gupta v. Sunni Central Waqf Board, Lucknow.2. The brief facts of the case giving rise to the present petition are that the respondent No. 3 filed a Civil Misc. Appeal No. 61 of 1992 against the order/notice dated 23.6.1992, issued by the Controller, U. P. Sunni Central Waqf Board, Lucknow, directing the Collector, Shahjahanpur to evict the respondent No. 3 from the land in dispute and in pursuance thereof, notice issued by the Collector. The appeal was filed on the ground that the land in dispute Nos. 1625A to 1268A measur...
Sarju Prasad Vs. Viiith Additional District Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-14-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)AWC1068
Rakesh Sharma, J.1. Heard Sri D.C. Jain holding brief of Sri H.S. Sahai, learned senior advocate appearing for the petitioner-tenant and Sri I.D. Shukla, holding brief of Sri S.K. Mehrotra, learned Counsel for the respondent-landlady.2. The petitioner has assailed the two orders, one passed by the prescribed authority/Munsif, Sadar, Faizabad on 28.4.1995 by which the application of the landlady filed under Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act 1972 (Act XIII of 1972), hereinafter referred to as the Act, has been allowed and the other, order dated 19.3.1999, passed by the appellate authority, i.e., VII It h Additional District Judge, Faizabad, by which the appeal filed by the petitioner has been dismissed. The petitioner was directed to hand over peaceful possession of the shop in question to the respondent landlady within one month. Both the learned courts below have recorded concurrent findings of facts on the points of bona fide n...
Raghuraj Pratap Singh and ors. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Ta ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-14-2006
Reported in: (2009)222CTR(All)153; [2009]179TAXMAN73(All)
Pradeep Kant, J.1. This is a bunch of writ petitions, which challenge the notice under Section 158BC of the IT Act, 1961, issued to all the petitioners separately and thus challenge the proceedings for block assessment initiated under Chapter XIV-B of the IT Act, for the block period commencing from 1st April, 1996, to 16th Dec, 2002. Since all the writ petitions arise out of almost similar facts and involve the same questions of law, we have proceeded to decide them by a common order but in doing so, keeping in mind the distinct circumstances, which require separate adjudication, we divide the aforesaid petitions in two sets. Writ Petn. Nos. 5731 (MB) of 2004, 5730 (MB) of 2004 and 5729 (MB) of 2004, Writ Petn. No. 5931 (MB) of 2004 and Writ Petn. No. 5932 (MB) of 2004, which have been filed, respectively, by (i) Raghuraj Pratap Singh, son of Udai Pratap Singh, (ii) Smt. Bhavni. Kumari, wife of Raghuraj Pratap Singh, (iii) Smt. Manjul Raje, wife of Udai Pratap Singh, (iv) Trilochan Pr...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »