Allahabad Court August 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.
Hira Lal and ors. Vs. Ram Das
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-22-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)AWC148
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. This petition has been filed challenging the validity and correctness of the judgments and decree dated 14.9.1999 and 12.5.2005, passed by Judge Small Causes Court, Etah and Additional District Judge, Etah, respectively in S.C.C. Suit No. 37 of 1986 and S.C.C. Revision No. 19 of 1993 respectively.2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the plaintiff-respondent filed Suit No. 37 of 1986 against Late Mauji Ram, father of the petitioners for ejectment on the ground of nonpayment of rent w.e.f. 11.11.1976 to 10.5.1986. Notices were issued by the Court fixing 21.8.1986, which were served on the tenant, which was incidentally a holiday, as such, the case was taken up on 22.8.1986.3. The plaintiff was present in the Court but neither late Mauji Ram nor his counsel was present when the case was taken up, as such, the Court on 22.8.86 ordered the case to proceed ex parte fixing 29.8.1986 for ex parte hearing. The predecessor-in- in terest of the petitioners, i.e., ...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Pancham Dass Jain
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-21-2006
Reported in: (2006)205CTR(All)444
1. The Tribunal, Allahabad has referred the following question of law under Section 256(1) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for opinion of this Court:Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in sustaining the deletion by the CIT(A) of the following sums added by the ITO under Section 68 of the IT Act, 1961 1. Meer Mullah Kabari Rs. 1,33,6792. Noor Mohd. Kabari Rs. 1,34,5752. The reference relates to the asst. yr. 1976-77.Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows:The original assessment in respect of the assessment for asst. yr. 1976-77 was completed on 5th Sept., 1980. The same was, however, set aside by the CIT(A) with the direction that the ITO should make the assessment de novo from the return stage onwards in accordance with law. Accordingly, the ITO proceeded with the assessment de novo and asked the assessee to explain the nature and source of the various deposits appearing in ...
Maharaj Yadav S/O Shri Panchu Ram Yadav Vs. State of U.P. Through Secr ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-21-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)AWC826
Arun Tandon, J.1. Standing Counsel prays for and is granted four weeks' time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit may be filed within one week thereafter. List in the third week of October, 2006.2. A post of Lecturer Physics was requisitioned in respect of the vacancy available at Mahraj Singh Inter College, Bahraich. The petitioner has been selected against the said post by the U.P. Secondary Education Services Selection Board. Accordingly, the panel was intimated to the District Inspector of Schools, Bahraich. The District Inspector of Schools, Bahraich by means of his order dated 29th March, 2006 has stated that a teacher appointed to teach Physics in the institution has filed a writ petition before the Lucknow Bench of this Court and has obtained an interim order, therefore, petitioner cannot be offered appointment against the post for which he has been recommended. It is against this order that the present writ petition has been filed.3. This Court by means of order date...
Amar Nath Mehta Vs. Special Judge (Bhrastachar Nivaran) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-21-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)AWC3575
Sanjay Misra, J.1. This writ petition has been made by the tenant who seeks quashing of the judgment and orders of the courts below whereby the tenanted portion has been released in favour of the landlady in proceedings Under Section 21(1)(a) of the U. P. Act No. XIII of 1972.2. The prescribed authority while considering the bona fide need of the landlady found that she had 10 members in her family whose need has to be seen. They are living in the house of Sampati Devi who is the landlady's husband's maternal grandmother. The accommodation consists of two rooms and it was found to be Insufficient. The need of the landlady was held to be bona fide. The prescribed authority considered the plea of the tenant that one portion of the house was in the tenancy of one Tejinder Singh and in a S.C.C. Suit No. 34 of 1988 the said portion was made available to the landlady by virtue of a compromise arrived at between them and in proceedings Under Section 16 of the Act it was released in her favour...
Ramesh Chandra Pandey Son of Late Sri M.N. Pandey Vs. Central Bank of ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-21-2006
Reported in: [2006(111)FLR507]
Amitava Lala, J.1. Having heard learned Counsel for the parties and after perusing the record of the case it appears to this Court that there are live charges against the petitioner. While the petitioner was working at Padrauna Branch during the period from 12.9.1985 to 22.6.1991 he committed lapses and accordingly five charges were levelled which are as follows:1. While working at Padrauna Branch Sri Pandey was deputed to Vishunpura Branch occasionally as officiating Branch Manager from where he took cash of Rs. 13450/- Rs. 21000/-and Rs. 27,000/-on 18.2.91,21.2.91 and 10.4.91 respectively to deposit the same at Padrauna Branch. Though he reached at Padrauna Branch well in the office hours on all these dates, but he did not deposit the cash and kepi the same with him unauthorisediy and deposited on 20.2.91, 22.2.91 and 11.4.91 respectively and thus defalcated Bank's money, temporarily.2. Sri Pandey misappropriated a credit entry of Rs. 800/= dated 24.3.90 from term loan (Tractor) A/C ...
Nafees Alias Laddan and ors. Vs. Smt. Sardari Begum and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-21-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)AWC146
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 15th July, 2006, appended as Annexure-6 to the writ petition rejecting amendment application of the petitioners as not maintainable.2. Heard counsel for the petitioners and perused the record.3. The case of the petitioners is that by means of amendment application, they wanted to bring on record the subsequent developments and its rejection has deprived them to raise their pleas and lead evidence in regard to subsequent developments.4. It has been urged by counsel for the petitioners that Hon'ble the Supreme Court, in catena of cases, has held that ordinarily amendment applications must be allowed but the court below has committed manifest illegality apparent on the face of record in not allowing the amendment application.5. From a perusal of the impugned order, it appears that an application under Section 21 (1)(a) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction Act), 1972, had been moved ...
Rewa Chandra Vs. District Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-21-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)AWC379
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. By means of the instant writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 27.8.2002, passed by the District Judge, Kanpur Nagar-respondent No. 1 seeking relief of direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the release order dated 5.3.1992, order dated 2.6.1997 by which the review application has been dismissed as well as the impugned order dated 27.8.2002, dismissing the revision.2. Facts of the case, in brief are that the petitioner claims himself to be an old tenant of a portion of house No. 88/478 (old No. 88/465) on the first floor on a monthly rent of Rs. 63 per month which was purchased by the father of the present landlord-respondent No. 3 in 1960. The accommodation in the tenancy of the petitioner consists of two rooms, verandah, court-yard, kitchen, latrine and bath-room.3. It is alleged that the petitioner later on came to know that the respondent No. 3--landlord had moved an application dated 7.2.1991 under Section 16(1)(b) of the ...
Vishnu Gopal and ors. Vs. Prem Dutt Gautam
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-21-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)AWC383
Prakash Krishna, J.1. This is plaintiffs appeal from order of the First Additional District Judge, Aligarh dated 13.5.1994 in Civil Appeal No. 45 of 1987 whereby the court below allowed the appeal, set aside the judgment and decree of the trial court and remanded the matter to the trial court for fresh decision.2. The Suit No. 262 of 1981 was instituted by the present appellants against the defendant respondent on the pleas inter alia that the defendant is the tenant of the disputed land of which the plaintiffs are owners and landlord, on a monthly rent of Rs. 180. The defendant failed to pay the rent after 20.6.1977 and sublet a portion of it to defendant No. 3. The tenancy was terminated through a notice, which was served on 10.1.1981 and the suit was filed for recovery of arrears of rent, damages and ejectment of the defendants.3. The defendant No. 1, contested the suit denying the ownership and landlordship of the plaintiff over the disputed land. He came out with the case that the...
Anil Kumar Son of Ram Nandan and Ram Autar Son of Ram Sakal Vs. State ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-19-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)AWC3833
B.S. Chauhan and Ashok Bhushan, JJ.1. We have heard Sri M.D. Mishra, learned Counsel for the appellants, and Sri Chandra Kesh Rai, learned standing counsel for the respondents.2. This appeal has been filed against the order of learned Single Judge dated 26th February, 1996 allowing two writ petitions filed by Gaon Sabha challenging the order dated 12th December, 1992 of the Chief Revenue Officer, Ballia.3. Brief facts of the case for deciding the appeal are; proceedings under Section 122-B of Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 were initiated against the appellants by issuing a notice under Z.A. Form 49- A. The notice alleged that the appellants are in unauthorised occupation of Plot Nos. 856/1/1 and 856/3 situate in Piprauli, which is a Gaon Sabha property. The notice issued under Z.A. Form 49-A was objected by the appellants and objections were filed stating that the appellants are in possession of the land in dispute from time immemorial, they have perfected...
Aniruddh Rai S/O Sri T.N. Rai, Plantation Jamadar (Ropwani Naik), Divi ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Aug-19-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)AWC4104; [2006(111)FLR716]
R.K. Agrawal, J.1. By means of the present writ petition filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, petitioner Aniruddh Rai, seeks the following reliefs:a) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the Tribunal's judgment dated 16-1-86(Annexure:III),b) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus requiring the respondents to consider and permit th petitioner to the post of Forester retrospectively w.e.f. The date when his promotion was due and grant him all consequential benefits of seniority, emoluments and arrears of emoluments alongwith interest at the rate of 12% per annum,c) issue any other writ, order or direction which the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of this case, andd) award costs of this petition to the petitioner against the respondents.2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present petition are as follows:According to the petitioner, he was holding the post of Plantation Jamadar/R...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- Next ›
- Last »