Allahabad Court September 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.
Rajesh Kumar Singh and ors. Vs. Pratap Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-22-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)AWC55
ORDERUmeshwar Pandey, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the appellants.2. This appeal has been reeocted against the judgment and .aecree dated 24.8.2006 passed by the lower appellate court whereby the plaintiffs-appellants' appeal filed against the trial court's judgment rendered in a suit for specific performance of contract and permanent injunction, has been dismissed.3. The appellants of the aforesaid suit have filed it seeking relief of specific performance of contract and permanent injunction and stating that the property in question was agreed to be transferred by the defendants in their favour but they declined in-spite of the fact that in earlier suit for the relief of specific performance of contract filed on the basis of same agreement was decreed in terms of their compromise by the lower appellate court. The defendants, when did not execute the sale deed in pursuance of the decree passed in the aforesaid suit No. 143 of 1964 also tried to disturb the possession of the plaintiff...
Rajeshwar Prasad Shukla Vs. Smt. Vimla Devi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-22-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)AWC1267
ORDERAnjani Kumar, J.1. The petitioner, in this writ petition being tenant of the accommodation in question, aggrieved by the order passed by the prescribed authority dated 3.8.2004, whereby the application for release of the accommodation in question filed by the landlady under Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Act No. XIII of 1972 (In short 'the Act'), has been allowed after adjudicating the rival pro and cons of the parties. On the basis of the evidence on record, the prescribed authority came to the conclusion that the need of the landlady for the accommodation in question is bona fide and further that the comparative hardship also tilts in favour of the landlady. Aggrieved by the order passed by the prescribed authority, the petitioner preferred an appeal as contemplated under Section 22 of 'the Act' before the appellate court, which has been registered as Rent Appeal No. 67 of 2004. Before the appellate authority, the same arguments were advanced as were advanced, before the prescribe...
Rajendra Prasad Gupta Vs. Ravi Prakash and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-22-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)AWC1547
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.2. This is tenant's petition. The petitioner is tenant of a shop situated at Miyanpur, Pargana Hawaii Shahar, Jaunpur on a monthly rent of Rs. 150. He is running a shoe-shop from the disputed shop.3. Respondent-landlord filed Civil Suit No. 558 of 1998 for rent and eviction of the petitioner from the disputed shop. The petitioner-tenant also filed Case No. 45 of 1982 for deposit of rent in Court.4. It is alleged that during the pendency of the aforesaid cases, a settlement took place under the agreement appended as Annexure-3 to the writ petition and the petitioner-tenant was to vacate half portion of the shop as the disputed shop which had two separate shutters for ingress and egress. The shop was so divided that each one of them could separately and independently use one shutter to run their business. The rent of the shop was reduced to Rs. 100 per month under the aforesaid agreement.5. In the aforesaid shop so ...
Dr. Dharm Nath Singh Son of Late Hardeo Singh Vs. State of U.P. Throug ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-21-2006
Reported in: [2006(111)FLR882]
Amitava Lala, J.1. The petitioner was initially appointed as lecturer in sociology in the university under the order of the Vice Chancellor dated 11th March,1980 on a consolidated pay of Rs. 500/- per month for a period of three months. Although the appointment was made for a period of three months but the same was continued till 31st July, 1983. In the session 1979-80 the university made an advertisement for the selection of lecturer in sociology. The petitioner applied in pursuance to the advertisement and appeared before the selection committee on 13th April, 1981. Selection committee selected three other persons on 26th September, 1982. The name of the petitioner was placed under serial No. 4 with the recommendation that in any case vacancy found, the petitioner may be given appointment. However, no such situation arose. Again on 26th September, 1982 another advertisement was made to fill up the post of temporary lecturer in Economics, Sociology, English, Hindi, Philosophy and Hist...
Janki Prasad Vs. Kashi Nath Mishra
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-21-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)AWC961
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. The petitioner has challenged the validity and correctness of the impugned judgment and decree dated 29.7.2000 passed by the Prescribed Authority/VIth Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Agra allowing the release application of the respondent-landlord, affirmed vide judgment and order dated 6.4.2002 passed by Additional District Judge, Court No. 14, Agra.2. The factual backdrop of the case leading to the present proceeding may be stated thus:Respondent-landlord moved release application, registered as P.A. Case No. 57 of 1997 under Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') on the ground that he is owner and landlord of the disputed shop in which the petitioner is tenant at the rate of Rs. 10 per month, who is carrying on seasonal business of making earthen toys. The family of the landlord consists of two sons and a married daughter. It is averred in the application t...
Kiran Agrawal Vs. Hari Mohan Gupta
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-21-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)AWC1400
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Invoking extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, this petition takes an exception to the Judgment and decree dated 21.8.2003 in S.C.C. Suit No. 1 of 1998 passed by Civil Judge (Senior Division), Small Causes Court, Banda affirmed in S.C.C. Revision No. 15 of 2003 by judgment and order dated 29.4.2005 passed by Special Judge, (S.C./S.T. Act), Small Causes Court, Banda appended as Annexures-6 and 7 respectively to the writ petition.2. Concise facts are as under:Respondent-landlord filed S.C.C. Suit No. 1 of 1998 against the tenant-petitioner, inter alia, on the ground that the shop, in question, was constructed in 1990. Rent of the shop in May, 1997 was Rs. 535.50 P. per month. He further claimed that shop No. 7 was constructed in 1987 and the shop in dispute as well as the entire building was assessed for the first time on 17.11.1992 which became effective from April, 1993. The landlord demanded rent from May, 1997 from him by ...
Bhagwant Singh Vs. Prescribed Authority/Civil Judge (Senior Division) ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-21-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)AWC1282
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.2. The aforesaid writ petition arises out of an order dated 28.3.2003, passed by the Prescribed Authority/Civil Judge (Senior Division), Piltbhit in Execution Case No. 2 of 2000 and Execution Case No. 1 of 2000 in Rent Control Case No. 16 of 1990 in which an order of eviction against the petitioner was passed fixing 5.4.2003 for orders in respect of damages at the rate of Rs. 100 per day for violation of Clause 2 of the agreement.3. The facts of the case as culled out from the records are that respondent No. 2 filed Rent Case No. 16 of 1990 for release of the disputed accommodation. The petitioner moved an application-dated 12.9.1991 for providing better particulars and details. Subsequently during the pendency of application under Section 27(1)(A) of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 an agreement was arrived at between the parties on 12.11.1992. Relevant conditions for the purpose of decision of (his case are:(i) Condition...
Fareed Ahmad Alias Chaudhry Vs. Vth Addl. District Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-21-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)AWC1543
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Tenant-petitioner has approached this Court for a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing of impugned judgment and decree dated 4.5.2001 passed by respondent No. 2 in Suit No. 94 of 1999 and judgment dated 20.3.2002 passed by respondent No. 1 in Revision No. 21 of 2001 dismissing the revision and writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents not to evict him from the disputed shop.2. Briefly stated, facts of the case as disclosed in the writ petition are that respondent No. 3 is the landlord of the disputed shop. He filed S.C.C Suit No. 94 of 1999 in the Court of Judge, Small Causes Court, Bijnor against the tenant-petitioner, inter alia, on the ground that the shop, In question, was given on monthly rent of Rs. 715 to the petitioner on 1.1.1996.3. The tenant claims that the provisions of U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') do not apply to the disputed accommodation and that a...
Zahid Khan Vs. Special Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-21-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)AWC1590
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. By means of the instant writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the validity and correctness of the impugned judgment and order dated 18.6.2001 passed by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Kanpur Nagar - respondent No. 2 in Rent Control Case No. 184 of 1999 cancelling the allotment order dated 10.9.1996 in favour of the petitioner in respect of house No. 12/36, plot No. 36, Gwaltoli, Kanpur Nagar affirmed by the Special Judge, Kanpur Nagar - respondent No. 1 in Rent Revision No. 43 of 2001 vide judgment and order dated 7.3.2001.2. Briefly stated, facts of the case as disclosed in the writ petition are that the petitioner a resident of Kanpur Nagar, on coming to know that premises No. 12/36, plot No. 36 Gwaltoli, Kanpur Nagar is likely to fall vacant moved an application for allotment of the said premises before the Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Kanpur Nagar.3. Notices were issued to the concerned parties and a report of Rent Control Inspector was calle...
Dr. Dinesh Singh and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-21-2006
Reported in: 2007(2)AWC1793
ORDERRakesh Sharma, J.1. This writ petition was presented on 19.7.1996 and till date no counter-affidavit has been filed by the respondents.2. At the time of filing of the writ. petition, petitioner No. 1 was working as Research Assistant and has now left the job. Petitioner No. 2 is working as librarian; petitioner No. 3 is working as clerk and petitioner No. 4 is working as peon in the Ayurvedic Evam Tibbi Academy, U.P. Rajkiya Ayurved Maha Vidyalaya Bhawan, Tulsidas Marg, Lucknow, hereinafter referred to as the Academy. The Government of Uttar Pradesh vide G.O. dated 28.2.1950 sanctioned the establishment of the Academy. By a formal Government order, various posts were created and staff was appointed against the posts created and sanctioned by the Government. The petitioners were engaged in the Academy on the posts indicated above. The members of the staff were given parity with the Government servants and they were treated as employees of the Local Bodies, vide Government Order dat...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »