Allahabad Court December 2007 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.
Life Insurance Corporation of India Through Its Chairman and the Senio ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-06-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)AWC1399; [2008(116)FLR1031]
Amitava Lala, J.1. Both the aforesaid appeals are arising out of an order passed by the learned Single Judge on 13th April, 2001 in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 19951 of 2000 (Kailash Nath and Ors. v. Chairman, (sic) Office Mumbai and Ors.). The order impugned is as follows:This is a writ petition for quashing the notice for employment published by Life Insurance Corporation (LIC) for class IV post in its Divisional office at Varanasi and for a direction to regularise the petitioners in that office on the ground that they have been working temporarily in that office since 1985.I have heard Sri BN Singh, counsel for the petitioner and Sri R.P. Goel assisted by Sri Manish Goel, counsel for LIC. According to the petitioner the LIC called for the names for temporary employment in class IV in its Divisional office in 1985 and the names of the petitioners were sponsored by employment exchange. They further states that select list was prepared and since 1985 they have been permitted to work ...
Vimla Devi Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-06-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)AWC1025
V.M. Sahai and R.N. Misra, JJ.1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition for renewal of the mining lease.We have heard Shri Krishna Kumar Chaurasiya, learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel for the respondents.2. It appears from the contents of the petition that the mining lease was granted in favour of the petitioner for five years, i.e., from 27.9.2002 to 26.9.2007. According to Rule 6A of the U.P. Minor Mineral (Concession) Rules, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules') the petitioner has applied for renewal of the lease in Form MM-1 (Ka) on 2.2.2007, i.e., before six months of the expiry of the original lease. The District Magistrate, Mirzapur (respondent No. 3) has not passed any order on her renewal application on the ground that 'No Objection Certificate' has to be obtained from the Forest Department. The petitioner has prayed for the issuance of writ of mandamus directing the respondent No. 3 to consider the renewal application of the petitione...
Santosh Kumar Alias Tata Vs. Smt. Meena Devi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-06-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)AWC1222
V.M. Sahai and R.N. Misra, JJ.1. This appeal has been preferred by the plaintiff-appellant Santosh Kumar alias Tata against the order dated 12.10.2007, passed by Sri Bachchu Singh, Civil Judge (Senior Division), Ballia in O.S. No. 276 of 2004, by which ad-interim injunction 6C-2, moved by the plaintiff-appellant has been rejected but the application 60C-2, moved by the defendant-respondent Smt. Meena Devi for the same purpose has been allowed and the plaintiff-appellant has been restrained till the pendency of the suit from interfering in any way with the title and possession of defendant-respondent in the property in dispute.2 We have heard Sri Phaujdar Rai and Sri V. Singh, learned Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant and Sri Pradeep Kumar Rai, learned Counsel for the respondent.3. The plaintiff-appellant filed a suit for injunction on the basis of a Will dated 6.3.2003, alleged to have been executed by Shambhoo Prasad, husband of defendant-respondent regarding his two immovable prope...
Dharam Pal Singh Vs. Hira Lal and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-06-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)AWC658
Sunil Ambwani, J.1. Heard Shri Dinesh Chandra, learned Counsel for the petitioner-tenant.2. The prescribed authority rejected the release application under Section 21 (1) (a) of Uttar Pradesh Urban Building (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 filed by the landlord to release the four rooms, courtyard and store rooms in the tenancy of the petitioner in the same house in which they were living on the ground that the landlord did not prove that he had bona fide need for additional accommodation. The appellate court has set aside the judgment and order of the prescribed authority dated 20.9.2005 and while allowing the Rent Appeal No. 3 of 2005 on 11.9.2007, held that the landlord has proved his bona fide need for more than five rooms. The tenant has made no effort in the last several years to find out any alternative accommodation and would not suffer greater hardships than the landlord if the release application is rejected.3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner tenant con...
State of U.P. and anr. Vs. District Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-06-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)AWC1348
Sunil Ambwani, J.1. Heard Sri Mayank Saxena, learned standing counsel.2. Learned standing counsel states that the possession of the bungalow was handed over to Sri Ashok Kumar Garg and Smt. Madhuri Garg on 1.2.2003 and that half of the rent as enhanced by the court below under Section 21 (8) of U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 was paid in pursuance of the order of Supreme Court to the owners.3. No one appears on behalf of the respondents in both the writ petitions. The property was allotted by the District Magistrate to the District Supply Officer for his office at a monthly rent of Rs. 86. Initially only the constructed portion, i.e., 409.22 sq. mtrs. was considered for determining market value. The valuation of the land was not considered by the District Magistrate. The site plan produced by the D.G.C. (C.) reported the covered area at 1139.40 sq. mtrs. The appellate court considered the valuation of the land at the circle rate of Rs. 2,003 a...
Jitendra Kumar Agarwal and anr. Vs. Brigadier Daya Krishna Rastogi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-05-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)AWC660
Sunil Ambwani, J.1. Heard Shri Som Narain Mishra for the petitioner and Shri Ashutosh Srivastava for the respondents.2. The petitioner retired from Indian Army and filed an application for release of two shops in the tenancy of the respondent for setting up business of distributing liquefied petroleum gas or any other agency. The application was rejected by the trial court on 5.11.1992 on the ground that the applicant has not started living at Hasanpur. He has houses at Dehradun and N.O.I.D.A. The house at N.O.I.D.A. has been let out and it appears that the applicant is living in Dehradun. In the circumstances, it was found that he has not established the bona fide need for establishing business in the disputed shops.3. The order of the prescribed authority was challenged in R.C. Appeal No. 36 of 1994. The appellate court, while discussing the evidence with regard to bona fide need, called in aid the provisions of the Explanation (iii) to Section 21 (1) (a) of U. P. Urban Building (Reg...
Noman Masood Son of Rashid Masood Vs. State of U.P. Through Secretary ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-05-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)AWC1224
Amitava Lala, J.1. The aforesaid four writ petitions have been placed before us for the purposes of analogous hearing. Three writ petitions out of four writ petitions have been filed by one candidate for the Municipal Election, whose candidature was rejected due to his caste certificate. The fourth writ petition has been filed by an independent candidate, who had withdrawn his candidature in support of the petitioner herein who made the aforesaid writ petitions.2. The dispute is whether the petitioner belongs to the caste of Backward Muslim community known as 'Sheikh Sarwari' or not? In the Schedule of the relevant notification, we find that there is a 'comma' in between the words Sheikh and Sarwari as annexed to the writ petition. However, a clarification has been made by the Judgment of a learned Single Judge rendered in the case of Shamiuddin v. Additional District Judge, Mathura and Ors. reported in 1998 (16) L.C.D. 424, that Sheikh includes the word Sarwari. Such argument of Sri S...
Prahlad Kumar Gupta S/O Sri R.P. Gupta and Vs. the State of U.P. Throu ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-05-2007
Reported in: 2008(2)AWC1227
V.M. Sahai and R.N. Misra, JJ.1. By invoking jurisdiction of this Court, under Article 226 of Constitution of India through this writ petition, the petitioners have challenged jurisdiction of District Consumer Forum Budaun in passing the order dated 2.2.2007 in Consumer Complaint No. 306 of 2002, by which the petitioners have been ordered to pay the amount of Fixed Deposit Receipts in favour of Km. Pragya Bharti, Rohit Kumar and Akshey Kumar, the complainants of the case and some other persons named in annexure-3.2. We have heard learned Counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and learned Counsel for respondent No. 3. The main grievance of the petitioners is that District Consumer Form (hereinafter called as Forum) has no jurisdiction to intervene in such matters, in which payment of money is involved. The complainants have remedy of filing civil suit for recovery of money, if any. Surprisingly enough, the petitioners have not made party to the...
Ravendra Alias Hawaldar and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-05-2007
Reported in: 2008CriLJ1986
ORDERM.K. Mittal, J.1. These applications have been filed against the order passed by learned Magistrate under Section 156(3), Cr.P.C. whereby they directed for registration of first information report and investigation of the case. In all these matters first information report has not yet been registered as stated by the applicants. Since the common question of law is involved they have been heard together and are being decided by one order.2. Criminal Misc. Application No. 26622 of 2007 has been filed against the order dated 19-9-2007 passed by C.J.M., Mainpuri in Criminal Misc. Case No. 311 of 2007. Criminal Misc. Application No.26623 of 2007 has been filed against the order dated 27-9-2007 passed by C.J.M., Allahabad in Criminal Misc. Case No. 779 of 2007, Criminal Misc. Application No. 2778 of 2007 has been filed against the order dated 30-10-2007 passed by A.C.J.M., Agra in Criminal Misc. Application No. 242 of 2007, Criminal Misc. Application No. 27756 of 2007 has been filed aga...
Frontier Alloy Steels Ltd. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Dec-05-2007
Reported in: [2008]144CompCas438(All)
1. The petitioner, M/s. Frontier Alloy Steels Ltd., Kanpur, is a company, registered under the Companies Act. The petitioner is aggrieved by an order passed by the Railway Board, through its Joint Director, Railway Stores (IC), Railway Board, New Delhi, dated February 21, 2007, whereby the petitioner has been informed that the Ministry of Railways has decided to ban business dealings with the petitioner, being the sister concern of M/s. Frontier Springs Ltd., for a period of 5 years with effect from April 21, 2007.2. So far as the banning of M/s. Frontier Springs Ltd., the sister concern of the petitioner is concerned, the matter is not under challenge before us, and therefore, for the purposes of the present writ petition, it is recorded that such debarment of M/s. Frontier Springs Ltd. is in accordance with law. The only issue up for consideration before us is as to whether the present petitioner, namely, Frontier Alloy Steels Ltd., which is a distinct legal entity being a separate c...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »