Allahabad Court April 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.
Kumari Surya Shukla and anr. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-04-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)AWC3618
Devi Prasad Singh, J.1. Whether change in dress, curriculum or books and demanding advance fees for the closer period, compelling the students to purchase books and dress material from particular shops and Bookstall by the Schools or Colleges and also to compel the students to open Bank account in a specified bank, is justified and whether student can be expelled from an institution without serving prior notice in utter disregard of principle of natural justice, are some of the questions which have cropped up for adjudication by this Court in the present writ petition.2. Petitioners, who are of tender age, being meted with unruly treatment imparted by the Principal and management of their institution and because of raising of their voice against certain malpractices, have approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, challenging their ouster from the school in question. The facts and circumstances, brought on record, also show, how cruelly and in unsystematic ma...
Shanti Swaroop Tripathi and ors. Vs. Iiird A.D.J. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-04-2007
Reported in: 2008(1)AWC852
Rakesh Sharma, J.1. Heard Sri Avadhesh Kumar learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ashish Misra, learned Counsel for the opposite parties.2. The petitioner has assailed the order dated 7.12.1987 passed by the IIIrd Additional District Judge, Lakhimpur Kheri, allowing the revision of the widow-landlady Smt. Rajeswari Devi and ordering for release of the rented accommodation under the tenancy of petitioner, Sri Shanti Swaroop Tripathi.3. It emerges from record that a release application was submitted by Smt. Rajeshwari Devi before the prescribed authority under the relevant rent control laws at Lakhimpur Kheri on 6.9.1982 for release of a house situate in Mohalla Mahraj Nagar, in the main city of Lakhimpur Kheri. It was indicated in the release application that earlier tenant Sri Raziuddin Siddiqui had vacated the disputed premises and the landlady wanted the recommendation for her personal need and requirements. She was having a large family comprising 12 members who had no adequat...
Hindustan Construction Corporation Vs. Commissioner of Trade Tax
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-04-2007
Reported in: (2009)21VST36(All)
Rajes Kumar, J.1. These three revisions under Section 11 of the U. P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') are directed against the order of the Tribunal dated July 20, 2000 relating to the assessment years 1993-94, 1994-95 and 1995-96.2. Brief facts of the case are that the applicant was civil contractor and was liable to tax under Section 3F of the Act, on the value of the goods involved in the execution of works contract. The applicant applied under the compounding scheme introduced by the State Government under Section 7D of the Act for payment of one per cent tax on the amount received against the execution of the works contract. For all the aforesaid assessment years the Assistant Commissioner (Assessment), Trade Tax, Ghaziabad accepted the application under the Compounding Scheme and passed the appropriate orders for the assessment years 1993-94, 1994-95 and 1995-96 on July 12, 1996, October 15, 1996 and February 26, 1998, respectively. The Deputy Commissio...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Sudesh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-03-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)AWC2105
ORDERAmitava Lala, J.1. Since two relevant questions of law are involved in the present appeal, by the consent of the parties the appeal is heard on the informal papers.2. The appeal has been preferred by the insurance company attacking the award of the court below on two grounds; firstly, the compensation, which has been awarded by fixing the salary of the deceased at Rs. 3,000, is wrongful; and secondly, the application of multiplier is not correct.3. So far as the first point is concerned, we find from the ratio of the judgment in State of Haryana and Anr. v. Jasbir Kaur and Ors. 2003 (3) TAC 569 (SC), what would be modus for fixation of 'just compensation'. It has been held by the Supreme Court 'gauzing the relevant aspects, noted above, the monthly income is fixed at Rs. 3,000 per month, and after deducting Rs. 1,000 for personal expenses, financial contribution so far as the claimants are concerned is fixed at Rs. 2,000 per month'. Worked out on the basis of multiplier of 18 and ...
Sri Ramji, Vs. Rent Controls and Eviction Officer/Addl. District Magis ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-03-2007
Reported in: 2007(78)AWC2196
Prakash Krishna, J.1. These two writ petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by a common judgment, as jointly agreed upon by the learned Counsel for the parties. The fate of Writ Petition No. 2403 of 2007 is dependant on the success of the leading writ petition, i.e., Writ Petition No. 13237 of 2001.2. The background facts of the case are as follows:Gulab Das, the respondent No. 2 claiming himself owner and landlord on the basis of the sale deed executed in his favour with respect to the property in question which according to the petitioner was one of the trust properties initiated proceedings for declaration of vacancy and release in respect of the disputed properties being house No. K-46/197, Mohalla Hartirath under Section 16(1)(b) of the U.P. Urban Building (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act No. 13 of 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on 1st of August, 1995. The Rent Control and Eviction Officer by the order dated 24th of February, 1999 declared...
Jagdish Prasad Agarwal Vs. Xth Additional District Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-03-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)AWC3001
S.U. Khan, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. Through this review application, review and reversal of my Judgment dated 18.5.2006 has been sought through which 1 dismissed the writ petition. Against the said Judgment S.L.P. was filed before the Supreme Court being S.L.P. (Civil) No. 11587 of 2006, which was dismissed by one line order, which is quoted below:Heard.The special leave petition is dismissed.3. It appears that thereafter review application was filed before the Supreme Court which was got dismissed as not pressed. If S.L.P. is dismissed without assigning any reason then review petition before the High Court is maintainable, vide Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala : [2000]245ITR360(SC) .4. In my judgment, I placed reliance upon an earlier Judgment delivered by me in Harish Khurana v. Prem Kumar and Anr. 2006 (1) ARC 118 : 2006 (1) AWC 642. It is reported that against the said Judgment of Harish Khurana S.L.P. has been filed in the Supreme Court and notices has been issu...
Mohd. Ishaq Khan Vs. Javed Anwar and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-03-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)AWC2989
S.U. Khan, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. This is tenant's writ petition arising out of S.C.C. Suit No. 121 of 1996 filed by landlord respondents No. 1 to 3 against the petitioner and proforma respondent Nos. 4 and 5 for eviction and recovery of arrears of rent. Eviction was sought on the ground of default and subletting. The suit was filed against Mohd. Yusuf Khan and Mohd. Ishaq Khan. Mohd. Yusuf Khan died during pendency of suit and was survived by Smt. Raeesa Begum proforma respondent No. 4 his widow and Smt. Farzana Begum proforma respondent No. 5 his daughter. Mohd. Yusuf Khan and Mohd. Ishaq Khan were real brothers, proforma respondent Nos. 4 and 5 engaged counsel in this writ petition and filed counter-affidavit supporting fully the case of the petitioner. The suit was decreed on 20.5.2006 by J.S.C.C. Moradabad. Against the said Judgment and decree petitioner Mohd. Ishaq Khan and proforma respondent Nos. 4 and 5 filed S.C.C. Revision No. 29 of 2006. A.D.J. court ...
Smt. Geeta Varma and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-03-2007
Reported in: [2007(114)FLR569]
S.S. Chauhan, J.1. The petitioner filed the present writ petition challenging the termination order dated 9.3.1990, contained in Annexure No. 1 to the writ petition. An interim order was granted by this Court on 22.1.1993 and the petitioner has been continuing on the basis of the interim order in service.2. During the pendency of the writ petition the petitioner expired on 28.11.2006. Thereafter the heirs of the petitioner have moved an application for substitution and they have been substituted and brought on record in place of the petitioner. Thus, the termination order requires adjudication as the heirs are claiming the retiral dues of the petitioner, which are legally due to him.3. The petitioner was appointed by means of order dated 14.12.1989. The petitioner thereafter joined on the post in question on 1.1.1990. After joining of the petitioner the Settlement Officer, Consolidation sent information to the Consolidation, Commissioner, but while sending information the Settlement Of...
Doon International Educational Society and anr. Vs. State of Uttaranch ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-02-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)AWC1952
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. Both these petitions are directed against order dated 19.6.2002, passed by Government of Uttaranchal, whereby while upholding the rest of the constructions, top floor (second floor) of the building in question, has been directed to be demolished. For the sake of convenience, both these petitions are being disposed of by this common Judgment.2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the entire record.3. Brief facts of the case, as narrated in the Writ Petition No. 379 (M/B) of 2002, are that petitioner No. 1 Doon International Educational Society, is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, which runs a school at 3, Mohini Road, Dehradun. A plan was submitted by petitioner No. 1 to the Mussoorle-Dehradun Development Authority (hereinafter referred as M.D.D.A.) on 31.5.2001, for further constructions in the building. After expiry of 90 days, when no Information was received that the plan is sanctioned, petitioners started construction, ...
Council of Scientific and Industrial Research and anr. Vs. Goodman Dru ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-02-2007
Reported in: 2007(4)ARBLR123(All); 2007(2)AWC1956
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. This appeal, preferred under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, is directed against the judgment and order dated 11.1.2005. passed by learned District Judge, Dehradun, in Misc. Arbitration Case No. 46 of 2003, whereby the said Court has refused to set aside the award given by the Arbitrator.2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.3. Brief facts of the case are that appellant No. 1 Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (hereinafter referred as C.S.I.R.) is doing research in the field of Science and Technology. Appellant No. 2 Indian Institute of Petroleum (hereinafter referred as I.I.P.) is a constituent laboratory under C.S.I.R. and is a society registered under Societies Registration Act. Respondent M/s Goodman Drug House Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred as Goodman), which is a private limited company registered under the Companies Act, entered into an agreement on 21.8.1996 with the appellant for the purpose...
- ‹ Prev
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 14
- Next ›
- Last »