Allahabad Court January 2008 Judgments
Smt. Raj Kumari Awasthi and anr. Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-31-2008
Reported in: 2008CriLJ2539
Amar Saran, J.1. Heard Shri Saurabh Srivastava, learned Counsel for the applicants and Shri Shashi Dhar Tripathi, learned Additional Government Advocate.2. The applicants who are the wife and daughter of O.P. No. 2 have preferred this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging the order dated 29.11.2007 whereby the learned Additional Chief Family Court, Kanpur Nagar has modified his order dated 9.5.06 granting maintenance to both the applicants at the rate of Rs. 700 per month in proceedings under Section 127 Cr.P.C in Case No. 171 of 2006 and limited the grant of maintenance to his daughter, applicant Akansha till the date she turns major, i.e. till 21.8.06 whilst upholding the grant of maintenance to his wife, applicant Smt. Raj Kumari Awasthi3. This part of the order was assailed by the applicants by arguing that under Section 127 of the Code, grant of maintenance cannot be denied to an unmarried daughter, who has no source of income whatsoever to maintain herself and who bei...
Tag this Judgment!Bhagwati Prasad S/O Gaya Prasad Vs. State of U.P. Through Its Secretar ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-31-2008
Reported in: [2008(119)FLR1084]
A.P. Sahi, J.1. The petitioner contends that the Magistrate as well as the revisional court have erred by dropping the proceedings in view of the fact that the petitioner is in possession and that in view of the History of the litigation, the proceedings for attachment ought to have been continued as there was a continuous existence of an apprehension of breach of peace and there was a serious dispute with regard to possession.2. In order to appreciate the aforesaid contention of the petitioner, it is to be noticed that the property in dispute which is an agricultural land appears to have been recorded in the name of the father of the petitioner Gaya Prasad and the same continued during consolidation operations. After the consolidation was over, the petitioner alleges that his father Gaya Prasad and his brother Bhawani had departed from the village and were living elsewhere for the past 15 or 16 years and that he was the exclusive owner of the said property. To assert his aforesaid rig...
Tag this Judgment!Occupier/Director, Hindustan Lever Ltd. and Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-31-2008
Reported in: [2008(116)FLR1152]
D.P. Singh, J.1. Heard Sri Sudhir Chandra, learned Senior Advocate 'assisted by Sri Vivek Chaudhary for the petitioner, Sri Shyam Narain and Sri A.P. Srivastava for the contesting respondents and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No. 1 and 2. This petition is directed against an order dated 26.7.2005 allowing the application of the respondent workmen under the U.P. Industrial Peace (Timely Payment of wages) Act, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).2. The facts in brief are that Brooke Bond Upton India Limited owned a factory at Tundla and after amalgamation with the petitioners it became a Unit of the petitioners company. The petitioners floated a Voluntary Retirement Scheme dated 19th August, 2004 for the employees at its Tundla Unit in pursuance of which all the employees numbering about 255 took the benefit of the Scheme and resigned after entering into a settlement under Section 18(1) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and they were paid all their dues for whi...
Tag this Judgment!Govinda Son of Krishna Murari Tripathi and ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pra ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-31-2008
Reported in: 2008CriLJ2551
A.P. Sahi, J.1. This revision has been filed questioning the legality of the order dated 30.8.2007 and in support of the submissions advanced, a supplementary-affidavit has been filed stating therein that the court below has committed a manifest error by summoning the applicants on the strength of the signed statements of Shiv Mangal, Naresh Kumar Singh and Sheelu, which is an erroneous procedure for the purposes of Section 190(1)(b) Cr.P.C. inasmuch as the Magistrate has relied on extraneous material which did not form part of the case diary. Sri Manish Tiwari contends that the ingredients of a police report cannot include the signed statement of any person as there is a complete bar to the admissibility of such a statement under Section 162 Cr.P.C.2. The question, therefore, that arises for consideration is as to whether the Magistrate has erred in proceeding to summon the applicants only on the basis of the said statements which are alleged to have been signed by them and whether in...
Tag this Judgment!Neetu Devi Singh Daughter of Shri Kunwar Bahadur Singh Vs. High Court ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-31-2008
Reported in: 2008(2)AWC1541
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. This Special Appeal has been filed against the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge dated 24/1/2008 by which the writ petition filed by the appellant claiming appointment in reserve category being physically handicapped has been dismissed on the ground of suitability as the appellant-petitioner secured only 44 marks out of maximum 120 marks in the Preliminary Examination.2. The facts giving rise to this appeal are that this Court vide advertisement dated 31/5/2006 invited applications for 150 posts for direct recruitment on the post of Assistant Review Officer in its establishment. The reservation provided by the State Government for physically handicapped persons was given effect and the advertisement itself provided that five posts were reserved for physically handicapped candidates. Petitioner-appellant appeared in the examination, but secured only 44 marks out of 120 marks and could not qualify as the Selection Committee had prescribed 55 percent as qua...
Tag this Judgment!Yogendra Rai Vs. Adhyaksha, Basti GramIn Bank and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-30-2008
Reported in: 2008(2)AWC1277
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the promotion list dated 23.09.2000 (Annex.4) insofar as it promotes respondent Nos. 3 to 5 and ignores the claim of the petitioner, and also for quashing the impugned Circular dated 16.03.2000 (Annex.2) providing for a minimum benchmark for the assessment of minimum merit. 2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the petitioner as well as respondent Nos. 3 to 5 held the post of Scale - I Officer in the respondent Bank. All of them being eligible for promotion to the post of Scale - II Officer were considered. However, the said respondent Nos. 3 to 5 have been promoted though they were admittedly junior to the petitioner. Petitioner has been non-suited as he failed to secure the 70 % benchmark as provided under the Circular dated 16.03.2000. 3. We have heard Shri Bhagwati Prasad, Learned Counsel for the petitioner and Shri Yashwant Verma for the respondent Bank. 4. The facts are not in dispute. Re...
Tag this Judgment!Muir Mills, a Unit of National Textile Corporation (U.P.) Ltd. Through ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-30-2008
Reported in: 2008(2)AWC1890; [2008(117)FLR273]
D.P. Singh, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri R.N. Kushwaha holding brief of Sri A.K. Gautam, learned Counsel for respondent No. 2.2. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 01-9-2006 allowing the application of the workman under Section 33-C(2) of U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.3. The petitioner Mill was earlier a private enterprise but when it closed down, firstly its Management was taken over and thereafter the Mill was nationalised under the Sick Textile Undertaking (Nationalization) Act, 1974. The effect of nationalization was that the petitioner Mill along with its entire property stood vested in the Central Government under Section 3(1) of the Nationalisation Act and under Section 3 (2), it stood transferred and vested in the Nationalization Textile Corporation where-after it was transferred to its subsidiary known as National Textile Corporation (U.P. Ltd.) with effect from 1.4.1974.4. The respondent workman was appointed on temporary basi...
Tag this Judgment!Man Mohan Anand and anr. Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-30-2008
Reported in: 2008(2)AWC1121
V.M. Sahai and R.N. Misra, JJ.1. The short question that arises for our consideration in this petition is whether the period of 90 days has to be counted w.e.f. 15.5.2003, the date on which the notice was served on the petitioners to deposit free hold amount or from the next date, i.e., 16.5.20032. The brief facts of the case are that on 30.1.1999, the petitioner applied under the policy of the State Government for getting their residential nazul plot No. 7 free hold. The petitioners deposited 25 per cent of the free hold charges. The petitioners on 15.5.2003 received a notice dated 8.5.2003 by which they were directed to pay Rs. 3,44,212.56 as balance amount of free hold charges within a period of 90 days from the receipt of the notice, Rs. 36,446.25 as transfer charges and Rs. 234.50 as lease rent were also demanded. On 13.8.2003, the petitioners deposited the free hold charges and other charges as demanded by the respondents within 90 days of the receipt of the notice after availing...
Tag this Judgment!Mahboob Ali and ors. Vs. Indrawati and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-30-2008
Reported in: 2009ACJ798
Alok K. Singh, J.1. This first appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 14.3.1986, passed by the then Presiding Officer of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Mr. O.N. Khandelwal as he then was, subsequently elevated to the Bench of this Court and since retired) whereby the claim petition was rejected.2. Briefly stated the facts are that the claim petition under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act was filed by father, brother and sister of the deceased against vehicle owner Lalta Prasad Pandey and National Insurance Co. Ltd. Subsequently on account of death of Pandey, his four daughters and widow were substituted. According to claimants deceased Mohd. Ali aged about 14 years was a motor mechanic and whose monthly income was Rs. 480. On 7.8.1982 at about 6 p.m. on Faizabad-Ayodhaya Road near eye hospital he was going on his bicycle on roadside. Suddenly Tempo No. UTZ 1552 which was being driven carelessly, did not blow any horn and crushed the deceased. He was...
Tag this Judgment!Km. Saroj Chaudhary D/O Ram Nayan Chaudhary Vs. State of U.P. Through ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-29-2008
Reported in: [2008(117)FLR90]
Tarun Agarwala, J.1. Heard Shri Shashi Nandan, the learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri N.K. Chaudhary for the petitioner, Shri Rakesh Pandey, the learned Counsel for the respondent No. 4 and the learned standing Counsel for the remaining respondents.2. The petitioner's appointment on the post of Shiksha Mitra has been cancelled by the District Magistrate on the ground that she is the grand daughter of the Village Pradhan and was therefore, disqualified as per Clause (10) of the Government Order dated 10.10.2005. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the said Clause does not include a granddaughter, therefore, the petitioner could not be disqualified. The learned Counsel submitted that the said Clause is exhaustive in nature and has to be read literally leaving no room or scope for any addition.3. Clause (10) of the Government Order dated 10.10.2005 states that 'close relatives' of the Pradhan or of the Secretary will not be appointed as a Shiksha Mitra. The Clause in...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »