Allahabad Court February 2008 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.
B.D. Sharma Son of Sri Bhim Sen Sharma Vs. Smt. Zarina Widow of Late S ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-2008
Reported in: 2009ACJ1205
Amitava Lala, J.1. This appeal arises out of an order of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Ghaziabad dated 5th February, 1996 awarding a compensation for a sum of Rs. 1,34,400/- on account of death of the deceased at the age of 27 years leaving aside wife and children. The appeal has been preferred by the owner by saying that on the fateful day i.e. 6th January, 1993 he was not the owner of the vehicle. The sale of the vehicle was done on 15th November, 1992 in favour of one Sri Rajendra Prasad. However, court disbelieved the story on the ground that the vehicle was not registered in the name of Sri Rajendra Prasad on the fateful day. That apart, the learned Counsel also took a point that the amount of compensation is on the higher side since as per the Minimum Wages Act, 1923 the salary of skilled handloom worker is Rs. 632/- per month but the Tribunal assessed at Rs. 1200/- per month. In support of his case, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant has cited two judgments repor...
Dr. (Smt.) Saroj Kumari Vs. District Inspector of Schoold and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-2008
Reported in: [2008(117)FLR225]
Sabhajeet Yadav, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.It is not in dispute that the institution in question is Government aided and the petitioner was appointed as LT grade teacher against the short term vacancy on ad-hoc basis by the Committee of Management of the institution. The said vacancy occurred on account of promotion of one LT grade teacher who has been promoted on ad-hoc basis on the post of Lecturer, The Committee of Management after holding selection has sent papers to the District Inspector of Schools, Mirzapur on 30.12.1997 but the District Inspector of Schools, Mirzapur has disapproved the appointment of petitioner vide order dated 21.1.1998 by making reference to a Government notification dated 8.5.1995 holding that the Committee of Management of the institution has no power to hold the selection for direct appointment on the post of Assistant Teacher on ad-hoc basis in such institution. The petitioner has challenged the aforesaid order passed by the District Ins...
U.P. State Brassware Corporation Ltd. Vs. Mirza Zahid Beg and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-20-2008
Reported in: [2008(117)FLR399]
Tarun Agarwala, J.1. List has been revised. Learned Counsel for the respondents is not present.2. The petitioner has challenged the award of the Labour Court, by which respondent workman has been reinstated with back wages with continuity of service. During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioner was directed to reinstate the workman and based on the interim order, the workman was reengaged and continue to work till he retired on 5.8.2004. It has also come on record that the petitioner-company has closed down irrevocably and is not functioning.3. Consequently, in view of the retirement of the workman, the question of back wages from the date of termination till the date of reinstatement which is about 3 years and 6 months remains to be adjudicated.4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has conceded that since the petitioner-company has closed down therefore full back wages should in be ordered to be paid as it would become onerous and that lesser back wages could be awarded.5....
Smt. Malti Devi W/O Mehi Lal Vs. State of U.P. Through Secretary, Panc ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-19-2008
Reported in: 2008(2)AWC1837
Sunil Ambwani, J.1. Heard Shri B.D. Mandhyan, Senior Advocate assisted by Shri M.N. Singh for the petitioner and learned standing counsel for the state respondents.2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged an order dated 13.11.2007, passed by the District Magistrate, Sant Ravidas Nagar, by which he has ceased petitioner's administrative and financial powers as the elected Pradhan of Gram Panchayat Baraila, Block Bhadohi, District Sant Ravidas Nagar, under Section 95(1)(g) of U.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1947, and has directed the Block Development Officer, Bhadohi to appoint a 'three-member committee', to exercise such powers until the formal enquiry under the U.P. Panchayat Raj (Removal of Pradhans, Up Pradhans and Members) Enquiry Rules 1997 (in short, Rules of 1997) is concluded.3. Before making the order, the District Magistrate appointed the District Basic Education Officer, Sant Ravidas Nagar, to enquire into the complaint against the petitioner, and to submit h...
Smt. Vakila Wife of Shamshad Vs. State of U.P. Through Secretary,
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-19-2008
Reported in: 2008(2)AWC1326
Ashok Bhushan, J.1. Heard Sri Sanjeev Kumar Pandy, learned Counsel for the petitioner.By this writ petition petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 4.8.2006 passed by Additional Collector directing for cancellation of lease granted to the petitioner as well as the order dated 26.12.2006 passed by Additional Commissioner dismissing the revision.2. The petitioner was granted lease by the approval of the Assistant Collector dated 14th August, 1991 along with several other persons. A report was submitted by Sub Divisional Officer, Modinagar dated 4th April, 2006 to the effect that by order dated 16th March, 1995 the land was allotted for agricultural whereas the land which has been allotted is a land of river and is for public utility within the meaning of Section 132 of U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 which could not be recorded. The recommendation was made for cancelling the lease. A case was registered and suo-moto exercise of power notices were issued to ...
Vijay Kumar Pandey Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-19-2008
Reported in: 2008(2)AWC1588
V.M. Sahai and R.N. Misra, JJ.1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought the relief restraining the respondents No. 1, 2 and 3 from interfering with. his possession over the disputed land. Further, it has been prayed that the order dated 5.7.1997, passed by the respondent No. 3 be treated as non est and assess the cost of construction demolished by the respondents and pay damages to the petitioner.2. We have heard Shri R.C. Shukla, learned counsel' for the petitioner and Shri Lalji Sinha, learned Counsel for the respondents.It appears from the record that the petitioner purchased a piece of land from the respondent No. 4 Mohd. Haneef through a sale deed dated 13.8.1993, a photo copy of which is Annexure-2 to the. writ petition. The respondents No. 1 to 3 claimed this land to be their own. Mohd. Hanif had filed a suit in the year 1992 before the Civil Judge (S.D.), Allahabad bearing Original Suit No. 29 of 1992 against the respondents No. 1 to 3 and that suit was decreed...
Smt. Sumrati (D.) by L.Rs. and ors. Vs. Mule and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-19-2008
Reported in: 2008(2)AWC1824
Shiv Charan, J.1. The instant second appeal has been instituted against the judgment and decree dated 28.9.2007, passed by Addl. District Judge, Court No. 15, Meerut in Civil Appeal No. 38 of 1995, Smt. Sumrati and Ors. v. Mule and Ors. By the impugned judgment and decree learned appellate court dismissed the appeal of the appellants.2. perusal of the judgment of the courts below shows that Mangloo deceased filed Original Suit No. 168/1988 in the court of Munstf, Mavana, Meerut for injunction and for recovery of possession from the defendants of the property in dispute. It has been alleged in the plaint that the property in dispute belonged earlier to his father Surja and after the death of father Surja the plaintiff inherited the property a house existing on the property in dispute. Afterwards the house collapsed and now the plaintiffs appellant wanted to reconstruct the house. The defendants have no concern and connection with property in dispute. But the defendant wants to occupy th...
Pnb Capital Services Ltd. Vs. Willard India Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-19-2008
Reported in: [2008]88SCL129(All)
Sunil Ambwani, J.1. Heard Shri Jitendra Sethi and Shri Pushkar Mehrotra for Willard India Ltd. (In Liq.). Shri Vipin Sinha appears for Punjab National Bank. Shri Amit Jetly holding brief of Shri Piyush Agrawal appears for Hindustan Composite Ltd., Malanpur Steels Ltd. and Rasoi Ltd. Shri Ravi Prakash Srivastava appears for Hindustan Sanitary Ware and Industries Ltd. Shri Rajnath N. Shukla appears for the Official Liquidator.2. Willard India Ltd., a public limited company registered under the Companies Act was wound up by this Court on 1-10-2007. The applications were filed on 11-10-2007 in Company Petition Nos. 115 of 1997, 13 of 2002, 4 of 2005 and 8 of 2006 for recalling the winding up order.3. On 1-11-2007 Shri Jitendra Sethi appearing for the respondent-company (In Liq.) filed affidavit annexing therewith settlement with the Punjab National Bank (The Punjab National Bank Capital Services Ltd. has integrated back and merged with the Punjab National Bank). A compromise with Malanpur ...
Radhe Shyam Vs. District Inspector of Schools and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-19-2008
Reported in: [2008(117)FLR270]
Bharati Sapru, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.The petitioner has filed the present petition being aggrieved by on order passed by the District Inspector of Schools doled 16.6.1986 in second appeal by which he has confirmed the order of dismissal dated 11.3.1985 passed against the petitioner and also the order passed in the first appeal by the management by which his dismissal was confirmed.2. The facts are that the petitioner is a class 4th employee and was suspended by an order dated 13.12.1984 for two charges that is for not doing night duties of which he was supposed to do. In his reply the petitioner stales that he Could not do the night duty on account of certain family problems. The management, however, dismissed him. The petitioner filed an appeal. The appeal of the petitioner too was dismissed. The petitioner has taken several grounds before the management to show that before passing of the dismissal order he was n...
Dayanath Pandey S/o Raghunath Pandey Vs. State of U.P. through It's Se ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-18-2008
Reported in: AIR2008All103; 2008(2)AWC1255; II(2008)BC634
V.M. Sahai and R.N. Misra, JJ.1. We have heard Sri Anand Kumar Srivastava, learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No. 1, Sri H.R. Misra, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri K.M. Misra for respondent No. 2 and Sri Ghanshyam Joshi for respondent No. 3.2. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged recovery proceedings initiated against him by the respondent No. 2. He has sought relief for quashing the entire recovery proceedings and to direct the respondent No. 2 Allahabad Bank to accept payment desired to be made by him.3. It appears from the record that the petitioner applied to respondent No. 2 for loan amounting to Rs. 5 lacs only for construction of house. The loan was sanctioned and amount of Rs. 4,39,971/ was paid to the petitioner, which was to be refunded in 180 monthly instalment. The petitioner paid some amount from time to time but he could not regularly pay the instalments due to personal difficulties. The respondent No...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- Next ›
- Last »