Allahabad Court April 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.
Sri Sai Stone Crusher, Partnership Firm Through Its Partner, Rajeev Ku ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-11-2008
Reported in: AIR2008All186
Sushil Harkauli and Sudhir Agarwal, JJ.1. The petitioners having registered stone crushers situated at various places in District Bijnor have approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the collection and demand of transit fee on stone grit/chips transported by the petitioners from their stone crushers to other places in the State of U.P.2. The case set out by the petitioners in brief is that they purchase stones, boulders and rocks from Uttarakhand Forest Development Corporation and pay transit fee to the forest authorities of Forest Department of Uttarakhand in the said State. However, when they transport and bring in aforesaid items to their stone crushers situated in District Bijnor, on the entry in the State of U.P. the forest department of U.P. also charges transit fee on the said items under the provisions of U.P. Transit of Tiber and other Forest Produce Rule, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as '1978 Rules'). The aforesaid items, namely, stone...
Chhagan Lal Gupta Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-10-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)AWC2740
S.U. Khan, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. Both the appeals have been filed by the plaintiff against the judgments and decrees dated 29.8.1977, passed by the District Judge, Banda in Original Suit No. 7 of 1973 (giving rise to First Appeal No. 263 of 1978) and Original Suit No. 8 of 1977 (giving rise to First Appeal No. 264 of 1978). In both the suits appellant was plaintiff and the respondent was defendant. Appellant had filed 3rd suit also against the respondent being Original Suit No. 10 of 1973, which was also decided by same Judge, i.e., District Judge, Banda on the same date, i.e., 29.8.1977. Against the said Judgment and decree the appellant filed First Appeal No. 230 of 1978 which was allowed by this Court in part on 20.3.1995, photostat copy of the certified copy of the said judgment has been supplied.3. In all the three suits it was pleaded that M/s. Khandelwal construction company Banda, a partnership firm, was granted contract by the Executive Engineer, Irriga...
Ali Hasan and anr. Vs. Dinesh Pal Singh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-10-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)AWC2742
S.U. Khan, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. These writ petitions are directed against rejection of temporary injunction application by the courts below in O.S.N. 1038 of 2004, AH Hassan and Anr. v. Dinesh Pal Singh and Ors.3. Plaint allegations in brief are that plaintiff No. 2 Khurja-Jewar-Tappal Bus Operator Union, Khurja of which plaintiff No. 1 Ali Hassan is Secretary, is using the land in dispute as a bus stand; That the land in dispute was given by Nagar Palika Parishad, Khurja defendant No. 3 to the Union plaintiff No. 2 about 60 years before on rent; That rent at the rate of Rs. 1,240 per year had been paid till October, 2004 ; That defendants Nos. 1 and 2 Dinesh Pal Singh and Jalilur Rehman Khan were threatening to interfere in the possession of the plaintiffs over the land in dispute. A sketch map of the property was also given at the bottom of the plaint and property in dispute was denoted by letter v c l n4. Defendants Nos. 1 and 2 filed Joint reply to the temp...
Central Bank of India Vs. Presiding Officer, Central Government Indust ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-10-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)AWC2263; [2008(118)FLR39]; (2008)IIILLJ635All
S.U. Khan, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. First writ petition has been filed by the employer against award dated 1.4.1997 given by Presiding Officer Central Government Industrial Tribunal Cum Labour Court, Kanpur in Industrial Dispute No. 76 of 1995. The matter, which was referred to the Tribunal by the Central Government was to the following effect:Whether the action of the Management of Central Bank of India, Ballia/Varanasi in not regularising and terminating the services of Shri Babban Gupta-casual workman w.e.f. 22.6.1992 is legal and justified? If not, to what relief is the said workman entitled?3. The case of workman Babban Gupta-respondent No. 2 in the first writ petition was that he was engaged on 29.3.1991 as sub-staff and he worked till 26.6.1992 and was paid wages @ Rs. 25 per day and as he had completed more than 240 days, hence his retrenchment without payment of notice pay and retrenchment compensation was bad under Section 25F of Industrial Disputes Act, ...
Sulabh International Social Service Organisation (Branch U.P. State) V ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-10-2008
Reported in: [2008(118)FLR92]; (2008)IIILLJ652All
Prakash Krishna, J.1. The petitioner a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1960 having its Head Quarter at Patna (Bihar) claims itself a non profit social organization having its primary object to promote scavenger free society, has filed the present writ petition for quashing the order dated 19th of August, 1999 passed by the Prescribed Authority under the Payment of Wages Act on the short ground that the impugned order is totally without jurisdiction as the provisions of Payment of Wages Act, 1936 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) are not at all attracted.2. Prem Chandra Jha, the contesting respondent No. 1, herein, filed an application before the Prescribed Authority appointed under the Payment of Wages Act on the allegations that he is an employee of the petitioner society and his wages for the certain periods have not been paid3. The due date for payment of wages, according to him, is fixed as 7th of every month. In response to the show cause notice issued ...
Smt. Ram Lali Wife of Vijay Kumar Mishra and ors. Vs. State of U.P. Th ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-10-2008
Reported in: AIR2009All1
Anjani Kumar and Sudhir Agarwal, JJ.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel and Sri Satendra Kumar Singh, Advocate for the respondents.2. The grievance of the petitioners is that despite of their request for providing a helper of their own choice for casting their vote, the Assistant District Election Officer, respondent No. 4 has said that the petitioners may cast their vote by giving necessary instruction to the returning officer as provided under Rule 24(7) of U.P. Zila Yojna Samiti Niyamawali, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules, 2008'). Learned Counsel for the petitioners contended that Rule 16 provides that the election shall be held on secret ballot basis but by permitting the petitioners to cast their vote through Returning Officer, secrecy of their vote would be lost and, therefore, the impugned order passed by the respondent No. 4 is illegal. He further contended that Rule 24(7) is ultra vires of Rule 16 of Rules, 2008.3. We do not fi...
Punjab and Sind Bank and anr. Vs. Manoram Agencies and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-09-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)AWC2624
Dilip Gupta, J.1. This Revision has been filed by the tenant under Section 25 of the Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887 for setting aside the judgment and decree dated 31st May, 1999 whereby the suit filed by the landlord for eviction and recovery of rent, damages and mesne profit was decreed for eviction and for cost of notice and the defendants were directed to vacate the premises and deliver its vacant possession to the plaintiffs within three months.2. SCC Suit No. 9 of 1996 had been filed impleading Punjab and Sind Bank, through its Manager, Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as the Bank) as defendant No. 2. While M/s Manoram Agencies through its partner Smt. Rajni Tandon was Plaintiff No. 1, the other partner of the said firm Smt. Rajni Tandon, Sri Harish Tandon and Smt. Padma Tandon were arrayed as plaintiff Nos. 2, 3 & 4. The plaint was filed with the allegation that M/s Manoram Agencies had let out a portion of building No. 34, M.G. Marg, Allahabad to the Bank on a monthl...
District President, Bhartiya Janta Party Vs. Hari Ram Gupta
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-09-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)AWC2513
Dilip Gupta, J.1. Applications for allotment of the disputed accommodation under Section 16(1) (a) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) were filed before the Rent Control and Eviction Officer on the allegation that the occupant had vacated the premises. An inspection was carried out by the Inspector and ultimately the Rent Control and Eviction Officer declared vacancy under Section 12 of the Act on 23rd July 1996. The landlord then filed an application for release of the disputed accommodation in his favour under Section 16(1)(b) of the Act on 28th January 1997 on the ground that he intended to open a Charitable Hospital and Dispensary in the disputed accommodation. The application filed by the landlord was rejected by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer by the order dated 16th April 1998. Subsequently, the accommodation in dispute was allotted in favour of the petitioner by the order dated 21st April 19...
Hira Lal Gupta and anr. Vs. New Okhla Industrial Development Authority ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-09-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)AWC2690
Rakesh Sharma, J.1. Through this writ petition, petitioners have prayed for quashing of the notices dated 22.3.2003, 6.9.2002, 25.7.2002 and 1.5.2002 sent by the appropriate authorities of New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as N.O.I.D.A.) imposing penalty against the petitioners for not getting the lease deed for the commercial Plot No. 1/1A, Sector 27, N.O.I.D.A. executed within the stipulated period of 120 days from the date of allotment of the said plot, that is, 25.7.2001. The petitioners have assailed the penalty imposed on them by N.O.I.D.A.2. As per the learned Counsel for the petitioners, after completing necessary formalities, the petitioner was allotted a commercial plot No. 1/1A, Sector 27 in New Okhla Industrial Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as N.O.I.D.A.) on 3.7.2001. Initially, the petitioner was allotted 2970 Sq. Meters of land at the rate of Rs. 15,552 per Sq. Meter. Later on, a revised allotment order was issued to the ...
Smt. Louise Khurshid (Indian National Congress) Vs. Kuldeep Gangwar
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-09-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)AWC2808
Dilip Gupta, J.1. These two applications have been filed by the returned candidate under Order VII, Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as the 'C.P.C.') (A-7) for rejecting the election petition as it does not disclose any cause of action and under Order VI, Rule 16, C.P.C. read with Section 86(1) of 'The Representation of the People Act, 1951' (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') (A-6) for striking out paragraphs 5 to 21 of the Election Petition.2. The election petition has been filed by Smt. Lousie Khurshid under Section 80/81 of the Act calling in question the election of Kuldeep Gangwar for the Vidhan Sabha No. 297, Kaimganj constituency in the State of Uttar Pradesh.3. The petitioner Smt. Louise Khurshid and the respondent Kuldeep Gangwar, amongst others, had contested the said election which was held on 18th April, 2007. The re-poll was held on 10th May, 2007 on selected polling stations. The respondent was declared elected on 11th May, 2007 wi...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »