Allahabad Court May 2009 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.
Siddharth Sharma Vs. Smt. Neha Sharma
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-28-2009
Reported in: 2009(3)AWC2879
ORDERAmitava Lala, J.1. This is an appeal of the appellant/husband challenging the judgment and order dated 5.5.2009, passed by the concerned family court, Meerut by which interim alimony has been awarded in favour of the wife for a sum of Rs. 7,500 per month and other sums for son and daughter were awarded Rs. 5,000 each with the direction that the same will be deposited with the Court alongwith the legal expenses. The allegation of the appellant is that the wife is a working woman having qualification of M.B.A., therefore, maintenance pendente lite and expenses of proceedings under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred as the Act) are not applicable in this case. On the other hand, it has been contended by the wife that she was working in the office of sister of the husband and because of bad relationship with his husband she is no more in the service. She has further submitted that at the time of working she worked as trainee.2. In any event, since the par...
Smt. Rajni Swami Vs. Smt. Shakuntala Sharma
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-28-2009
Reported in: 2009(3)AWC2873
Amitava Lala, J.1. This appeal is arising out of order impugned passed by the Addl. Civil Judge (Senior Division), Court No. 2, Meerut dated 9th February, 2009 directing the plaintiff-appellant to deposit ad valorem court fee in proceeding with the suit.2. Being aggrieved/dissatisfied with the order impugned, Mr. Mukhtar Alam, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant contended before this Court that the suit is in the nature of declaration simplicitor, therefore, fixed court fee, as prescribed under Article 17 (iii) of Schedule-II of the Court Fees Act, 1870 will be applicable in this case. But the court below, under the order impugned, wrongly and erroneously held that the plaintiff-appellant is required to be paid ad valorem fees.3. On one hand the nature of relief, as appears from the plaint, is that a Will executed by the testator in favour of the defendant-respondent is declared to be null and void on the other hand Sri Rahul Mishra, learned Counsel appearing for the defendant-...
Neena Chaturvedi Vs. Public Service Commissioner
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-28-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)AWC3302
Sabhajeet Yadav, J.1. By this petition, the petitioner has sought relief of mandamus directing the Commission to accept the application form submitted by the petitioner and allow her to participate in process of selection as a candidate for the post of Lecturer in Government Intermediate College by treating her application within time.2. The relief sought for in this writ petition rests on the facts that the Commission has advertised certain vacancies of Lecturer in Government Intermediate Colleges. The last date for receipt of the application form was 20th February, 2009. According to the conditions stipulated in the advertisement duly filled application form must reach to the office of the Commission till 5.00 p.m. by 20th February, 2009 or before it either through registered post or by hand. It was also stipulated in the said advertisement that the application shall not be received through 'FAX'. A photostat copy of the Advertisement No. 5/2009-09 dated 31st January, 2009 is on reco...
Committee of Management, Dharma Samaj Inter College and anr. Vs. State ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-28-2009
Reported in: 2009(3)AWC3129
S.P. Mehrotra, J.1. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioners, inter alia, praying for quashing the order dated 4.2.2009 (Annexure-15 to the writ petition) passed by the respondent No. 4 (State Government) under Section 16D (4) of the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921.2. By the said order dated 4.2.2009, the Committee of Management in respect of the institution in question has been placed under suspension, and the Assistant District Inspector of Schools, Aligarh has been appointed as the ex officio Authorized Controller in respect of the institution in question for managing the institution and its property during the period of suspension.3. The petitioners claim to have been elected in the election held on 20.11.2007.4. It is averred in paragraph 20 of the writ petition that the papers in regard to the said election were sent to the Regional Level Committee on 24.12.2007 alongwith the Communication dated 24.12.2007 (Annexure-14 to the writ petition) for the purpos...
State of U.P. and anr. Vs. Purshottam Das and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-28-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)AWC3906
Amitava Lala, J.1. Since all the aforesaid first appeals are connected and have been heard analogously, the same are being decided by this common judgment and order having binding effect upon all the aforesaid appeals. The First Appeal No. 42 of 1997 which has been dealt with first herein, will be considered as leading case.2. The facts in brief giving rise to the aforesaid appeals are as under:First Appeal No. 42 of 1987:This appeal has been filed by the State of Uttar Pradesh through the Collector, Gorakhpur and Union of India through the Ministry of Defence, New Delhi. Initially a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter called as the 'Act') was issued on 14th March, 1970 which was subsequently modified and fresh one was issued on 26th October, 1971. By way of such notification land situated in Village Mahadeo Jharkhandi, Tukra No. 3, district Gorakhpur was acquired. The acquisition was made by the State of Uttar Pradesh for the Union of India. The...
Tej NaraIn Upadhyay Vs. Allahabad Vikas Pradhikaran and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-28-2009
Reported in: AIR2009All179; 2009(4)AWC4135
ORDERTarun Agarwala, J.1. The Allahabad Development Authority, hereinafter referred to as the A.D.A., invited tenders for running a swimming pool in Bharadwaj Ashram Park, which is owned and managed by the Allahabad Development Authority. The petitioner submitted his tender, which was accepted by the authority, and an agreement dated 5-6-2005 was executed for a period of 5 years. Under the terms of the agreement, the petitioner was required to pay a monthly rent of Rs. 21,881/ - and the respondents were obliged to provide electricity and water to the petitioner for running the swimming pool.2. It is alleged that pursuant to a Public Interest Litigation filed in the High Court, an order dated 25-4-2006 was passed, whereby all the parks, located in the city of Allahabad, was directed to be handed over for its maintenance to the Nagar Nigam Allahabad, pursuant to which, Bharadwaj Ashram Park was handed over to the Nagar Nigam, Allahabad. It is alleged that the water for the swimming pool,...
Class Iv Employees Association, High Court of Judicature and anr. Vs. ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-27-2009
Reported in: 2009(3)AWC2888
Tarun Agarwala, J.1. By means of this petition, the petitioners have prayed for the quashing of the order dated 28.2.2007, passed by the Principal Secretary (Nyay) whereby the recommendation of the Chief Justice for the enhancement of the pay scale of Class IV employees of the High Court, made under Article 229(2) of the Constitution of India, has been refused. The petitioners have also prayed for the quashing of the resolution dated 29.7.2006 made by a High Powered Committee comprising of the officers of the High Court and officers of the State Government, which was constituted to sort out the differences with regard to the proposed enhancement of the pay scale. The petitioners have also prayed that a mandamus be issued to the State Government to implement the recommendation of the Chief Justice with regard to the fixation of the pay scale.2. The facts leading to the filing of the writ petition is, that the petitioner is an Association of the Class IV employees of the High Court of Ju...
Food Corporation of India Vs. Regional Labour Commissioner (Central) a ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-27-2009
Reported in: 2009(3)AWC3015
Arun Tandon, J.1. These two writ petitions raised common question, facts and law and, therefore, are being decided by this Court under a common judgment.2. The writ petitions are directed against the order dated 1.5.2009, passed by the Regional Labour Commissioner (Central) Kanpur with a further prayer for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent No. 1 to not to implement its own order.3. The dispute with regards to categorization of old and genuine workers employed by the earlier Contractor, for the purposes of being offered appointment in Food Corporation of India (F.C.I.) at its depots at various places was subject-matter of consideration in writ petition filed before this Court being Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 22652 of 1998. The writ petition was decided under a judgment and order dated 6.9.1998 with a direction that the matter can be more appropriately examined by the Assistant Labour Commissioner (Central), Kanpur, the parties were directed to appear before him for the pur...
State of U.P. and ors. Vs. Km. Sarita Goel and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-27-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)AWC3233
D.P. Singh, J.1. Heard, counsel for the petitioner and Sri M. K. Gupta for the contesting respondent.2. This petition is directed against concurrent orders dated 20.12.2004 and 3.3.2006 by which the application of the respondent landlord for enhancement of rent under Section 21(1)/(8) of U.P. Act No. XIII of 1972 (here-in-after referred to as the Act) has been allowed.3. The. office of the District Cane Officer, Muzaffarnagar was situated in a rented premises No. 406, Kambalwala Bagh, commonly known as 'Shyam Kutir' (here-in-after referred to as the disputed premises). It stands on an area of about 1459.35 sq. meters, including land appurtenant. Admittedly, the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 are the landlords and respondent No. 3 was their agent and power-of-attorney holder receiving rent from the petitioner tenant. An application under Section 21(8) of the Act for enhancement of the rent was moved by the three respondents which was registered as Case No. 31 of 1998 claiming enhancement of re...
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Manju and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: May-26-2009
Reported in: 2009(3)AWC2573
S.U. Khan, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 filed Motor Accident Claim Petition (M.A.C.P.) No. 198 of 2003 against petitioner, the insurance company and Ripusudan Pandey-respondent No. 3 the vehicle owner. Father of the claimants had died in an accident with the vehicle belonging to respondent No. 3. Claim petition was decided on 20.8.2004 by Motor Accident Claim Tribunal/Additional District Judge/Special Judge (Anti Corruption), Bareilly. Claim was allowed for Rs. 1,82,000. In the judgment copy of which is Annexure-7 to the writ petition it is mentioned that respondent No. 3 vehicle owner filed written statement, pleading that suddenly a child had come in front of the Jeep, the driver intended to apply the brake however, his foot pressed the accelerator instead of brake which resulted in the death of father of claimants. It was also pleaded in the written statement that the offending Jeep was insured with the petitioner-insurance company. Cover note ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- Next ›
- Last »