Allahabad Court July 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.
Krishi Utpadan Mandi Samiti and anr. Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Cou ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-02-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)AWC3826
S.U. Khan, J. 1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties on the merit of the writ petition. 2. This writ petition is directed against award dated 14.11.2002 given by Presiding Officer, Labour Court (Ist), U.P., Kanpur in adjudication case No. 131 of 2001. The matter which was referred to the Labour court was as to whether the action of the petitioner-employer in terminating the services of its workman - Ashish Kumar Dixit - respondent No. 2 w.e.f. 1.6.1998 was valid or not. 3. The case of the workman before the Labour court was that he had been appointed on 10.4.1996 as Clerk under Viklang (disabaled) quota. It was also stated by the workman that at the time of termination he was not given retrenchment compensation. Labour court held that the written statement had not been supported by affidavit while the application of the workman was supported by affidavit hence whatever was stated by the workman will have to be taken as correct. Labour court also observed that workman adduced oral evi...
Neeraj Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-02-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)AWC3427
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard counsel for the petitioner, standing counsel who has accepted notice on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 3 and perused the record.2. Sri Samay Lal father of the petitioner was Constable in the Police Department. He died in Harness on 20.6.1994. U.P. Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servants (Dying-in-Harness) Rules, 1974 provides that in the event of any Government employee to whom the aforesaid rules apply died in harness then, one of dependants of the deceased may be considered for appointment to meet the indigent circumstances which the family may be facing due to death of bread earner.3. At the time of death of the deceased, Samay Lal his wife did not apply for compassionate appointment on the ground that her elder son, the petitioner in the present writ petition, was minor at that time. Since the petitioner has passed High School examination in the year 2003 and Intermediate Examination in the year 2005. Thereafter on attaining majority, the petition...
Ajit Kumar JaIn and ors. Vs. Ixth Addl. District Judge and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-02-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)AWC3443
Shashi Kant Gupta, J.1. The aforesaid writ petition is directed against the order dated 10.3.2000, passed by respondent No. 1 whereby the application filed under Section 5 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1963 has been allowed.2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:3. The petitioners are the landlords and owners of the disputed premises No. 104A/170 Rambagh, Kanpur Nagar. They filed an application under Section 21(8) of the Act. The Rent Control and Eviction Officer, Kanpur Nagar, by order dated 31.1.1996 allowed the application under Section 21(8) of U.P. Act No. XIII of 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and enhanced the rent to Rs. 4,900 per month plus water tax. The respondent Nos. 2 and 3 filed a review application before the court below for reviewing the order dated 31.1.1996 and the same was dismissed on 13.5.1998 as non-maintainable. Thereafter an appeal under Section 22 was filed against the order dated 31.1.1996 on 28.5.1998 alongwith an application under Section 5...
Jitendra Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-02-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)AWC3556
Arun Tandon, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the order passed by the Prescribed Authority (S.D.M.) Sadar, Mau dated 7.9.2007 whereby the Election Petition filed by the present writ petitioner was dismissed as also against the order of the Revisional Authority namely the District Judge, Mau dated 5.3.2008 whereby the revision filed against the order dated 7.9.2007 has been dismissed.2. Facts giving rise to the present writ petition are as follows:Elections for the office of Pradhan of Gram Panchayat Bhela Bandh, Block Kopaganj, district Mau took place in the month of August, 2005. The writ petitioner Jitendra as well as respondent No. 5 contested the aforesaid alongwith other candidates. It is not in dispute that the office of the Pradhan was reserved for Scheduled Caste candidate. The result of the elections was declared on 24.12.2005 and the respondent No. 5 namely Santosh was declared elected. Petitioner not being satisfied filed an election petition basically on the grou...
Wajid Ali and ors. Vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-02-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)AWC3809
ORDERRajes Kumar, J.1. By means of present petition, the petitioners are challenging the order of the Deputy Director of Consolidation, Siddharthnagar dated 29.11.2006 in Revision No. 99 of 2005 by which the revision filed by the petitioners has been rejected.2. The brief facts giving rise to the present petition are that respondent Abdullah, son of Kallu, had an original holding of plot Nos. 420 and 421 of chak No. 12. The aforesaid plot was on a road side and was valuable land, therefore, the claim was that it was outside the purview of the consolidation. The claim of Abdullah has been accepted but tt appears that while making the map the chak was twisted and some body else was given the land adjoining to the road instead of making the plots in square shape. Therefore, Abdullah filed the application under Section 42 of the Uttar Pradesh Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') for the correction of the map which was allowed by the Consolidation Offic...
Pappu (In Jail) Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-01-2009
Reported in: 2009CriLJ4495
Vijay Kumar Verma, J.1. 'Whether condition to deposit the amount of earlier executed personal bond can be imposed at the time of granting fresh bail', is the main point that falls for consideration in this bail application moved under Section 439(1)(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short, 'the Cr.P.C.'), in which it is prayed that condition imposed by the Special Judge (Gangster Act) Bareilly in case No. 64 of 2004, arising out of case crime No. 397 of 2003, under Sections 2/3 U.P. Gangster & Anti Social Activities (Prevention) Act 1986 (in short 'the Gangster Act'), for depositing Rs. 50,000/- in court as penalty be set aside. 2. I have heard arguments of Sri Sanjiv Kumar Gupta, Advocate appearing for the applicant and AGA for the State. 3. From the impugned order (Annexure-2) it is revealed that the applicant Pappu and Ganga Singh were accused in the FIR lodged on 22.11.2003 at P.S. Sahaswan, District Budaun at case crime No. 397 of 2003, under Section 2/3 Gangster Act. After...
Gaurav Agarwal Vs. State of U.P. and
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-01-2009
Reported in: 2009CriLJ4491
Vijay Kumar Verma, J.1. Challenge in this Revision preferred under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short, 'the Cr.P.C.') is to the order dated 16.05.2009 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 2, Mathura in Session Trial No. 245 of 2009 (State v. Devi Das and Anr.) under Sections 323, 504, 506 Indian Penal Code (in short, 'the I.P.C.') and Section 3(1)(X) Scheduled Castes and The Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short, 'the SC/ST Act'), P.S. Highway, District Mathura.2. By the impugned order, the court below has declined to discharge the applicant and co-accused Devi Das in case crime No. 745 of 2007 of P.S. Highway (Mathura) for the offences mentioned herein-above and their discharge application has been rejected. The court below has also opined that there is sufficient ground to charge the accused persons under Section 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1)(X)3. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts leading to the filing of this Revi...
Shaukat Ali Vs. Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari Sangh and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-01-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)AWC3536
Rakesh Tiwari, J.1. Heard Sri K.P. Agrawal, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri G.D. Mishra who has accepted notice on behalf of respondents No. 1 and perused the record.2. The petitioner claims that he was appointed as a permanent employee on the post of Dairyman in the State Dugdh Parishad Dugdhshala Vikas, Mirzapur and since then he has been regularly working. His wages at the time of appointment was about Rs. 1,200 per month and currently the wages are Rs. 7,735 per month and that under orders of the D.D.O., Mirzapur and Vikas Adhikari the daily activity of collecting and selling the milk as stopped but the petitioner was continued in employment having been retained for looking after some essential works.3. It is stated that the activities of collection and distribution of milk in the Dugdhshala Mirzapur started again and duties of the Dairyman were again assigned to the petitioner by order dated 20.6.2005, issued by the Deputy Dugdhshala Vikas Adhikari, Mir...
Smt. Shashi Agarwal Vs. Chairperson, Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-01-2009
Reported in: AIR2010All24; 2009(4)AWC3806
Arun Tandon, J.1. Heard Sri A.K. Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Sri Tarun Verma, learned Counsel for the Allahabad Bank.2. Original Application No. 60 of 2004 was initiated by the Allahabad Bank, a body Corporate and Banking Company constituted under the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, V of 1970, having its Head Office at 2, Netaji Subhas Road, Kolkata-700001 and a Branch amongst others at I.B.B. Branch Nadesar, district Varanasi, against the present petitioner under Section 19 of the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the Act, 1993) for recovery of total sum of Rs. 24,05,860 alongwith pendente lite and future interest at the rate of 20% per annum. In the aforesaid original application a compromise was arrived at between the present petitioner, Smt. Shashi Agrawal, who was guarantor of the loan advanced in favour of M/s. Alex Enterprises and Sri Kamta Prasad, whereunder, a sum...
Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Urmila Devi and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Jul-01-2009
Reported in: 2009(4)AWC4020
ORDERAmitava Lala, J.1. The appeal is arising out of the judgment and order dated 9th March, 2009 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/ Additional District Judge/Special Judge, Chandauli, awarding compensation of Rs. 13,77,000., The income of the deceased, who was a teacher in a Government School. The Tribunal has awarded just compensation on the basis of income by following the principles of Second Schedule. Hence, the dispute is only with regard to the quantum.2. The appellant contends that the claimant/respondent No. 1 wife of the deceased is getting pension of Rs. 4,300 per month. She has also been engaged on the post of clerk, therefore, as last dependency of the claimant/respondent upon income of the deceased has wrongly been calculated by the Tribunal. In fact, she has not suffered any loss of earning on account of untimely death of the deceased.3. In support of such contention, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant's insurance company relied upon a judgment of the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »