Allahabad Court April 2010 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.
Smt. Vidyawati Vs. Additional District Judge
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-28-2010
S.C. Chaurasia, J.1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed with the prayer that by a writ of certiorari, Judgment and order dated 02-09-2009 (Annexure No. 12 to the writ petition) passed by learned Additional District Judge, Court No. 4, Lakhimpur Kheri, may be quashed.2. The brief facts, giving rise to the present writ petition, are that the applicants, Ram Gopal Shekhar and Krishna Gopal Shekhar, moved an application under Section 21 of the Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings(Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction)Act, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as U.P. Act No. XIII of 1972), with the prayer that the shop in question may be released in favour of the applicants after eviction of the opposite parties on the ground that they are owner-landlords of the shop in question as detailed and described in the application and the opposite party is the tenant in the said shop at the monthly rent of Rs. 250/-. When the said shop was let out to the opposite...
U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Thru H.C. Vs. Man Mohan BhasIn and anr.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-28-2010
Ritu Raj Awasthi, J.1. Heard Sri M.G. Misra, learned Counsel for the appellant and perused the record.2. The present first appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act read with Section 96, C.P.C., has been filed against the judgment and order dated 16.03.2004, passed by the Additional District Judge/Presiding Officer, Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Tribunal/Nagar Mahapalika, Lucknow in Misc. Case No. 37 of 1993, Man Mohan Bhasin v. State of U.P. and Anr., in Reference Petition filed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, with respect to the land situated at village Ismailganj, District Lucknow, bearing Khasra No. 86, areas -4-18-7 and 0-4-0 total area 0-5-2-7. The present appeal has been filed mainly on the ground that the enhancement made by the Tribunal is not as per the market value of the land in question.3. Learned Counsel for the respondents, at the very outset, has submitted that the learned Tribunal vide judgment and order dated 12.9.1991, passed in Misc. Case No. 17 o...
Gyan Singh Yadav and ors. Vs. the State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-27-2010
Uma Nath Singh, J.1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for issuance of a writ , order or direction in the nature of Certiorari for quashment of the orders dated 30.01.2010 and 04.12.2009 issued by the Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, U.P., Lucknow vide Annexure Nos. 1 & 2 herein on the grounds that these orders are void, illegal and without jurisdiction and also a writ , order or direction in the nature of Mandamus Commanding the respondents to treat the Northern Railway, Primary Cooperative Bank (for short 'the NRPCB') as a Multi State Cooperative Society, and thus, not to apply the provisions of the U.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1965 (for short 'the State Act of 1965') besides other usual prayers of general nature.2. During the course of hearing, at the very outset, learned Counsel for respondents informed the Court that the letter dated 04.12.2009 and the order dated 30.01.2010 issued by the Joint Registrar, Cooperative Societies, U.P., Lucknow vide ...
Commissioner of Income Tax-i Vs. Gyan Security Press (P) Ltd.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-27-2010
Devi Prasad Singh, J.1. Controversy relates to assessment year 1989-90. The assesse company entered into an agreement with Madhya Pradesh Government to print and supply lottery tickets. It was found by the Director of lotteries M.P. Government that the assessee company had breached the terms of the agreement by printing and supplying defective lottery tickets without obtaining any release order to the Sole Selling Agents. In consequences thereof, a show cause notice dated 24.1.1987 was issued to the assesse for the breach of agreement and consequently forfeiture of Rs. 11,73,350/-. In response to notice, the assessee company submitted its reply dated 12.3.1987. The reply submitted by the assessee was considered and rejected by the Director Lotteries vide order dated 6.10.1988. Originally by order dated 9.9.1987 the bank guarantee was forfeited and exparte decision was taken to recover the amount. In consequences thereof, the decision was communicated vide letter dated 24.1.1987. It sha...
Smt. Mohd. Jahan Begum and anr. Vs. Board of Revenue and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-27-2010
Rakesh Sharma, J.1. Heard Sri Umesh Chandra, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Sarvasri Vivek Singh and V.C. Misra, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Sri Mohd. Arif Khan, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Sri Adil Khan, learned Counsel for the respondent Nos. 4, 5 and 7. Learned Standing Counsel represents respondent No. 9.2. Through this writ petition, a mother and daughter duo has challenged a judgment and order rendered by the Board of Revenue, U.P., at Allahabad on 15.12.2006, setting aside an order dated 11.3.2003, passed by the Additional Commissioner, Lucknow Division, Lucknow, effecting partition of the shares of the petitioners in the agricultural land in Suit. The Board of Revenue has declared respondent No. 4, Shafiqur Rahman Khan, being the only son of the original tenureholder, Fazlur Rahman, as a sole Bhumidhar of the land in preference over his step mother Smt. Mohd. Jahan Begum, who had remarried with another person to lead a happy married life with her husban...
State of U.P. Vs. the Additional Commissioner (Judicial) Lucknow Divis ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-26-2010
Rakesh Sharma, J.1. Heard learned Standing counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri Virendra Singh who has put in appearance on behalf of respondents No. 3 to 39.2. Through this writ petition the petitioner (State of U.P) has assailed the judgment and order passed by the Prescribed Authority (ceiling) on 31.8.89 and the order dated 31.1.91 passed by Additional Commissioner, Lucknow Division, Lucknow. The Prescribed Authority had allowed the objections filed by the respondent Nos. 3 to 36. The Prescribed Authority dealt with objections put forth by the respondent Nos. 3 to 38 and passed the order on 31.8.89, declaring that no surplus land was available with the said tenure holders. There land holdings were excluded from operation of the Rural Ceiling Act. The details of the land Gata/plots in respect of 27 objectors situated in village Dhakherwa Khalsa, Tehsil Nighasan, District Lakhimpurkheri have been given in judgment itself.3. The proceedings under the U.P. Imposition of Ceiling...
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. U.P. Rajya Sahkari Evam Bhoomi Vikas Ba ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-26-2010
Devendra Kumar Arora, J.1. Present appeal has been filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here-in-after referred to as the 'Act') against the judgment and order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 26.07.1999 passed in Income Tax Appeal No. 1023/Allahabad/1994 for the assessment year 1990-91.2. Heard Sri D.D. Chopra, learned Counsel for the appellant and Sri Amit Shukla, learned Counsel for respondent.3. The Assessee/Respondent (here-in-after referred to as the 'Assessee') is a co-operative society. For the assessment year 1990-91, Assessee filed the return on 26.12.1990 showing the receipt of Rs. 26,35,99,400/- in the status of co-operative society. The Assessing Authority levied the penalty under Section 271-B of the Act vide order dated 26.08.1993 on the ground that the assessee could not get its accounts audited within the stipulated period as required under Section 44-AB of the Act. Being aggrieved by the penalty order, assessee filed appeal before Commissioner o...
Munni Devi and ors. Vs. Babu Lal and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-26-2010
Devendra Kumar Arora, J.1. This First Appeal From Order has been filed against the Judgment & Award dated 11.7.2008, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Addl. District Judge, Rae Bareli, in Claim Petition No. 198 of 2006, Munni Devi and Ors. v. Babu Lal @ Barati and Ors.2. Brief facts of the case, as culled out from the record of the appeal, are that husband of the appellant No. 1, Munni Devi, namely, Raju Chaurasia while he was going to have feast at the house of one Deshraj Yadav, met with a fatal accident with a motorcycle No. U. P. 33K/3453 in the evening of 8th July, 2006 in front of the house of E. D. situated in the campus of Dariya Mill. Raju Chaurasia succumbed to injuries on the spot. The said motorcycle was being driven by respondent No. 1 Babu Lal @ Barati Lal very rashly and negligently causing death of Raju Chaurasia. First Information Report of the said accident was lodged by brother of the deceased Raju Chaurasia, namely, Dileep Chaurasia at police station Bhad...
U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad Thru H.C. Vs. Kunj Bihari and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-26-2010
Ritu Raj Awasthi, J.1. Heard Sri Umesh Chandra Pandey, learned Counsel for the appellant as well as Sri A.K. Rai, Sri Rajendra Prasad and Sri P.A. Khan learned Counsel for the respondents and perused the record.2. The present first appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act read with Section 96 C.P.C. has been filed against the judgment and order dated 30.9.2003 and the decree dated 22.10.2003, passed by the Presiding Officer, Nagar Mahapalika/Avas Vikas Parishad Tribunal, Lucknow in Misc. Case No. 05 of 1994, Kunj Bihari v. State of U.P. and Ors. in Reference Petition filed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, with respect to the land situated at village Ismailganj, District Lucknow, bearing Khata No. 15, Khasra No. 606 A, area 5-13-7-0 and Khata No. 184, Khasra No. 606 (sa) area 0-6-18-0. The present appeal has been filed mainly on the ground that the enhancement made by the Tribunal is not as per the market value of the land in question.3. Learned Counsel for the r...
Hon'ble High Court of Judicature thru. R.G. and Anr. Vs. Diwakar Singh ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Apr-23-2010
1. After hearing both sides, by assigning reasons the Bench granted stay to the directions issued in the impugned orders which are under challenge in these appeals.2. As large number of matters are tied up/clubbed involving same question for getting the exercise in this respect checked by the concerned official and otherwise to make the progress known the matter is again listed.3. When the matter was taken up Sri Upadhyay, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel, Sri Yashwant Singh, learned Advocate and other Advocates having concern in connected matters are present and the matter proceeded in their presence.4. An application is also filed from the appellants side with an affidavit with a request to delete certain observations in some of the paragraphs which may not change the concept and outcome of the orders so passed and otherwise they may not be needed for the purpose of orders.5. Sri Upadhyay, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel submitted that some of the paragraphs of which details...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »