Allahabad Court September 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.
(Ayodhya Dispute) Gopal Singh Visharad (Now Dead) and ors. Vs. Zahoor ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-30-2010
Summary Of the Case:GIST OF THE FINDINGS by S.U.Khan J.1. The disputed structure was constructed as mosque by or under orders of Babar.2. It is not proved by direct evidence that premises in dispute including constructed portion belonged to Babar or the person who constructed the mosque or under whose orders it was constructed.3. No temple was demolished for constructing the mosque.4. Mosque was constructed over the ruins of temples which were lying in utter ruins since a very long time before the construction of mosque and some material thereof was used in construction of the mosque.5. That for a very long time till the construction of the mosque it was treated/believed by Hindus that somewhere in a very large area of which premises in dispute is a very small part birth place of Lord Ram was situated, however, the belief did not relate to any specified small area within that bigger area specifically the premises in dispute.6. That after some time of construction of the mosque Hindus s...
Mahendra Kumar and ors. Vs. District Judge, Meerut and ors.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-30-2010
1. These are two connected writ petitions based on same set of facts raising common question of law, hence, are being disposed of by this common judgment. Heard Shri Manish Goyal, learned counsel for the petitioners and learned Standing Counsel. 2. The petitioners claim to be licensee of shops situate within the judgeship of Meerut, paying licence fee to the office of the District Judge, Meerut. The petitioners further alleged that in the year 1996, respondent nos. 2 and 3, namely, the Incharge, Nazarat and the Central Nazir, Civil Court, Meerut decided to shift the shops in the premises of judgeship on account of the extension of building and a decision was taken that till any permanent arrangement is made, the shopkeepers will be permitted to run the shop on the western side of the Meerut judgeship, outside the premises. O/C, Nazarat submitted a proposal dated 29.01.1998 to the District Judge that the licences accommodated in the temporary shops constructed on the main road connectin...
Shadab. Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-30-2010
1. Learned A.G.A. files counter affidavit, which is taken on record. Sri Siddiqui holding brief of Sri Narendra Kumar Tripathi and learned Additional Government Advocate are present before the Court. The complainant-opposite party no. 2 despite service of notice did not turn up before the court.2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State as well as perused the documents available on record. This petitioner under Section 407 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the 'Code') has been filed by the accusedpetitioner to transfer the Sessions Trial No. 28 of 2008 (State v. Moin @ Bablu & Other) arising out of case Crime No. 656/2009, under Sections 307, 506, 504, 120-B IPC relating to P.S. Aliganj, District Ambedkar Nagar pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge/F.T.C. Court No. 2, Ambedkar Nagar to some other District Court.3. The allegation of the petitioner is that in this case the injured-Ak...
M.S. Rana Vs. Union Of India Thru' Secy. Finance And Banking And Other ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-30-2010
1. The petitioner, M.S. Rana has appeared in person and made his submissions in support of the writ petition. Learned Counsel for the Bank, respondents no. 2 and 3 has also been heard. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 5.8.2004 passed by the Disciplinary authority inflicting punishment of removal of the petitioner, who was working as Officer MMG/Scale S-3 in the Bank of Baroda. The appellate order dated 15.2.2005 dismissing the appeal of the petitioner has also been prayed to be quashed. 3. Brief facts of the case, which emerged from the pleadings of the parties are; the petitioner from 27.11.2000 to 13.6.2002 was posted as Senior Branch Manager MMG-3 at Rampur Branch of Bank of Baroda from where he was transferred to Agra. By order dated 19.6.2002, the petitioner was placed under suspension in contemplation of disciplinary inquiry. A memorandum dated June 6, 2003 was issued containing articles of charges and statements of allegations. A...
Gopal Singh Visharad Vs. Zahoor Ahmad and ors
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-30-2010
1. The suit was initially filed by Sri Gopal Singh Visharad. After his death, his son Sri Rajendra Singh was substituted at his place. The plaintiff has sought following reliefs; Annexure-II Pages 30-59 2. It be declared that plaintiff is entitled for worship and offering prayers without any interruption of the deity of Lord Rama installed at Ram Janam Bhumi for which particulars are available at the foot of the plaint and further defendant nos.1 to 6 or their heirs and defendant nos. 7 to 9 and defendant no.10 be restrained not to interfere in the aforesaid right of the plaintiff. The defendants be restrained from removing the idols from the disputed place and be further restrained not to cause any hindrance in the entry of the plaintiff and also be prohibited not to close the entry door causing hindrance in the worship and Darshan of the plaintiff. The plaintiff be granted any other relief deemed fit by court along with costs. 3. The details of the disputed property are as under:-- E...
Alok Nath Chattopadhya Vs. Sri Anil NaraIn Tadvalkar and ors
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-30-2010
1. Heard Shri Chandra Bhan Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. Facts giving rise to the dispute are as under. 3. Petitioner and respondent no. 1 entered into a partnership to carry out business in the name and style of M/s. Metals & Methods vide partnership deed dated 04.04.1997. The said firm was engaged in the business of Foundry and Binders. There was a dispute amongst the partners, and the petitioner filed a suit for dissolution of the partnership firm, rendition of account as well as partition of the partnership property and possession and injunction, impleading the other partner of firm and the firm as defendants. Defendant-respondent no. 3, who is stated to be a tenant in the property belonging to the partnership firm was also impleaded. In response to the summons and notice, the defendants put in appearance and filed written statement dated 15.05.2006. A specific plea was taken in the written statement that the subject matter of the suit being covered by the arbit...
Mohd. Hashim Vs. District Judge, Faizabad and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-30-2010
1. Heard Sri Jafaryab Zilani, Sri M.A. Siddiqui, Sri Qamar Ahmad and Sri Irfan Ahmad, learned counsels for the petitioners and learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel appearing for State-respondents. 2. These two writ petitions have been filed against the common order dated 1st February, 1986 passed by the District Judge, Faizabad in Civil Appeal No. 8 of 1986, whereby, while allowing the appeal, he has directed respondents to open the locks of the Gate 'O' and 'P', not to impose any restriction or hurdle in Darshan, Pooja of the applicant and other members of the community in general. It, however, has left the respondents with liberty to take independent decision to control law and order situation according to the need and situation and to regulate the entry of pilgrimages. Writ Petition No. 746 of 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the 'first petition') has been preferred by Mohd. Hashim, son of Karim Bux and another one, Writ Petition No. 3106 of 1986 (hereinafter referred to as the 'sec...
Vijay Alias Talwar Vs. State
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-30-2010
1. This jail appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 30.4.2004 whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 302 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default of payment of fine further imprisonment for six months. 2. Briefly stated according to the prosecution case on 14.12.1999 informant's brother Hulasi had gone to answer the call of nature outside village and on account of enmity Vijay son of Ramdhani in order to kill his brother assaulted him by sword. His brother Hulasi son of Mathose sustained grievous injuries and his condition was serious. On raising alarm by Hulasi Jagdish Prachat Rai, Udhal reached there to rescue him and accused person leaving his brother ran away. On account of previous enmity his brother was assaulted by Vijay. While going away he also abused him and threatened to kill. Jagdish and Udhal and other family members carried injured to the police station and lodged the report. Hulasi wa...
Arvinder Singh Vs. State of U.P. and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-30-2010
1. Heard Mr. O.P. Singh, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner and the learned AGA for the respondent no.1 and perused the record. 2. This is a writ petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing the order dated 28.4.2010 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bareilly (Annexure no.14) and the order dated 18.6.2010 passed by the Incharge Sessions Judge, Bareilly (Annexure no.16). 3. It appears that the respondent no.2, M/s Typical Tones Pvt. Ltd., which is a private limited company, through its Managing Director Mahesh Yadav, filed a criminal complaint against the petitioner in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bareilly, which was registered as complaint case no.1286 of 2008. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate examined the complainant under section 200 CrPC and also recorded the statements of PW-1 Ajay Kumar and PW-2 Hori Lal. Copies of the sale deed dated 30.7.1999 and other relevant documents were also produced by the respondent no.2. The lear...
Vijay Kumar Verma Vs. State of U.P. and Ano.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-30-2010
1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State as well as perused the documents available on record. 2. The only question involves in this revision is the legality of the impugned order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 7, Faizabad in Sessions Trial No. 137 of 2009 (State v. Vijay Kumar) arising out of case Crime No. 6 of 2009, under Sections 376/323/504/506 IPC relating to P.S. Rudauli, District Faizabad whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge has rejected the application filed by the accused for treating him to be juvenile is in issue. Therefore, with the consent of learned Additional Government Advocate the criminal revision is being disposed of without issuing notice to the Opposite Party No. 2 to curtail the delay in trial of the Sessions Trial pending against the accused-revisionist before the Trial Court. 3. This criminal revision under Section 53 of the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »