Allahabad Court February 2011 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.
Nageshwar Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-03-2011
1. By this appeal the appellant Nageshwar has impugned the judgment and order dated 15.3.1999 rendered by Mr. Dilip Kumar, the then XIII Additional Sessions Judge, Lucknow, in S.T. No. 73 of 1995, State v. Nageshwar, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced under section 306 read with section 34 I.P.C. to undergo rigorous imprisonment of five years and to pay a fine of Rs. five thousand and in default of payment of fine to undergo additional simple imprisonment of six months. He has been further convicted and sentenced under section 498-A I.P.C. to undergo rigorous imprisonment of two years and to pay a fine of Rs. one thousand and in default of payment of fine to undergo additional simple imprisonment of three months. 2. The prosecution story leading to this appeal is that the appellant Nageshwar is the husband of the deceased Smt. Mohana Devi. Their marriage had taken place about two years before the occurrence. It is alleged that on 8.5.2008 the deceased consumed a poi...
Amrit Lal Vs. State of U.P. and Others.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-03-2011
1. This application has been filed by Amrit Lal, applicant/petitioner for review of the judgement and order dated 24.11.2010 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.11428 (M/B) of 2010 : Amrit Lal v. State of U.P. and others whereby the petition for quashing the F.I.R. was dismissed. 2. The review of the judgment and order dated 24.11.2010 has been sought on the ground that subsequent to the date of order dated 24.11.2010, certain new and important facts were discovered which were not within the knowledge of the applicant and could not be argued before the court when the judgment and order dated 24.11.2010 was passed. That the alleged abducted person Shri Prem Shanker Pandey was himself involved in a criminal case and non bailable warrant of arrest and process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. was also issued against him by C.J.M., Sultanpur and the petitioner was falsely implicated in Case Crime No.443 of 2008. The police had failed to trace the abducted persons and a final report was submitt...
Mahesh Chandra Agarwal and Others Vs. Addl. District Judge Court No. 6 ...
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-02-2011
1. Heard Sri Abhay Raj Singh holding brief of Sri Ravi Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Manish Kumar on behalf of respondent nos. 1 & 2 and Sri Manish Mathur on behalf of respondent no.3. 2. Controversy involved in the present case relates to the shop no. 6/11/269(Old No. 1139/1141) situated at Mohalla Haiderganj, City and District Faizabad (hereinafter referred as shop in question) purchased by the father of respondent no. 3/landlady by registered sale-deed in the name of his wife Smt. Sudama Devi, let out to Sri Ram Agarwal, father of the petitioners who was a statutory tenant at the rate of Rs. 16.25 per month. 3. After the death of her parents, Smt. Luxmi Kesharwani/respondent no. 3 became the landlady. On 01.04.1981, an application under Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Act no. XIII of 1972 was moved, accordingly a P.A. Case No. 15 of 1981 registered before respondent no. 2, allowed by order dated 07.03.1987. 4. Aggrieved by the same, the tenants filed an appeal (Ap...
Satya Prakash Pandey and Others Vs. Dev Brat Mishra
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-02-2011
1. This is a First Appeal From Order under Order XLIII Rule 1(w) of the Code of Civil Procedure. 2. Heard Sri Yogesh Agarwal, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri Vinod Swaroop, learned senior counsel for the sole respondent. 3. This appeal arises against the order dated 14.12.2010 passed in Review Application No.01-A/2006 (Devbrat Mishra vs. Satya Prakash Pandey and others) arising out of Civil Appeal No.311 of 1999 (Keshavanand & others vs. Devbrat Mishra and others) by the Additional District Judge, Court No.13, Allahabad whereby the review application has been partly allowed. 4. According to Sri Yogesh Agarwal, learned counsel for the appellant the impugned order passed on the review application is patently illegal for the reason that none of the ingredients under Order XLVII Rule 1 Code of Civil Procedure had been made out. According to him under Order XLVII Rule 1 a review application can be maintainable only if it is established that there has been discovery of new and...
Shekhar Tewari Vs. the State of U.P. and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-02-2011
1. Heard Mr. Dilip Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. I.B.Singh, learned Senior Advocate Special Public Prosecutor as well as Mr. Salil Srivastava, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2. 2. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 21.01.2011 passed by the Special Judge, Ayodhya Prakaran/Additional Sessions Judge, Lucknow in Session Trial No. 446 of 2009 and 447 of 2009. 3. By means of order impugned the petitioner's application being Application No. 192-B to summon P.W.10 and to take the sample of her voice and photographs of her face and body for seeking expert opinion of any of the Central Forensic Laboratory has been rejected. The learned Sessions Judge has rejected the application on the ground that neither the witness D.W.11 nor accused provided D.V.D. to the Investigating Officer which is recording of interview of P.W.10 Smt. Shashi Gupta for investigation nor did they raise such objection during the course of the investigation. Further during the course of...
Mahendra Nath
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-02-2011
1. Petitioner before this Court seeks quashing of the order dated 17.03.1989 whereunder the Chief Medical Officer, Azamgarh had cancelled the promotion earlier granted to the petitioner as Clerk under an order dated 14.03.1989. 2. Facts in short giving rise to the present writ petition are as follows : 2. According to the petitioner he was working as Ward Boy in hospital at Taihar Kushun Deopur, Azamgarh. He made an application for promotion on the post of Clerk which was forwarded to the Joint Director (Child Disease) Medical Health and Family Welfare, U.P., Lucknow. The Joint Director passed an order requiring the Chief Medical Officer to promote the petitioner on the post of Clerk. On the strength of the said letter of the Joint Director, an order was passed by the Chief Medical Officer granting promotion to the petitioner as Clerk in the pay scale of Rs.354-500. The order of promotion specifically records that the same was purely temporary and could be cancelled at any point of tim...
Shakeel and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-02-2011
1. This revision has been directed against the order dated 7.5.2003 passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge, Kanpur Nagar in Session Trial No. 674 of 2002 (State v. Shakeel and others). Through this order the learned Addl. Sessions Judge has dismissed an application moved by the revisionists under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. wherein the revisionists had prayed that no charge under Section 304-B I.P.C. and 3 D.P. Act should be framed against them. After rejecting the application, the learned Sessions Judge framed charges against the revisionists. 2. The brief facts of the case are that an F.I.R. was lodged with the police of of P.S. Swaroop Nagar, district Kanpur Nagar on 6.12.2001 at about 6.30 P.M. against the revisionists which was under Sections 498-A/304-B I.P.C. and of D.P. Act. The complainant of the case was Mohammad Alam, opposite party no. 2 of this revision. 3. According to the complainant he got his daughter Km. Shahnaz married to revisionist no. 1, Shakeel, on 29.1.20...
Shri Prakash and Another Vs. Distt.Judge Sitapur and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-02-2011
1. Heard Sri Alok Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Kulkar Mishra holding brief of Sri R.K. Sharma, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. Controversy involved in the present case relates to the shop situated at Hasan Ali Crossing Mohalla Pared Zail Road, Sitapur. 3. In respect to which, an application under Section 21(1)(a) of the U.P. Urban Building Act, 1972 has been moved by the petitioners on the ground that they are the owner-landlord, shop in dispute come to their share by virtue of a private partition between them and one Sri Om Prakash. 4. It is also mentioned in the release application that the shop in question has been let out by their father to the tenants and after his death, the rent of the shop is exclusively taken by the applicants. Further, as they are doing their business from one of the shop situated in the same building jointly but due to the growing needs of their family, petitioner no. 2 want to establish his business separately to carry out...
Smt. Sharifunnissa and Others Vs. Kaviullah
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-01-2011
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2. The facts in brief are that JSSC Suit No. 59 of 2007 was filed by plaintiff respondent no.1 for arrears of rent and ejectment from godown no.2 Eastern side situated near gate no.2 Anand Niketan Market, Bareilly against the petitioner. 3. The defendant petitioner filed his written statement controverting the allegations made in the plaint. An application under Order 15 Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure was filed by the plaintiff for striking off the defence against which no objection was filed by the defendant petitioner. The trial Court/Judge Small Causes Court, Bareilly vide order dated 10.6.2010 allowed the application directing striking off the defence of the petitioner. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order dated 10.6.2010, the petitioner filed representation, which too was rejected by the Court below vide order dated 30.8.2010, against which revision was filed by the petitioner before the court of District Judge, B...
Mehdi Ul Hasan Abadi and Others. Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Feb-01-2011
1. This special appeal has been filed by the appellant-writ petitioners challenging the judgement and order dated 01st December, 2010 passed by the learned Single Judge in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 69837 of 2010 (Mehdi-ul Hasan Abadi and others v. State of U.P. and others), thereby dismissing the writ petition. 2. The facts of the case are that one R.D.M. Shia Trustee Committee, Jaunpur, U.P. (hereinafter in short called as the ''trustee committee') is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (hereinafter in short called as the ''Act') and the appellants claim themselves to be permanent members of the trustee committee. On account of death of 15 permanent members, vacancies were caused. It is alleged that for filling up of such vacancies neither any meeting was called nor any agenda was circulated, but 15 henchmen of Dr. Akhtar Hasan Rizvi, President of the trustee committee-respondent no. 4 herein, and Abiz Rizvi, Secretary of the trustee committee-responden...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »