Allahabad Court September 2012 Judgments
Shree Dev Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-27-2012
Anil Kumar Sharma, J. 1. THE appellants have challenged the judgment and order dated 20.01.1997 passed by Sessions Judge, Etah in Sessions Trial no. 17 of 1993, whereby appellant Shree Dev has been convicted for the offences punishable under sections 147, 302/149 IPC and has been sentenced to undergo two years R.I. and fine of Rs. 2,000/- under section 147 IPC and imprisonment of life under section 302/149 IPC. THE rest of the appellants have been found guilty for the offences punishable under section 148 and 302/149 IPC and each of them has been sentenced to undergo two years R.I. and fine of Rs. 2,000/- under section 147 IPC and imprisonment of life under section 302/149 IPC. In default of payment of fine each accused appellant has been directed to undergo R.I. for two months. 2. FACTS germane to this case are that in Mohalla Chaudah Paur, Kasba and P.S. Soron, District Etah (now district Kanshi Ram Nagar) accused Sridev, deceased Satya Narayan and Laxmi Narayan were three real broth...
Tag this Judgment!Dhanpal Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-26-2012
Vinod Prasad J. Solitary appellant Dhanpal was tried by IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Muzaffarnagar in S.T. No. 272 of 1981, State Vs. Dhanpal and others, along with two other acquitted accused Malkhan and Chohal, for committing murder of Smt. Santa, widow of Bira Singh and mother of informant Anil, PW1 u/s 302 I.P.C. and was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment, vide impugned judgment and order dated 27.11.1982, and hence this appeal by the appellant challenging his aforesaid conviction and sentence. Narration of entire prosecution case was made by the informant Anil Kumar,P.W.1,in the Sessions Trial, according to which informant was a resident of Wazirpur, police station Ashok Vihar, Delhi. His great grand-father Guddhi had four sons Sukhkhan, Chandra Bhan, Bhagwan and Har Lal. Veer Singh and Smt. Santo (deceased) were the wife and son of Har Lal and parents of the informant Anil Kumar,P.W.1, whereas Jaswant (eye-witness) is the son of Chandra Bhan. Veer Singh, informant's ...
Tag this Judgment!Ashok Kundalia and Another Vs. Dr. Nanak Chand Khanduja and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-26-2012
List revised. None appears for the respondents. Heard Ms. Manisha Ambwani, Advocate holding brief of Shri Vipin Sinha, learned counsel for the revisionist. The revision has been filed challenging the order dated 22nd April, 1998 passed by the Ist Additional Civil Judge, Bareilly in Suit No. 470 of 1996. By means of said order the Issue No. 2 regarding valuation of the suit has been decided against the defendant-revisionist and it was held that the Court fee paid of amount of Rs. 200/- is sufficient. The submission of the learned counsel for the revisionist is that the suit was filed for declaration that the sale agreement dated 20.9.1993 entered into between the parties and the conditions of the said agreement had not complied with by the defendant and as such the plaintiff is not liable to execute the sale deed in favour of the defendant as per the agreement. Further relief was sought is that declaration be made to the effect that as the defendants are guilty of violation of terms and...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Khilawan Vs. Additional District Judge
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-25-2012
Saeed-Uz-Zaman Siddiqi: 1. THESE two writ petitions relate to the similar matter regarding similar premises, the owner is common and have been filed by two tenants, hence, I proceed on to decide these writ petitions together. 2. BRIEFLY stated, the relevant facts for the purposes of deciding these writ petitions are that the petitioners are the tenants of part of premises, of which respondent no.3 is trustee and remaining respondent nos. 4 to 7 are trustees. The respondent nos. 2 to 7 filed S.C.C. Suit for eviction and recovery of arrears of rent and damages of use and occupation and ejectment. During the pendency of the suit, the proceedings were adjourned on the application of the petitioner, subject to payment of costs on different dates. The petitioners were defendants before the learned Trial Court, did not pay the cost and continue to participate in the proceedings. When the costs of so many dates was accumulated, the plaintiffs who are respondents before this Court, moved applic...
Tag this Judgment!Brij Kishore Verma Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-21-2012
Devi Prasad Singh, J. 1. WITH the change of Government, the creation of new districts has become a routine feature in the State of Uttar Pradesh that too, without adverting to financial viability and necessity. Ordinarily, decisions are political to perpetuate legacy of political parties. 2. SIMILAR is the case in hand referred by the Division Bench of this Court relating to constitution of Chhatrapati Shahu Ji Maharaj Nagar (in short CSM Nagar). 3. On account of conflicting judgment with regard to right of State Government to create districts, a Division Bench of this Court (Hon'ble Pradeep Kant, J. and Hon'ble Ritu Raj Awasthi, J.), has framed three (3) questions and referred the same to the Larger Bench. In terms thereof, Hon'ble the Chief Justice has constituted the present Bench. The questions referred by the Division Bench vide order dated 25.3.2011 passed in Writ Petition No.10159 (M/B) of 2010 and three other connected writ petitions, are as under: (i) Whether the issuance of n...
Tag this Judgment!Prem Das Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-21-2012
1. THIS Criminal Revision under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. has been preferred against order dated 21.04.2010 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.7, Ghaziabad in Case Crime No.422/1998 of Police Station Sahibabad, District Ghaziabad under Sections 323, 452, 504 and 506 I.P.C., allowing application of the complainant purported to be under Section 323 Cr.P.C. and thereby committing the case to the Court of Special Judge, under the Schedule Castes and the Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to 'the SC/ST Act'). 2. THE factual matrix of the case is that on 24.04.1998 at about 18.30 O'clock, there was a clash between the complainant's side and the revisionist's side over an issue of throwing debris of complainant's house on the public lane. It is said to be a case of free-fight, wherein both the sides received injuries. THE Police registered F.I.Rs. on the basis of cross version and after concluding investigation, the Investiga...
Tag this Judgment!Vikas Singh and Another Vs. Banaras Hindu University and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-20-2012
Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, J. 1. THESE two writ petitions raise a challenge to the Ordinances of the Banaras Hindu University Students' Council framed by the University pursuant to the directions issued by the Apex Court in the case of University of Kerala Vs. Council and others reported in 2006 Volume (8) SCC Page 304. It is to be noted that the matter has been referred to a larger Bench vide orders of the Supreme Court reported in 2010 Volume (1) SCC Page 353. However, again on an interim application further directions modifying the earlier directions have been issued by the Apex Court on 8.12.2011 which order has also been brought on record. 2. THE petitioner, Vikas Singh, is a Ph.D. Student of the respondent University doing his research in Hindi from the Arts Faculty and is a student on the rolls of the respondent University. Praveen Kumar Singh who is the petitioner in the second writ petition is also a research student of the same university. The basic challenge in the writ petition...
Tag this Judgment!Mahendra Singh and Another Vs. Union of India
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-20-2012
Sunita Agarwal, J. 1. HEARD Sri S.N. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Mohan Srivastava, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No. 3 Jeewan Beema Karmchari Sahkari Sangh Samiti Limited, Varanasi(hereinafter referred to as 'Samiti') and Sri Somil Srivastava, learned counsel for respondent no.2. 2. THE controversy in both the writ petitions is that the petitioners are guarantors of one loan taken by respondent no. 4 from respondent no. 3 Samiti and the prayer is that respondent no. 3(Samiti) may not recover outstanding amount of dues of loan towards respondent no. 4 from the petitioners. In view of the same, the two petitions were heard together and are being decided by a common judgment. The case of the petitioners in the writ petitions is that the respondent no. 4 had taken loan on 1.6.2004 for an amount of Rs.4,11,000/- for the marriage of his daughter. Petitioners are working as Development Officers in LIC, Branch Chunar alongwith the respondent No. 4. The r...
Tag this Judgment!Anirban Nath Sushmita Huf Vs. Dcit Kanpur
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-20-2012
1. THIS Income Tax Appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 arises out of the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Allahabad dated 30.6.2000 in Income Tax Appeal No. 1037 (Alld)/1998, for the assessment year 1994-95. 2. WE have heard Shri S.D. Singh, learned counsel appearing for the assessee-appellant. Shri R.K. Upadhyay appears for the Income Tax Department. The appellant is a HUF composed of Mr. Anirban Nath and his mother Mrs. Sushmita Nath. There is another HUF composed of one Mr. Anirdam Nath and his mother Sushmita Nath. The Anirban Nath Sushmita (HUF)-the assessee-appellant was in need of money to apply for allotment of shares of two companies M/s Trimurti Fertiliser Ltd and Crown Leasing and Finance Co. Ltd. It approached Arindam Nath Sushmita HUF, and Arinban Nath (individual) for giving loan of Rs. 6, 45, 000/- and Rs. 5, 60, 000/- respectively. The loans were advanced and the money was paid by the creditors to the companies directly. There was no term f...
Tag this Judgment!Shakti Advertising and Others Vs. Nagar Nigam and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Sep-20-2012
1. WE have heard Shri W.H. Khan, Senior Advocate assisted by Shri J.H. Khan and Shri Gulrez Khan for the petitioners. Learned Standing Counsel appears for the State respondents. Shri Vivek Varma appears for Nagar Nigam, Varanasi. 2. IN Writ Tax No. 1522 of 2011 M/s Shakti Advertising and four others have prayed for quashing the demand notices dated 4.10.2011 (Annexure nos. 7, 8 and 9) issued by the Tax Superintendent (Advertisement), Nagar Nigam, Varanasi raising a demand of Rs. 24, 59, 923/- towards site rent, advertisement tax and renewal charges from M/s Shakti Advertising-petitioner no. 1; Rs.17, 18, 123/- from M/s Allora Outdoor-petitioner no.2; and Rs.1, 36, 376.50 from M/s Prisma Advertiser-petitioner no. 3. IN the impugned orders the petitioners were also required to give the list of the private site hoardings. In Writ Tax No. 1528 of 2011 M/s Selvel Media Services Private Limited and 10 others have prayed for quashing the notices dated 4.10.2011 issued by the Tax Superintenden...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »