Allahabad Court March 2013 Judgments
Food Corporation of India Vs. J.S. Sirohi
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-22-2013
Sibghat Ullah Khan, J. 1. Heard Sri Satya Prakash, learned counsel for the appellant. No one appeared on behalf of respondents even though the case was taken up in the revised list.Orders passed on 22.12.2011 and 18.5.2012 on the order sheet are quoted below:"22.12.2011This Second Appeal was earlier allowed on 15.2.2010 without framing any substantial questions of law. The said judgment has been set aside on 18.4.2011 by the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.3331 of 2011 only on the ground that appeal had been allowed without framing substantial question of law. Accordingly it is directed that the appeal shall be heard on the following substantial question of law:- 1. Whether Civil Court has got jurisdiction to decide the suit filed by a workman against his termination order regarding which he could also raise an industrial dispute under Industrial Disputes Act. List for hearing on 10.1.2012." "18.5.2012This appeal was initially allowed without framing any substantial question of law. T...
Tag this Judgment!Mohd. Shameem Vs. Pradeep Kumar and Another
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-19-2013
Vinod Prasad, J. This contempt appeal, u/s 19 of Contempt Of Courts Act, 1971, hereinafter referred to as the Act, emanates against the judgement and order dated 26.2.2013 passed by learned single Judge of this court in Civil Misc. Contempt Application No. 881 of 2013, between Mohd. Shameem versus Pradeep Kumar and another whereby learned single Judge has refused to draw contempt proceedings against the respondents u/s 12 of the Act, who are Up Nagar Ayukta, Nagar Nigam, Allahabad and Encroachment- In-Charge, Nagar Nigam, Allahabad and has dismissed aforementioned contempt application moved by the appellant/ applicant/ petitioner. Ab-initio we reproduce the impugned judgement and order herein below:- "Heard learned counsel for the applicant and perused the record. This contempt petition has been filed with the allegation that despite the order dated 8.2.2013 the opposite parties have demolished the constructions of the applicant. From the record, it appears that the demolitions were ma...
Tag this Judgment!Raj Gopal Sharma Vs. Krishna Gopal Sharma and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-14-2013
1. Heard Sri Rahul Mishra, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Manish Goyal, Advocate assisted by Sri Sheo Sagar Singh, Advocate for the respondents. 2. Following two questions were formulated by this Court, which need adjudication : A. Whether the lower appellate court could have ignored the family settlement which was reduced in writing on 29.5.1977 only because it was not registered in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Kale and others Vs. Deputy Director of Consolidation and others, (1976) 3 SCC 119 ? B. When a family settlement is said to have acted upon so as to show that parties were ad idem, can it be disregarded and dislodged on its being unregistered ? 3. Original Suit No.611 of 1992 was instituted by Krishna Gopal against Raj Gopal for partition. The case set up by plaintiff was that he and defendant, both, were sons of Late Mangelal Sharma, and members of Joint Hindu Family, of which late Mangelal Sharma was Karta. He (Mangelal Sharma) died abo...
Tag this Judgment!Sutikshan Kumar Singh Vs. Pushpa Kumar Garg and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-06-2013
Anil Kumar Sharma, J. Heard Sri M.K. Gupta, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri M.D. Singh Shekhar, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Sri Amit Daga, learned counsel for the respondents and perused the record. The brief facts of the case culled out from the record are that the suit property, measuring 560 Sq. yards was purchased by Smt. Vrindavani Devi through a registered sale deed on 5.11.1962. She is said to have executed a registered gift deed (Hiba) on 16.5.1964 in favour of Aligarh Janhit Bhawan Nirman Sehkari Samiti Ltd. Aligarh, (hereinafter referred to as the Society) to which Sri R.K. Sharma, her son is said to be an attesting witness. The plaintiff/appellant claims herself to be a member of the aforesaid Society. She is said to have been allotted the suit land on 5.2.1978 for Rs. 39,220.00. It is alleged that after the death of Smt. Vrindavani Devi her two sons and daughters did not get any right in the suit land, however, the defendant/respondent claimed to have purc...
Tag this Judgment!Kamlesh Singh and Others Vs. State of U.P. and Others
Court: Allahabad
Decided on: Mar-06-2013
1. The appellants Kamlesh Singh, Suresh Singh and Sukhlal Singh have been convicted for having committed offence under section 302 IPC read with section 34 IPC vide judgment and order dated 15.9.2006 passed by Additional Sessions Judge / Special Judge (E.C. Act), Allahabad in Sessions Trial No.729 of 2002 and vide order dated 18.9.2006, each of them has been sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- and in case of default, to further undergo simple imprisonment for three months. However, they were acquitted for the offence under section 120-B IPC. 2. Another co-accused Kapil Deo Singh was, however, acquitted by the trial court for the offence under section 302 IPC and against the order of acquittal, criminal revision no.5840 of 2006 has been filed on behalf of one Rajendra Singh. Appellant Kamlesh Singh has also challenged his detention in jail by means of habeas corpus writ petition no.11028 of 2007 with a further prayer to quash the entire proceedings of the S...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›