Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Jan-03-1997
Reported in : AIR1997All314
ORDER1. The present revision has been filed by the tenant under S. 25 of Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887 against the judgment and decree dated 16-8-1985 passed by Sri D. C. Srivastava, IVth Additional District Judge, Kanpur in S.C.C. Suit No. 117 of 1982.2. By the decree which is impugned in the present revision, respondent's suit for eviction of the applicant from the accommodation and land in suit, which in the common parlance is called 'petrol pump' and for recovery of damages at the rate of Rs. 500/- per month w.e.f. 1-7-80 till the date of eviction has been decreed with cost.3. For the purpose of effective disposal of the revision, facts of the case which are not disputed may be briefly stated as follows:--M/s. Kailash Motors (hereinafter referred to as 'the landlord') under an agreement dated 4-7-1960 let out the property in suit (hereinafter called 'building') to M/s. Standard Vacuum Oil Company on rent of Rs. 500/- per month for a period of ten years with the liberty to...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Dec-19-1997
Reported in : 1998CriLJ3794
ORDERO.P. Garg, J.1. This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with the prayer that the order dated 8-4-1997, Annexure 15 of the petition, passed by Sri Swatantra Singh, the then Vlth Additional District and Sessions Judge, Aligarh in revision No. 118 of 1997 Ashok Kumar Jain v. State of U.P. and others. setting aside the order dated 27-1-1997 passed by the City Magistrate Aligarh - Opposite Party No. 2 in proceeding under Section 145 of the Code, be quashed.2. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged. Heard Sri Anand Kumar Gupta for the petitioner and Sri Viresh Mishra for opposite party No. 3 - Ashok Kumar Jain as well as learned standing counsel on behalf of the opposite party Nos. 1 and 2.3. Shorn of all superfluities, the case of the petitioner is that there is a shop No. 7/4, Railway Road, Abdul Karim Crossing, Aligarh of which S/Sri Arvind Kumar and Manoj Kumar are owners -- landlords. It is alleged that the petitioner Ramesh Chandra Saxe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Nov-11-1997
Reported in : 1998(1)AWC394
Ravi S. Dhavan and V.P. Goel, JJ.1. This petition was brought fifteen years ago by Smt. Lalta Devl and Heera Lal, in effect, resisting the planning of the respondents in widening the Grand Trank Road. The petitioner No. 1 has died, her heirs have been substituted.2. On facts, there is no issue. The petitioners have shops on the side of the Grand Trank Road. Several persons like the petitioners and along side them saw their shops demolished to give way to a public plan to clear the Grand Trank Road for highway traffic. The petitioners tied up the respondents in knots in litigations. First they filed a case before the Munsif, being the Additional Munslf, Varanasi, in Suit No. 2 of 1976. Smt. Munsera Devi and another v. Nagar Palika. Mugalsarai, They did not make the relevant parties, parties to the suit. The contention of the petitioners was that they be not evicted except in accordance with law. The learned Munsif gave a declaration, in effect, that the petitioners ought not to be evict...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Oct-29-1997
Reported in : 1998(1)ALT(Cri)7; 1998CriLJ3343
Giridhar Malaviya, J.1. A Division Bench of this Court has referred the following question to be decided by the Full Bench :-Where an accused person is under judicial custody on the basis of a valid remand order passed under Sections 209 or 309, Cr.P.C. by the Magistrate pending committal proceedings or trial, should he be set at liberty by issuing a writ of Habeas Corpus on the ground that his initial detention was violative of Constitutional guarantee enshrined in Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution of India2. It may be mentioned here that the petitioner filed the present petition challenging his detention in Varanasi Jail in Crime No. Nil of 1993/Special Trial No. 273 of 1993 Under Sections 8/21/ 22/25/27 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act of Police Station N.C.D. Varanasi. It was alleged that when the petitioner was arrested in the said crime he was not informed the grounds of his arrest with the result that his detention being in violation of the provisions of Se...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Feb-17-1997
Reported in : 1998ACJ721; AIR1998All1; (1997)2UPLBEC1344
ORDERM. Katju, J.1. Heard Shri S.K. Misra, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri S.K. Garg for respondent Nos. 2 and 3.2. This writ petition has been filed against the impugned award dated 26-8-1996, Annexure 6 to the writ petition passed by the Collector under Section 7(1) of the Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991 (hereinafter referred to as the ' 1991 Act').3. The Facts of the caseThe facts of the caste are that the respondent No. 1 and 3 arc the father and mother of one late Anil Gurang. They filed a claim petition on 10-7-1995 under Section 6(1) of the 1991 Act before the Collector. True copy of the application is Annexure-1 to the writ petition. In this application it has been alleged that the applicants are the parents and legal representatives of late Anil Gurang who was unmarried and employed in Hilton Hotel, Dehradun. Anil Gurang used to financially support his parents from his income. On 16-10-1994 Anil Gurang had gone for a wedding, and while going in the wedding pro...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Jul-21-1997
Reported in : 1998(1)AWC49; (1997)3UPLBEC1702
S.R. Singh, J.1. Petitioner was commissioned by the President of India in the Rank of 2nd Lieutenant in the Electrical and Mechanical Engineering Corps and was appointed as such in Short Service Commission (S.S.C. for brief), initially on contract for a period of five years on March 8, 1986. The present petition has been filed for the relief of a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to consider the petitioner for grant of permanent commission de novo on or before 30th April, 1994 and also for issue of a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari, summoning the records of his A.C.R. and those of other officers of this batch, who were allegedly offered crucial favour of being insidiously granted permanent commission and quashing the selection process including Annexure 4, by which the petitioner's statutory complaint dated 27.8.1991 met the fate of rejection and Annexure 6, which is the record of interview in respect of the petitioner, he...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Dec-04-1997
Reported in : 1998CriLJ2797
ORDERJ.C. Mishra, J.1. This revision has been filed by the accused against the order dated 17th Oct. 1996 passed by III Additional Sessions Judge, Bijnor, rejecting the application that his case should be sent to the Court of Juvenile Judge for trial as he is a juvenile and in view of the provisions of Section of the Juvenile Justice Act (hereinafter called 'the Act') he cannot be tried with the other accused.2. Accused Mayank along with other accused was named in the F.I.R. and he was committed to session. At the time of trial the accused-revisionist moved an application stating that he was born on 1st July, 1980 and, therefore, he had not completed 16 years of age on the date of occurrence of offence. The State Counsel contested the application stating that he had completed 16 years of age before the date of occurrence and thus he was not a juvenile. The learned Additional Sessions Judge gave opportunity to the parties to adduce evidence. The accused examined his mother Smt. Prem Bal...
Tag this Judgment!