Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1951All21
wali ullah, j.1. two questions have been referred for decision by the full bench :1. ''whether it is possible to convict an accused person of an offence under section 304, part ii, read with section 34, penal code ?2. whether to establish a charge under section 325 read with section 34, penal code, where several persons strike another with lathis, it is necessary to establish specifically that one or more of them actually caused grievous hurt ?'2. at the time of the hearing before us the second question has been redrafted with a view to bring out more clearly its real implication. redrafted, the second question stands thus :'2 (a). if a person is attacked by several persons numbering less than 5 and grievous hurt is caused, and it is not known who caused the grievous hurt, can all of them be convicted of causing grievous hurt, with the aid of section 34, penal code ?2 (b). if a person is attacked by several persons numbering less than 5 and grievous hurt is caused, and it is known which of them caused the grievous hurt, can others be convicted of grievous hurt with the aid of section 34 ?'3. with regard to the first question, it may be stated at once, there is a serious conflict of judicial opinion. learned counsel for the parties have invited our attention to a large number of cases, the more important of which will be referred to and discussed at appropriate places in the course of this judgment.4. in order to give an answer to the first question it is necessary to examine, .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2003(3)AWC2433; [2003(97)FLR1160]
b.s. chauhan, j. 1. this writ petition has been filed against the award of the labour court dated 2nd september, 1995 by which the application of the respondent to make correction in the earlier award dated 19.9.1994 has been allowed and the matter has been decided afresh reviewing its earlier award and substituting the punishment of dismissal vide order dated 24.6.1989 by withholding the two annual increments without cumulative effect.2. facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the respondent workman had been employed as a conductor with the petitioner corporation and he was served the charge-sheet for embezzlement of rs. 9.70 as he had received the fare from the passenger and did not issue the tickets. after completing the departmental enquiry as he was found guilty, punishment of dismissal from service was awarded. the respondent workman raised the industrial dispute and the appropriate government in exercise of its power under section 4k of the industrial disputes act, 1947 (hereinafter called the act 1947), made a reference vide order dated 19.5.1992 as to whether the removal of respondent workman from his services was improper and not in accordance with law, if yes, to what relief he was entitled to? in pursuance to the said reference, the claim petition was filed by the workman contending that while he was working as conductor it was alleged that in the checking it was found that there were only 16 passengers travelling in the bus out of which 9 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2005(1)ESC649
b.s. chauhan, j.1. the special appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 23.12.2004 of the learned single judge dismissing the writ petition of the petitioner for issuing direction to treat the petitioner as belonging to members of scheduled caste being a member of 'bhar/rajbhar' community.2. the facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that the petitioner/appellant belongs to bhar/rajbhar caste, which falls in the category of denotified tribe (vimukti jati). persons belonging to bhar and rajbhar communities of the district azamgarh, in the state of uttar pradesh, had earlier been notified under the provisions of criminal tribes act 1924 (hereinafter called the act 1924). the act 1924 stood repealed in 1952 and all the communities included in the schedule thereof stood de-notified, and certain benefits have been given to them, for example, making certain reservations of the seats in educational institutions. the petition was filed for issuing direction to the respondents to treat the petitioner/appellant belonging to scheduled tribes and confer upon him the benefit of reservation available to scheduled tribes candidates for the purpose of admission in the b.t.c. course qua the entrance examination 2004. however, the petition has been dismissed. hence this appeal.3. sri l.d. rajbhar, learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the community of bhar/rajbhar in the district azamgarh has been suppressed to an extent that it became even weaker .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (1924)ILR46All663
boys, j.1. this is a reference by the sessions judge of meerut recommending that the convictions and sentences passed on four men, under sections 166 and 342 of the indian penal code, should be set aside on the ground that the arrest in respect of which they have been convicted was not an illegal arrest but was justifiable in law.2. it appears that the complainant, gropi nath, had come from allahabad to the court of the subordinate judge of meerut in order to give evidence in some proceedings before the subordinate judge under section 195 of the code of criminal procedure. at the time when he went to the court of the subordinate judge to give evidence, he went, as found by the judge, to all intents and purposes, as a witness summoned, though, in fact, no summons had been served on him. at this time there was a warrant out against him for his arrest in certain execution proceedings. on his arrival at the court of the subordinate judge, he asked for protection from arrest until he should be able to return to allahabad. he was informed that as a witness he could not be arrested and no special orders were necessary. as a matter of fact, before he reached the railway station at meerut, he was arrested and that arrest has formed the subject of the proceedings resulting in the con-viction and sentence which the sessions judge has referred with a recommendation that they should be set aside. it is urged on behalf of the complainant that he was, in fact, returning to allahabad when he .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1953All749
brij mohan lall, j.1. this is an appeal by six per-sons, viz., maiku, pusa, mata din, sobha ram, nand kishore and hari shankar, who have keen convicted by the learned additional sessions judge of farrukhabad under sections 147 and 428/149, penal code. under the former section every one of them has been sentenced to undergo one year's rigorous imprisonment and under the latter to undergo three months' rigorous imprisonment. the sentences are to run concurrently.2. mata din (appellant 3) is a patwari, while nand kishore (appellant 5) is his brother. sobha ram and hari shankar (appellants 4 and 6 respectively) are their nephews. all of them are brahmins. the remaining two appellants are chamars by caste.3. the prosecution case is that the appellants along with a large number of persons who are said to have numbered one thousand approximately, formed an unlawful assembly and that, in prosecution of the common object of the said assembly, they cut pokhpal's crop and also pulled down the chhappar of one genda chamar, burnt the chhappar and certain skins of dead carcasses which genda had stored in his house. it may be pointed out at this stage that mahtab singh zamindar is said to have been interested in getting pokhpal's crop cut. the charge levelled against the appellants was confined to their activities against genda only. the cutting of pokhpal's crop was not the subject matter of charge because it appears that mahtab had obtained through court possession over pokhpal's land .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2000(2)AWC1761; (2000)2UPLBEC1270
palok basu, j.1. this bunch of 73 cases, raises important question of law which may be having far reaching consequences, therefore, more than sufficient time was provided to the learned counsel for the parties to ventilate their grievances and respective arguments which all of them have done with great ability.2. on february 24, 1997. 'shaktinagar special area development authority (cess on mineral rights) rules, 1997' (hereinafter referred to as the cess rules) having been promulgated through publication in the u. p. gazette, all the petitioners seem to have been asked to pay cess in accordance with the cess rules and it appears that by the notice of demand the amount so calculated was demanded and the petitioners having not paid the cess, the recovery proceedings as arrears of land revenue have commenced and each one of the petitioners has rushed tothis court challenging those recovery proceedings and the citations issued by the recovering authorities for attempting to collect the said cess from each of the petitioners.3. in all the writ petitions, the petitioners are firm, company or individuals, as the case may be, when these petitions were filed, notice was issued to the respondents to show cause as to why the writ petitions be not allowed while calling for counter-affidavits from them and recovery proceedings against each of the petitioners had been stayed which was extended from time to time. four opposite parties. collector sonbhadra, tahsildar. tahsil robertsganj, .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1927All564
iqbal ahmad, j.1. this is a plaintiffs' appeal and arises out of a suit for ejectment of the defendants from plot no. 18/1 on the allegation that the defendants first party, who were the occupancy tenants of the said plot had without any right permitted the defendants second party to build a house on that plot, and the defendants second party had actually built a house and this action of the defendants was detrimental to the land and was in consistent with the purpose for which the land was let, and as such the defendants were liable to ejectment under clause (b). section 57 of the tenancy act.2. the main defence to the suit was that the house in question was situate, not on plot no. 18/1, but on plot no. 18/2 and as the plaintiffs had no concern with plot no. 18/2 they had no right to maintain the suit. it was also contended by one of the defendants that the relation of zemindar and tenant did not exist between the plaintiffs and that particular defendant, and as such the suit was not cognizable by the revenue court.3. during the course of the trial it was admitted by the defendant who had challenged the jurisdiction of the revenue court to entertain the suit, that he, in fact, was the tenant of the plaintiffs of plot no. 18/1, and after this admission the main controversy between the parties centered round the question whether the house in question was situate on plot no. 18/1 on upon plot no. 18/2. if the house existed on plot no. 18/2 the plaintiffs obviously were not .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2004(3)AWC2649
r.b. misra, j.1. heard sri r. c. chaturvedi, learned counsel holding brief of sri k.s. kushwaha learned counsel for the petitioner, and sri sandeep mukherjee, learned standing counsel for the state respondents, none appears for the gaon sabha of village udaipur through the land management committee of village udaipur, pargana and tehsil chail, district allahabad.2. in the petition the orders dated 24.6.1987 (annexure-2 to the writ petition) and 30.6.1988 (annexure-3 to the writ petition) passed by the tehsildar, chail, district allahabad and additional collector, allahabad respectively are under challenge, whereby both the authorities concurrently by their impugned orders on the basis of the fact finding that the land in possession of the petitioners is talab/big water pond, which is in unauthorised possession of the petitioner, therefore, the petitioner was to be evicted from the land in question treating it as unauthorised possession.3. according to the petitioner he is owner of the land in question by virtue of section 122b (4f) of the uttar pradesh zamindari abolition and land reforms act, 1950 (hereinafter in short called as the u.p.z.a. and l.r. act).4. it appears that on 1.1.1987 a notice in z. a. form 49 ka in reference to rule 115d of u.p.z.a. and l.r. rules, 1952 was served to the petitioner indicating that the land in question bearing arazi no. 93 measuring area 1 bigha 9 biswa situated in village udaipur, pargana and tehsil chail, district allahabad is recorded as .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2004(3)AWC2672
vineet saran, j.1. by means of this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for a direction in the nature of mandamus, commanding the respondents u. p. state sugar corporation ltd. to provide the pay scale of rs. 2,000-3,500 to the petitioner with effect from 31.7.1986 and pay him the arrears of the difference in salary. a further prayer has been made for a direction to promote the petitioner on the post of liaison officer.2. brief facts relevant for the decision of this case are that in the year 1973, the petitioner was appointed as laboratory chemist in the amroha sugar mills of the respondent u. p. state sugar corporation ltd. admittedly by the order dated 30.5.1985 passed by the general manager of the u. p. state sugar corporation ltd., the petitioner was designated as liaison assistant in the same pay scale and was attached to the general section to look after the liaison and public relation work of the factory as well as project work. subsequently, on 3.12.1987, the respondent-corporation redesignated the petitioner as laboratory chemist in the same scale. on the passing of the aforesaid order the petitioner raised an industrial dispute which was registered as adjudication case no. 13 of 1992 with the labour court, u. p. at rampur. by its award dated 30.1.1993 the labour court held that the stand taken by the respondent-corporation, that the petitioner was designated as liaison assistant on trial basis, was not correct. it was also held that the reversion/restoration of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : [2008]1444CompCas642(All)
sunil ambwani, j.1. heard shri p.v. kapoor, sr. advocate assisted by shri dhruv wahi, shri saral srivastava and ms. namrata kapoor for starlinger & co. ges.m.b.h, sonnenuhrgasse 4, a-1060 vienna, austria, the appellant and shri ravi kant, sr. advocate assisted by ms. bindu saxena, shri yatindra shukla and shri saurabh srivastava for m/s lohia starlinger limited, d-3/a, panki industrial estate, kanpur and other respondents.2. this appeal under section 10f of the companies act, 1956 arises out of an order dated 12.12.2006 passed by the company law board (clb), principal bench, new delhi in the company petition no. 62 of 2005, on a company application nos. 365 & 324 of 2006 by which the clb held that the issues raised by the application filed by the appellant are the matters to be decided on conclusion of main proceedings and permitted the respondent company to implement the decision taken in agm dated 30.9.2006 relating to amendment of the objects clause of the memorandum of association with the stipulation that till the disposal of the petition it shall not commence any business other than automotive parts and electrical accessories as indicated in para 5 of its application ca 365 of 2006.3. the facts giving rise to the appeal are as follows:that the appellant is a company organized and existing under the laws of austria having its registered office at sonnenuhrgasse 4, a-1060, vienna, austria. it is engaged in the manufacture of 'circular weaving machines' and machinery for .....
Tag this Judgment!