Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2008(2)ALD188; 2008(2)ALT429
ramesh ranganathan, j.1. 'save valuable wakf lands from being sold for a song' is a cry in anguish from mirza yaseen all baig who has filed w.p. no. 21854 of 2005 in public interest to have g.o. ms. no. 22, minorities welfare (wakf.i) department, dated 18.10.2004, quashed. he also seeks to have the sale deeds, executed in favour of respondents 6 to 11 pursuant to g.o. ms. no. 22 dated 18.10.2004, set aside contending that crores of rupees worth wakf property had been alienated to them for a pittance.2. the petitioner's case, in short, is that the government qazi had sought pemiission for sale of wakf lands admeasuring ac.39.16 cts on the specious plea of safeguarding it from illegal encroachment, that while these wakf lands would have fetched between 30 to 40 lakhs per acre the sale consideration was fixed at an abysmally low price of rs. 6 lakhs per acre and that g.o. ms. no. 22, dated 18.10.2004 was issued by the government according sanction for its sale to respondents 6 to 11 though wakf lands could be sold only by way of public auction after following the procedure prescribed under section 51 of the wakf act. petitioner would contend that the impugned g.o. was not only malicious, as it was taken with a view to favour respondents 6 to 11, but was also detrimental to the interest of the public as well as to the wakf.3. facts, in brief, are that on the proposals of the qazi for the sale of wakf lands, of an extent of ac. 39.16 cts, in survey nos. 201 to 203/2 of nidamanuru .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2003(1)ALD18
c.y. somayajulu, j.1. this petition is filed to order inspection, scrutiny and recount of all the ballot papers polled in the election to 81-tiruvuru assembly constituency held during 1999 ap general elections to the andhra pradesh legislative assembly and set aside the election of 1st respondent on the ground of corrupt practices allegedly indulged in by the 1st respondent and irregularities allegedly committed during counting. 1st respondent filed application no. 347 of 2000 to strike down paragraphs 7 to 11 of the election petition on the ground that they are vague and frivolous. petitioner filed his counter contending that the allegations regarding the corrupt practices were made only as a passing reference, and that as a matter of fact he is not either relying or basing his claim on any of the corrupt practices alleged in the petition. after hearing both sides, by the order dated 25-4-2000, paragraphs relating to corrupt practices in the petition were ordered to be struck off. thus the petition, now, is only on the ground of irregularities in counting. 2. the allegations, in brief, in the petition are, during 1999 a.p. general assembly elections to the tiruvuru assemblyconstituency reserved for sc candidate, petitioner and 1st respondent were the principal contestants on behalf of india national congress (inc) and telugu desam party (tdp) respectively. though 2nd respondent contested on behalf of cpm party, 3rd respondent as independent candidate and respondents 4 to 5 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2002(4)ALT746
orderv.v.s. rao, j.introduction:1. this writ petition is filed seeking a writ of mandamus declaring the notices issued by the first respondent bearing rc.no. 143/ 99-g3 dt. 9-02-1999 and 13-12-1999 as illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the orders of this court. the petitioner seeks a consequential direction not to interfere with petitioner's peaceful possession and enjoyment of the land in an extent of acs. 1.05 in s.no. 292/1, 292/3, 292/4 and 294/7c. by the impugned notices the petitioner was requested by the first respondent to stop unauthorised construction immediately and obtain approval from the shore area development authority, the third respondent, (hereinafter called, sada).background facts-pleadings:2. the brief facts leading to filing of the writ petition be noted as follows. mother of the petitioner purchased the property in question in 1987 under five registered sale deed's. the property is situated outside the visakhapatnam municipal corporation limits, approximately 25 kms. away from visakhapatnam city. it is abutting visakhapatnam-bheemili beach road. the mother of the petitioner so as to construct a residential building obtained building permission from gram panchayat of kapuluppada, the seventh respondent herein on 20-01-1988. at that juncture the first respondent by public notice dated 3-04-1988 called objections from the aggrieved parties in connection with preparation of draft zone development plan of rushikonda area under sub-section (2) of section 8 of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : [1996]87CompCas1(AP)
s. dasaradha rama reddy, j.1. this is a petition filed by one of the shareholders of the first respondent-company, hillock hotels private limited, visakhapatnam, under sections 397 and 398 of the companies act, 1956, alleging oppression, exclusion and mismanagement by the managing director, the second respondent, and other director, respondent no. 3. respondent no. 2 is the managing director of the company, while the third respondent, his wife, is a director and respondent no. 4, their daughter and respondents nos. 5 and 6, their sons are shareholders. 2. the averments in the petition are as follows : the authorised share capital of the company formed on may 13, 1980, was rs. 10,00,000, divided into 1,000 equity shares of rs. 1,000 each. the issued, subscribed and paid-up share capital as on september 30, 1985, was rs. 1,10,000 divided into 110 equity shares of rs. 1,000 each. the main object of the company, as per exhibit a-1 memorandum of association, is to carry on the business of a hotel. respondents nos. 2 and 3 who originally subscribed five shares each at the time of formation of the company were appointed as directors under article 12 of the articles. by virtue of article 19, respondent no. 2 was appointed as the managing director. the petitioner was inducted as a director of the company in its first meeting on june 7, 1980, and five shares were allotted to him (exhibit a-2). thereafter when the allotment of shares took place on march 9, 1981, he was allotted 45 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1995All13
orderb.m. lal, j.1. interpretation of tenure where language used therein is clear and unambiguous prescribing maximumperiod of outer limit but not internal limit, is involved in this case.2. besides this, where the appointment is not governed by any statutory provision or guideline, but is made purely on personal or political considerations, the appointment itself being arbitrary, whether can such appointee complain if the termination of such appointment is also equally arbitrary, and whether can such appointee raise objection to his exit when admittedly his entry itself is by back door, are the next question involved inthis case?3. by this petition under article 226 of the constitution of india, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing impugned office memorandum dated 2-3-1994 issued by the respondents contained in annure-8 to the writ petition, whereby tenure of oil selection board for selection of dealers/distributors of petroleum products constituted by the respondents on 1-1-1993 vide annexure-4 to the writ petition, has been terminated vide impugned annexure-8 dated 2-3-1994, with the result tenure of the office of chairman-justice shamsul islam jafri, a retired judge of this court and members sri ram nihor rajkesh and present petitioner sri anil kumar singh yadav has come to an end.3a. no doubt, this petition is filed only by one of the members namely sri anil kumar singh yadav challenging the termination .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1946All19
verma, j.1. the appellant, mahanarain, who is a resident of village dadraul in the district of shahjahanpur, has been convicted under section 302, penal code, and has been sentenced to death. the charge against the appellant was that he on 7th february 1944, early in the afternoon, committed the murder of one malkhan - who was also a resident of village dadraul - by stabbing him with a knife at paintapur in the har - which apparently means a field in which no crops arc standing or land which is used for grazing cattle-.and thereby committed an offence punishable under section 302, penal code. mahanarain has appealed against his conviction and the sentence of death passed on him and the record has also been submitted to this court for the confirmation of the death sentence. as has been indicated above, the appellant mahanarain as well as the deceased malkhan were residents of village dadraul. paintapur is a hamlet of dadraul and is situated to the east of that village. it appears from the evidence that there is a sugar factory at rosa, which is situated at a distance of three miles from dadraul, and that there is what is called the rosa co-operative development union which is connected with the factory. the 'gate supervisor' (mohammad usman ghaznavi) and the assistant secretary (a.n. chishti) of the union were examined by the defence. it further appears that this union has organised a system by which the various cultivators of sugar-cane are enabled to bring to the factory .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1961All73
gurtu, j.1. this is an appeal of lala behari lal the contesting defendant in the suit for recovery of property and mesne profit. the plaintiff is the idol, sri thakur radha ballabh ji and sues through yasodanandan as next friend. the plaint allegation is that house no. 49/54 belonged to the plaintiff. the said house was a partitioned portion of a bigger building of which the other partitioned portion bore no. 49/53. the plaintiff was not the proprietor of house no. 49/53 but he had acquired the mortgagee rights thereof.the partitioned portion no. 49/54 (also referred to as house in this judgment) had been bought by the plaintiff out of the plaintiff's fund by defendant no. 2 lala jagannath as manager and sarvarakar of the plaintiff. jagannath prasad later executed a sale deed dated 13-1-1942 in respect of the partitioned portion no. 49/54, of which the plaintiff was in proprietary possession, in favour of l. behari lal the contesting defendant for a consideration of rs. 10,000/- with the allegation that house no. 49/54 was in a dilapidated condition and needed to be rebuilt and that out of the sale proceeds some other newly constructed property would be purchased by jagannath prasad as sarvarakar of the temple. the aforesaid statement was incorrect and was incorporated in the sale-deed in order to give it validity.the sale-deed was executed for an inadequate consideration. there was no authority in jagannath prasad to sell the property. the plaint further alleged that the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1948All27
sinha, j.1. this is a pre-emptors' appeal and the question argued before me is an interesting question of some importance.2. a sale-deed was executed on 6-3-1944, in favour of nekiram and others by one mathuralal. on 6-3-1944, there was an exchange between the vendees, on the one side, and one neta, on the other, under which neta transferred three biswas in one mahal, in exchange for three biswas in three different khewats.3. the plaintiffs brought a suit for pre-emption. among the pleas raised in defence was a plea that the exchange conferred an indefeasible title and armed the vendees with the right to resist the suit for pre-emption.4. the learned munsif repelled the contention and decreed the suit. on appeal, the learned second civil judge disagreed with the learned munsif and held that the exchange conferred an indefeasible interest on the vendees and entitled them to defeat pre-emption.5. in second appeal before me mr. s.r.l. gaur has contended that the transaction was, on the face of it, an improvident transaction and liable to be defeated at the instance of his sons or the remaining members of the coparcenary, even though neta was the manager of the family, and could not confer an indefeasible title.6. it is not disputed that the gift being of a date subsequent to the date of the sale should convey an indefeasible interest to the vendees, before they are entitled to successfully resist the plaintiffs. it has, however, been strenuously contended by dr. n.c. vaish that, .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : (1895)ILR17All265
burkitt, j.1. this is one of the many cases in which execution-creditors of the late raja hari har dat dube of jaunpur have sought to have execution of their decrees against the present raja shankar dat dube, under section 234 of the code of civil procedure, on the allegation that shankar dat had in his hands assets of his deceased brother on which the creditors were entitled to levy execution.2. in the present case the decree-holder appellant, bithal das obtained a decree for some rs. 6,900 odd, a simple money-decree, against the raja hari har dat dube in the court of the subordinate judge of agra in february 189j. raja hari har dat dube died on january 13th, 1892. execution-proceedings were commenced at agra in may 1892, against raja shankar dat and the widow of raja hari har dat, who were described as heirs of the deceased and as in possession of his property. the application was clearly one within section 234 of the code of civil procedure. notices were issued to the two representatives, and, no appearance having been put in by them, the execution>proceedings were transferred to the jaunpur court. accordingly, in july 1892, thepresent appellant applied in jaunpur for execution by attachment of certain immoveable (landed) property and of a sum of money lying in the treasury in deposit. orders for attachment were issued by the court on july 27th. thereupon the raja shankar dat, on august 17th 1892, objected to the attachment. he denied that he was in possession of any .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : 2004(2)AWC986
a.k. yog, j.1. allahabad development authority, allahabad through its secretary (defendant-appellant) (hereinafter called 'a.d.a.') has filed the above noted first appeal under section 54, land acquisition act (called 'the act') against impugned judgment and compensation award dated may 15, 1998, passed by vth additional district judge, allahabad in land acquisition reference no. 51 of 1994, shakeel ahmad and two ors. v. government of u.p. through collector and anr. whereby the court below had enhanced compensation and fixed at the rate of rs. 115 per sq, metre, i.e., rs. 2,60,000 per bigha and also additional compensation under section 23(1a) of the act @ 12% market value along with 9% per annum interest on enhanced compensation amount w.e.f. the date of taking possession (i.e., 12.11.1990) till its actual payment and interest @ 15% per annum in case compensation amount is not deposited within one year, i.e., upto 12.11.1991.2. details of land in question, which is subject-matter of compulsory acquisition under the act, is admittedly agricultural land of two khatas, situated in mauja, kasari, masari paragana and tahsil, chail, district allahabad.i. khata no. 344 kasl. no.plot no.area12528501/08/002281/20-7-033140-8-044010-7-055650-7-0total3-00-0ii. khata no. 344 khasl. no.plot no.area1252(m)0-5-029210-16-039470-12-049830-08-0519710-06-0618690-04-0total02/11/00total : 1 +11=5-11-0. relevant dates are :21.7.1990notification undersection 4(1) of the act15.9.1990notification .....
Tag this Judgment!