Uttaranchal Court December 2004 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Murari Lal Sah Vs. Ivth A.D.J. and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Dec-24-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC295
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. By means of this writ petition, moved under Article 226 of Constitution of India, the petitioner-landlord has sought writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the judgment and order dated 29.2.1992, passed by Shri A. K. Srivastava, the then learned IVth Additional District Judge, Nainital, whereby he has allowed Rent Control Appeal No. 40 of 1989 and rejected the release application, moved by the landlord under Section 21 of U. P. Act 13 of 1972.2. Brief facts of the case as narrated in the writ petition are that the petitioner-landlord filed an application under Section 21 (1) (a) of the Act (copy Annexure-1 to the writ petition) before the Prescribed Authority for release of his shop No. 76, Tallital, Nainital (hereinafter referred to as the 'premises in question') with the plea that he is the owner landlord of the said premises and the respondent No. 3/opposite party, Shri Kishori Lal Sah, is a tenant from month to month. It is further alleged in the petition ...
Mohan Singh Negi Vs. Ramesh Chandra Tiwari
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Dec-23-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC471
Rajesh Tandon, J.1. Heard Sri Anil Dabral, Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rajesh Joshi, Counsel for the respondent.2. By the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 9th October, 2003 passed by the Rent Control and Eviction Officer as well as the orders dated 27th September, 2004 and 28th September, 2004 passed by the District Judge, Nainital.3. Briefly stated, the proceedings for vacancy were initiated in respect of the property situate at 265 Jai Lal Shah Bazar, Mallital, Nainital. Petitioner alleges himself to be the tenant and is running a shop in one room of accommodation on the rent of Rs. 600/- annually since 1979. The father of the petitioner was the tenant of Mr. M.L. Shah and he was running a shop.4. On 16th March 1990, the shop was declared to be vacant and the same was allotted to one Sri Subodh Kumar Upadhyay. Aggrieved by the said order, a revision was preferred by Smt. Laxmi Devi prospective allottee before the District Judge, ...
Gangu Singh Alias Ganga Singh Vs. State
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Dec-23-2004
Reported in: 2005CriLJ1864
B.C. Kandpal, J.1. This criminal appeal arises out against the judgment and order dated 28-6-1984 passed by Sessions Judge, Pauri Garhwal in Sessions Trial No. 1 of 1982 convicting the accused/appellant under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentencing him to life imprisonment.2. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 23-7-1981, Satya Prasad Bhatt of village Salda, Patti Bangarhsyun Circle No. III of District Pauri Garhwal sent a written report (Ex. Ka.1) to Naib Tahsildar, Pauri Garhwal stating therein that on 23-7-1981 five boys of his village, namely, Dinesh Singh, Vikram Singh, Jagdish Lal, Sajjan Singh and Promod Kumar had gone to bring mangoes in the bounds of village Charakot. In the evening one Dinesh Singh came to the village and he informed that one Pramod Kumar s/o Dayal Singh of his village was murdered by the accused Gangu Singh by means of stones. When the complainant reached at the spot he found the dead body of Promod Kumar lying at Gadhera in Charokot. As it was the se...
Kali Ram (Sri) Vs. Mirza Waker Ali and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Dec-22-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC530
Rajesh Tandon, J.1. Heard Sri B.C. Pandey, Sr. Advocate assisted by Sri Naresh Pant, Counsel for the petitioner and Sri V.K. Bisht, Sr. Advocate assisted by Sri Amberish Chatterji, Counsel for the respondents.2. By the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of certiorari quashing the order passed by the Courts below by which the decree for eviction has been granted. Both the Courts below have granted the decree for eviction and the petitioner has filed the present writ petition challenging both the orders.FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE:-3. Briefly stated, the suit was filed by the plaintiff/respondent No. 1 praying for eviction of the petitioner from the premises in dispute on the ground of default in payment of arrears of rent. The plaint averments to that effect are quoted below:-^^vr% izkFkZuk gS fd fMxzh cgd oknh f[kykQizfroknh uaO 1 bl izdkj nh tk;%&v fd izfroknh us oknh uaO 1 oknh dks cdk;kfdjk;k :O 4]586@& e; C;kt vnk djs vkSj uksfVl ds ckn okn ds fnukad rdgtkZu...
Ramesh Chandra (Sri) and anr. Vs. Ist Additional District Judge and or ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Dec-22-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC812
Rajesh Tandon, J.Heard Sri Arvind Vashisth, Counsel for the petitioners and Sri. B.P. Nautiyal and Sri Hari Mohan Bhatia, Counsel for the respondents.FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE CASE:-1. By the present writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for a writ of certiorari praying for quashing the order 13th June, 1997 (Annexure 9) passed by the Prescribed Authority/1 st Additional Civil Judge, Senior Division, Dehradun passed in P.A. Case No. 5 of 1988 and judgment an order dated 7.2.2002 passed by 1st Additional District Judge, Dehradun in Rent Control Appeal No. 63 of 1997.2. Briefly stated, the application was filed under Section 21 (1) (a) of the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 in respect of the shop situate in 487 Dakra Bazar, Dehradun at the rate of Rs. 8/- per month. In Paragraph 3 of the application, it was stated by the respondent No. 3 Sri Chandra Shekhar that the premises is in a dilapidated condition and the landlord has got prepared a map according to the regulations of the Cantonment Boar...
Sushil Kumar Gupta Vs. Additional District Judge and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Dec-21-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC293
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. By means of this petition, moved under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 2.4.1996 and 20.11.1998 passed by the respondent No. 2 and 1 respectively.2. Brief facts of the case, as narrated in the writ petition are that the respondent No. 3 Budhi Singh moved an application under Section 21 (1)(a) of the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 for release of the accommodation in question, which was registered as P.A. Case No. 124 of 1984. Respondents No. 4 to 12 are the tenants along with the petitioner against whom said application was moved. Petitioner's father Ram Das (now deceased) was the original tenant since 1928 against whom earlier the proceedings of the release of the shop in question were moved but failed. The respondent No. 3, in his present release application stated that he is doing business of selling milk as a hawker and now he needs shop in question for running his...
Shivraj Singh Vs. State of Uttaranchal and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Dec-21-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Utr39
ORDERPrafulla C. Pant, J.1. By means of this writ petition, moved under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have sought writ in the nature of mandamus, commanding the respondent No. 3 to issue registration certificates to the petitioners and also directing the State Government to seek approval from the Pharmacy Council of India for the recognition of the course passed out by them.2. Brief facts of the case as narrated in the writ petition, are that the petitioners have passed two years course of Diploma in Pharmacy from Government Polytechnic Uttarkashi, District Uttarkashi, where they got admission in the year 1998-99. They also completed apprentice training as required under Section 10 of Pharmacy Act, 1948. But Uttar Pradesh Pharmacy Council (respondent No. 3) is not registering the name of the petitioners on the ground that the course has not been recognized by the Pharmacy Council of India (for brevity hereinafter P.C.I.). The petitioners have alleged that th...
Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Raghubar Datt
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Dec-20-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)AWC294(UHC)
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. This second appeal has been preferred by the defendants under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and is directed against judgment and order dated 26.7.2001, passed by Shri Chaturbhuj, Addl. District Judge (IVth Fast Track Court), Dehradun, in Civil Appeal No. 101 of 2000.2. Brief facts of the case are that the plaintiff-respondent, filed Original Suit No. 191 of 1981 for recovery of Rs. 77,682.61 along with F.D.R. No. 71/919798/80-81 for Rs. 6,020. Said suit was filed with the allegations that an auction took place on 8.6.1981 for removing of 289 fallen trees belonging to the defendant-appellant. The plaintiff-respondent offered the highest bid of Rs. 60,200. The said bid was accepted by defendant-respondent No. 2, Range Officer, Landour Cantt , Mussoorie. The plaintiff-respondent, alleged that he has deposited the necessary security of Rs. 6,020 and also the amount of Rs. 60,200 on 8.6.1981. After the bid was accepted, the plaintiff alleged that he spe...
Madan Mohan Kaushik and ors. Vs. Om Prakash Ahuja and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Dec-18-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)AWC288(UHC)
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. By means of this petition, moved under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have sought writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 28.3.2001, passed by learned Civil Judge (J.D.), Haridwar in Misc. Case No. 130 of 1998 and order dated 13.12.2002 passed by learned Additional District Judge/lst Fast Track Court, Haridwar in Misc. Appeal No. 34 of 2001.2. Brief factual matrix of the case is that Original Suit No. 247 of 1998 was filed on 21.9.1998 by the petitioners in which a temporary injunction was issued on 1.12.1998 directing the defendants not to raise construction over land in suit. It appears that on 10.12.1998, the defendants preferred Misc. Appeal No. 141 of 1998 against said order before the District Judge, Haridwar, in which operation of the order dated 1.12.1998 was stayed. However, the said appeal appears to have been dismissed on 4.3.1999. Thereafter, a Misc. Case No. 130 of 1998 was filed by the plaintiffs/petition...
Ashish Semwal and ors. Vs. H.N. Bahuguna Garhwal University and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Dec-18-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)AWC290(UHC)
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. By means of these writ petitions, moved under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have sought mandamus to appear in the examination of their next semesters of the B. Tech course and permission to clear the back papers. Learned counsel for the parties requested that all these petitions be disposed of finally as the examination of the University are going to commence from 20.12.2004, as such these cases are taken up for disposal.2. Brief common factual matrix of these cases is that Graphic Era Institute of Technology is affiliated to H.N.B. Garhwal University and petitioners are its students of B. Tech course. As per the rules of the University, a student is required to appear in 10 papers i.e., 6 papers in theory and 4 papers in practical in each semester (there are in all 8 semesters). If a student fails to clear three or less than three papers, he is permitted to clear the said papers in subsequent semesters as back papers. The petitioners'...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »