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.
Chief Engineer Central Zone Telecommunication Civil and ors. Vs. Dayal ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Dec-10-2004
Reported in: AIR2005Utr34; 2005(2)ARBLR520(Uttaranchal)
ORDERPrafulla C. Pant, J.1. The above mentioned Second Appeal, Cross Appeal and Civil Revision have arisen out of the Civil suit No. 196 of 1995, Dayal Construction Company v. Union of India, as such all the three cases are being taken up together for their disposal.2. The brief facts of the case are that M/s. Dayal Construction Company (plaintiff/decree holder), instituted a suit for declaration and a permanent mandatory injunction before Civil Judge, Nainital, with the allegations that plaintiff is a firm engaged in the business of building construction activities, and Shri Deen Dayal Bhatt (plaintiff No. 2) is the sole proprietor of the said firm. The plaintiffs entered into an agreement with Union of India (defendant/judgment debtor) for construction of inspection quarters being constructed between a period from 6-12-1989 to 5-5-1991. As per the plaint allegations, plaintiffs were obliged to start the execution of the work only after pre-requisite conditions contained in the agreem...
Harshada P. Worah (Smt.) Vs. District Judge and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Dec-08-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC333
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. By means of this petition, moved under Article 227 read with Article 226 of the Constitution of India, plaintiff has sought quashing of judgment and order dated 6th of May, 2002 passed by learned District Judge, Dehradun, in Rent Control Appeal No. 107/2000.2. Brief facts of the case as narrated in the petitioner are that the petitioner (landlord) moved an application under Section 21 (1) (a) of U.P. Act XIII of 1972, for release of the accommodation in question situated at Mussoorie, which was registered as P.A. Case No. 10 of 1990 by the Prescribed Authority, Dehradun. The accommodation in question consists of two rooms with separate kitchen, two bathrooms and two servants quarters in the tenancy and occupation of the respondents No. 2 to 4 of the petition. It is alleged in 'the petition that the petitioner has two sons and two daughters. One of the daughters is unmarried. The petitioner needs the accommodation in question for her own use and for the use of her...
Birendra Singh (Sri) Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Dec-06-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC508
Rajesh Tandon, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.2. By the present writ petition the petitioner has prayed for a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 28.10.1993 and 10.2.1992 passed by the District Judge, Chamoli and Prescribed Authority Okhimath respectively.3. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that Patwari, Ukhimath, District Chamoli submitted report dated 21.11.1985, alleging therein that petitioner Birendra Singh had illegally made encroachment over Khasara Plot No. 1127 area 3 Nali and over khasara Plot No. 113 Area 7 Nali 8 muthi and was doing agriculture over that land. On the basis of the report of Patwari, the Prescribed Authority issued notice to the petitioner under Section 4 (1) of U.P. Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, (hereinafter called the Act). Petitioner Birendra Singh filed his written statement and both the parties adduced evidence. The prescribed authority vide order dated 25th August 1...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Neela Devi and anr.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Dec-06-2004
Reported in: IV(2005)ACC165; [2005(105)FLR215]
Rajesh Tandon, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.Present appeal has been preferred against the judgment and award dated 6th September, 2003 passed by the Commissioner for Workmen's Compensation, Champawat in Case No. 10 of 2000, Smt. Neela Devi and Ors. v. Smt. Janaki Devi and Anr.2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present appeal are that respondent Smt. Neela Devi has filed a claim petition under Section 4 of the Workmen's Compensation Act for grant of compensation on account of the death of her husband Sri Durga Dutt in a motor vehicle accident. The petitioner has submitted that her husband was employed as a driver on truck No. UGP 4015, which was owned by Smt. Janaki Devi. The truck has met with an accident on 2nd June, 1999 on Chhinkachhina Dhuwamauni road due to some mechanical fault and deceased Durga Dutt died instantaneously due to injuries sustained in the accident. The husband of the petitioner deceased Sri Durga Dutt was driving the truck being an em...
State of U.P. and Govt. Fruits Preservation Centre Vs. Sri Chand NaraI ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Dec-06-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC515
Rajesh Tandon, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.2. All the writ petitions have been filed against the orders dated 1.5.1992 and 25.6.1991 passed by the Addl. District Judge, Dehradun and Prescribed Authority, Dehradun respectively. Writ Petition No. 3435 of 2001 and 3436 of 2001 have been filed for setting aside the order of enhancement of rent and Writ Petition No. 4154 of 2001 has been filed for further enhancement of rent.3. Briefly stated, an application was filed by the respondent under Section 21 (8) of U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 praying for enhancement of rent in respect of premises No. 17, Rajpur Road, Dehradun, area 1177 Sq.Ft. Out of which 1493 Sq.Ft. is the covered area. According to the case of the landlord originally rent was Rs. 125/- per month. According to the landlord premises in dispute is valued at Rs. Four Lakh and 1/10 of the same comes to Rs. 40,000/-. Thus the monthly rent of the building comes to 1712 of Rs. 40,000/- i.e. Rs. 3333.34.4. The petitioner...
Murti Shri Raghunath Je Maharaj Virajman Mandir Shri Raghunath Jee Mah ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Dec-02-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC503
Rajesh Tandon, J.1. Heard Sri Arvind Vashisth, Counsel for the petitioner and Standing Counsel for the respondents.2. By the present writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 25.5.2004 passed by the Additional District Judge/F.T.C.-Vth, Dehradun in Misc. Appeal No. 28 of 2004 (Raj Kumar v. Murthi Sri Raghunathjee Maharaj and Ors.).3. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that the petitioners filed a Suit in the Court of Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), Dehradun against the defendant for permanent injunction restraining the defendant not to interfere in possession of the plaintiff over the property in suit.4. The plaintiff alleged that it is a charitable society and looks-after the property of Murti Sri Raghunathjee Maharaj. The temple of Sri Raghunathjee Maharaj is 200 years old. The property of the temple consists of Dharam Shala and Charitable Hospital and a piece of land measuring 1,200 sq.metre yard and hous...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›