Uttaranchal Court August 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.
Manmohan Singh Sharma Vs. Additional District Judge and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-21-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC79
Rajesh Tandon, J.1. Heard Sri J.P. Joshi, Advocate for the petitioner and Sri Arvind Vashistha, learned Counsel for the respondent Nos. 2 and 3.2. By means of this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 18.8.2003, passed by the Additional District Judge, Dehradun.3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the landlord respondent No. 3 has filed an application under Section 16 (1) (b) of the U.P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972, praying that he is landlord of the premises 41, Sewak Ashram Road, Dehradun having number of flats and Smt. Saroj Bala, the then Additional District Judge, Dehradun was the tenant in a portion of the said premises on the first floor and a garage on ground floor of the said premises was under her possession. One Sri Jodh Singh Chauhan in collusion and by playing fraud got allotment of a portion of the first floor, he continued to keep his car in the said garage. The said allotment order date...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Raju Majumdar and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-21-2004
Reported in: II(2005)ACC633; 2006ACJ2151
P.C. Verma, J.1. These appeals have been filed by the appellant-respondent National Insurance Co. Ltd. against the separate awards passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Uttarkashi, on different dates, in Motor Accident Claim Case Nos. 1 of 1996, 18 of 1995, 21 of 1995, 14 of 1996, 4 of 1996, 6 of 1996, 7 of 2001, 31 of 1995, 32 of 1995, 12 of 1996, 14 of 2001, 32 of 2001, 15 of 1996, 23 of 1995, 8 of 2000, 19 of 2000, 20 of 1996, 20 of 2000, 10 of 2000, 40 of 2001, 18 of 2000, 16 of 2000, 9 of 2000, 15 of 2000 and 6 of 2001 respectively.2. At the request of learned Counsel for the appellant all these appeals are being heard together and decided by one and common order as the facts and questions involved are common.3. In some of the appeals applications under Section 5 of the Limitation Act are pending for disposal. The learned Counsel for the respondent has no objection, if such applications are allowed. Hence applications under Section 5 of Limitation Act are allowed. The del...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Raghuvir Singh and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-21-2004
Reported in: IV(2005)ACC438; 2006ACJ2542
P.C. Verma, J.1. These appeals have been filed by the appellant-respondent National Insurance Co. Ltd. against the separate awards made by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Uttarkashi, on different dates in Motor Accident Claim Case Nos. 1 of 1996, 18 of 1995, 21 of 1995, 14 of 1996, 4 of 1996, 6 of 1996, 7 of 2001, 31 of 1995, 32 of 1995, 12 of 1996, 14 of 2001, 32 of 2001, 15 of 1996, 23 of 1995, 8 of 2000, 19 of 2000, 20 of 1996, 20 of 2000, 10 of 2000, 40 of 2001, 18 of 2000, 16 of 2000, 9 of 2000, 15 of 2000 and 6 of 2001 respectively.2. At the request of learned Counsel for the appellant all these appeals are being heard together and decided by one and common order as the facts and questions involved are common.3. In some of the appeals applications under Section 5 of the Limitation Act are pending for disposal. Learned Counsel for the respondents has no objection, if such applications are allowed. Hence, applications under Section 5 of Limitation Act are allowed. The delay in fil...
In Re: U.P. Carbide and Chemicals Ltd.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-20-2004
Reported in: [2005]63SCL419(NULL)
ORDERP.C. Pant, J.1. These objections have been filed on behalf of Indian Overseas Bank in Miscellaneous Company Application No. 8/2001 against the report No. 308/2004, dated 2-12-2003 of the Official Liquidator for distribution of claim to the Ex-workers and Financial Institutions under Section 529A of the Companies Act, 1956.2. Brief facts of the case are that the Board of Industries and Financial Reconstruction (BIFR) recommended winding up of the company M/s. U.P. Chemical and Carbide Ltd. (hereinafter referred to 'UPCCL') before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in the year 1994. The said High Court vide its order dated 19-7-1994 directed the winding up of UPCCL as no one opposed it nor company filed any appeal against the reference order of BIFR. Consequently, Official Liquidator under directions of the Court started taking steps for winding up of the company. After exchange of affidavits and counter-affidavit in the year 1996 the Official Liquidator sought permission to ...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Shadi Ram
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-20-2004
Reported in: 2006ACJ2321
Rajesh Tandon, J.1.Heard the learned counsel for the parties.2. All appeals have been filed against a common judgment and award dated 1.8.1995 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Tehri Garhwal.3. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present appeals are that respondents-claimants have filed as many as 21 claim petitions registered as M.A.C. Case Nos. 10 to 31 of 1989 for grant of compensation on account of injuries sustained by the claimants and also on account of death of some of the passengers travelling by bus No. URM 8612 involved in the accident. Petitioners have alleged that on 30.11.1988 bus No. URM 8612 was started from Moridhar for going to Uttarkashi. The bus was carrying a marriage party. At about 2.15 p.m. when the bus reached near Jadipani, it met with accident and rolled into a khad. All the passengers travelling by the bus sustained injuries in the accident out of which five passengers succumbed to the injuries sustained. The owner of the bus was Rukaman...
Ramjilal Keshav Dutt and ors. Vs. Smt. Devki Devi and anr.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-20-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC218
Rajesh Tandon, J.1. Heard the Counsel for the parties.2. By the present Writ Petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 28.10.2002 passed by the Prescribed Authority as well as order-dated 7.5.2004 passed in Rent control Appeal No. 8 of 2002.3. Briefly stated an application was filed under Section 21 (1) (a) U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 stating therein that the petitioners are the tenants at the rate of Rs. 500/- per month of a shop situate at Moh. Lohara, Kesara Line, Ramnagar.3. Respondent No. 1 has submitted that Km. Kamla Sati wants to do the business of Lady readymade Garment and there in no place to accommodate her. Further the Petitioners have locked the shop and is doing the business of hotel 'carbet jungle resort' near Almora apart from that there is a restaurant and bar at Moh Ranikhet, Ramnagar.4. The petitioners therefore, absolutely have no requirement and the shop has been unnecessarily locked by the petitioners. Written statement was filed by the petition...
Chandan Singh Ginwal Vs. Badri Dutt Joshi
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-19-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC164
Rajesh Tandon, J.1. By the present revision the applicant has prayed for setting aside the order dated 28.8.1999 by which the suit of the plaintiff has been dismissed.2. Briefly stated, a suit was filed by the plaintiff for ejectment on the ground that he is owner and landlord of the building known as Glemco Outhouse Mallital, Nainital. In one of the rooms of this Outhouse located at ground floor the defendant is the tenant at the monthly rent of Rs. 600/-. According to the case of the plaintiff-applicant he purchased the building on 27.7.1991 and on the request of the defendant the same was given on the monthly rent of Rs. 600/- to the defendant. In the last week of November, 1991 Rs. 600/- was settled since December, 1991. The plaintiff has submitted that not even a single penny towards rent was paid by the defendant and alleged that the rent was Rs. 150/- per annum. The defendant has also filed a suit restraining the plaintiff from evicting forcibly.3. In view of the aforesaid facts...
United India Insurance Co. Vs. Narayani Devi and anr.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-19-2004
Reported in: I(2006)ACC387
Rajesh Tandon, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.2. Present appeal has been filed against the judgment and award dated 3.6.2002 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Tehri Garhwal.3. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the respondent No. 1 filed a claim petition under Section 166-Aot MV Act for the grant of compensation on account of death of her husband in a motor vehicle accident on 27.6.2000 at 1.00 p.m. at Pilwa near village Kemaria Suar on Chamiala-Nageshwarsaur motor road involving bus No. UGY 8713. The petitioner alleged that the accident took place due to rash and negligent driving of the bus.4. The respondents contested the claim. The owner of the vehicle has contended that the vehicle was comprehensively insured with the respondent No. 2, hence respondent No. 2 is liable to pay compensation.5. Appellant Insurance Company has alleged that the cheque by which insurance premium was paid had been dishonoured by the Bank and it ...
idrish Vs. State
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-16-2004
Reported in: 2004CriLJ4076
V.S. Sirpurkar, C.J.1. This is a criminal appeal by the accused Idrish, who has been convicted for an offence of murder on the allegation that on 30-6-1995 at about 6.30 p.m., he committed the murder of one Inderjeet by inflicting blows by a 'Patal' (country made sword) near the tube well at Police Station Kashipur.2. The prosecution story was that the deceased Inderjeet as also the accused Idrish were working in the farm known as Sharma Farm and on 28-6-1995, while the deceased Inderjeet was taking rest near the tube well, the accused Idrish was shouting for flying-away the birds, which come in the field. Inderjeet asked him not to shout because it was disturbing him and at that point of time, there was an oral altercation between the two. The prosecution pleaded that on account of this, the accused Idrish took this to be his insult and started bearing grudge against the deceased Inderjeet. The deceased Inderjeet, along with his brother Ranjeet (PW1) and Uncle Nikunj Das (PW2), used t...
Convent of Jesus and Mary Vs. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner and ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-16-2004
Reported in: (2005)ILLJ907UC
Rajesh Tandon, J.1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.By the present writ petition the petitioner has prayed for a writ of certiorari quashing the demand notice dated April 30, 2004 passed by the respondent No. 3.2. By the order dated May 2, 2003 as well as vide order dated April 30, 2004 demand has been made to the extent of Rs. 4,01,818/-which was levied on the petitioner for belated payment of contribution towards Employees Provident Fund and E.D.L.T. Admittedly against the order passed under Section 14B of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, the appeal lies before the Tribunal under Section 7(1) of the Act.3. In view of the aforesaid fact, the writ petition is not maintainable as alternative remedy is available to the petitioner. I have been informed that no Presiding Officer has been appointed in the Tribunal. The recovery proceedings shall, therefore, remain in abeyance.4. Subject to the aforesaid observation, the writ petition is dismiss...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »