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.
Brijesh Kumar Tyagi and anr. Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-05-2004
Reported in: I(2005)ACC826
Rajesh Tandon, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties at length.2. Present appeal has been prefered against the judgment and award dated 20.11.2003 passed by M.A.C.T. Hardwar, awarding a sum of Rs. 1,22,000/- to the claimant-respondent Nos. 2 and 3.3. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present appeal are that claimants filed a claim petition on account of the death of Nitin in a motor vehicle accident. The claimants have submitted that on 13.12.1998, deceased was standing at Bus Stand Meerut for going to Hapur. At 6.30 a.m. bus No. UP 15 F-9469 which was being driven by Sri Nanak Chand rashly and negligently came from the side of Meerut City and hit deceased Nitin. The deceased sustained fatal injuries in the accident and succumbed instantaneously. The deceased was earning Rs. 4,000/- by tutoring the students. The claimants claimed a sum of Rs. 1,35,000/- as compensation.4. Opposite party No. 3-National Insurance Company has contested the case and filed written stateme...
Vijay Kumar Maurya Alias Krishna Kumar Vs. Prescribed Authority/Civil ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-04-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC380
Rajesh Tandon, J.1. Heard Sh. Arvind Vashist learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sh. Gopal Narain Counsel for the respondents.2. By the present writ petition the petitioner has prayed for the issue of a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 2.7.2004 passed by the respondent No. 1 dismissing the application of the petitioner under Order IX, Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure.3. Brief facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that the application under Section 21 (a) of the U.P. Act of 1972, was filed by the respondent praying for the eviction of the petitioner from the shop.4. The application was filed as back as in 2001 and it was decreed ex-parte on 11.2.2004. The written statement has already been filed by the petitioner. Thereafter both the parties were directed to file their evidence in the form of affidavits within a period of 3 weeks from the filing of the certified copy of the order.5. In Ram Nath Sao @ Ram Nath Sa...
Ester India Employees Union Vs. Presiding Officer and anr.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-03-2004
Reported in: (2005)ILLJ356UC
Rajesh Tandon, J.1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties at length. By the present writ petition the petitioner has prayed for setting aside of the order dated September 11, 2003. Further prayer was made directing the respondent No. 1 to decide the impugned reference on merit.2. Brief facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that Ester Industries Ltd. is a company registered under the Companies Act, having its registered office at Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar and Head Office at 75-76, Amrit Nagar. The controversy in the present writ petition is as to whether the Industrial Tribunal has power to look into the validity of reference made by the State Government as well as scope of Section 4-K read with Schedule I of U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.3. The counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the claim of the workmen for payment of arrears of bonus became due for the period 2000-01 at the rate of 20%. The bonus claimed by the workmen was withheld by the man...
State of Uttaranchal Through District Information Officer Vs. Addition ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-03-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC160
Rajesh Tandon, J.1. Heard Sri V.K. Kholi learned Counsel for the respondent No. 3 and learned Standing Counsel.2. By the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 25.8.2000 and 19.6.2002 (Annexure 6 and 7 to the writ petition) passed by the District Judge, Dehradun.3. Brief facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that the respondent No. 3-Om Prakash Sukhija being the owner of the Dehradun Property No. 9/ 4, Ashly Hall, Ground Floor had let out the property to the tenant-District Information Officer, Dehradun @ Rs. 150/- per month. The respondent No. 3 has filed an application under Section 21 (8) of the U.P. Act, 1972 for enhancement of the rent to the extent of Rs. 6,666.66 on the ground that the market value of the property is about more than Rs. 8 lakhs and the area of premises is 600 sq. ft. The respondent No. 3 has stated that the market value of property being Rs. 8 lakhs and he is entitled for a sum equivalent to one-twelfth of ten percent o...
Sushila Devi and ors. Vs. ShaukIn Singh and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-03-2004
Reported in: 2006ACJ1961
P.C. Verma and B.S. Verma, JJ.1. This appeal has been preferred under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against the judgment and award dated 6.11.1998 passed in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 119 of 1995 by Mr. R.K. Rastogi, the then District Judge/Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chamoli (in short 'the Tribunal'), whereby learned Tribunal has allowed the claim petition and awarded Rs. 50,000 in favour of claimants-appellants as against opposite party Nos. 1 to 3-respondent Nos. 1 to 3 along with 12 per cent interest per annum. However, the petition was dismissed against New India Assurance Co. Ltd., opposite party No. 4-respondent No. 4.2. Brief facts, giving rise to the present appeal, are that on 5.6.1995 Shiv Prasad, father of claimant Nos. 2 to 5 and husband of claimant No. 1 was travelling by bus No. USY 3268 belonging to opposite party Nos. 1 and 2-respondent Nos. 1 and 2 and driven by opposite party No. 3-respondent No. 3, from Pokhari to Karnprayag. The bus was overcrowd...
Atol Singh Bisht Vs. Collector and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-02-2004
Reported in: (2005)ILLJ668UC
Rajesh Tandon, J. 1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of mandamus directing the Respondent No. 1 to pay the amount in pursuance of the recovery certificate dated August 27, 2002 issued by the respondent No. 2.2. Brief facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that the petitioner is the workman, who was employed as daily wager. Petitioner has raised an industrial dispute and claimed permanent status with all benefits. The dispute was referred to the Labour Court. The Labour Court, after hearing the parties, passed an order regularising the petitioner and other workmen with all benefits of permanent employee w.e.f. October 1, 1988. An award to that effect was passed on March 28, 1995. The said award was challenged by the respondent No. 3 before the Allahabad High Court in Writ Petition No. 12331 of 1996. On February 13, 1998, the said writ petition was dismissed and the award was confirmed.3. Thereafter, respondent No. 3 approached the Hon'ble S...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›