Uttaranchal Court May 2005 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.
N.K. Paliwal, Advocate Vs. Special Judge and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: May-26-2005
Reported in: AIR2005Utr72
ORDERB.C. Kandpal, J. 1. By way of this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for certiorari quashing the order dated 31-5-1989 passed by in Civil Revision No. 319 of 186 Adarsh Colonizers v. Sri N.K. Paliwal and Ors. by the Special Judge. Saharanpur (now District Haridwar).2. Brief facts giving rise to this petition are that the petitioner Sri N. K. Paliwal filed a suit for specific performance against the defendants/respondents No. 3 to 5 on the ground that the defendants/respondent No. 3 is a firm and rest of the defendants/respondents are its partner.3. As per the plaint, the defendants/respondents purchased a land at Roorkee Road in order to establish a colony. The plaintiff/petitioner also agreed to purchase a plot and paid an amount of Rs. 500/- as advance on 9-7-1962. Thereafter, the plain-tiff/petitioner also paid the amount in instalment and the agents of the defendants/respondents handed over the possession of the plot in the plaintiff/petitioner.4. The plaint further reve...
Jasvinder Singh and anr. Vs. State of Uttaranchal
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: May-26-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ3384
Irshad Hussain, J.1. These appeals and revision arise out of the judgment dated 1-10-2002 passed by the then Sessions Judge, Udham Singh Nagar at Rudrapur in Sessions Trial No. 345/2001. Five accused faced trial. Out of those five, Sukhdev alias Satnam and Tejendra Singh were not held guilty and acquitted. Accused Smt. Veero Kaur and her two sons accused-Dilbagh Singh and Jasvinder Singh were convicted and sentenced to imprisonment as under:-____________________________________________________________SI. Name of Convicted SentenceNo. the accused under Sec- of imprison- tions ment1. Dllbagh Singh (a) under Section Imprisonment2. and Jasvinder 302/149,I.P.C. for life. Singh (b) under Section Rigorous im- 307/149,I.P.C. prisonment for five years, (c) under Section 148 Rigorous im- I.P.C. prisonment for two years.3. Smt. Veero Kaur (a) under Section Imprisonment 302/149, I.P.C. for life. (b) under Section Rigorous im- 307/149, I.P.C. prisonment for five years. (c) under Section Rigorous im...
Uttaranchal Training and Employment Karmachari Sangharsh Samiti Vs. St ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: May-24-2005
Reported in: AIR2005Utr58
Cyriac Joseph, C.J.1. The petitioner claims to be an association of the employees of the Directorate of Training and Employment under the Government of Uttaranchal. The grievance of the petitioner is that the head quarters of the Directorate of Training and Employment at Haldwani is being shifted to Deharadun on the basis of Annexure 3 Letter of the fourth respondent who is a Minister for Technical Education; Labour, Employment and Training in the Government of Uttaranchal. According to Mr. K. P. Upadhyaya, learned Standing Counsel for the State of Uttaranchal, what was proposed in Annexure 3 Letter of the fourth respondent is not a shifting of the Directorate of Training and Employment from Haldwani, but the office of the State Council for Vocational Training. Whether it is the Directorate of Training and Employment or it is the office of the State Council for Vocational Training, it is for the Government to decide where it should be located. It is not for the High Court under Article...
State Industrial Development Corporation Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: May-20-2005
Reported in: [2005(106)FLR188]
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 award dated 12.3.2001 (annexure-2), recovery certificate dated 10.9.2001 (annexure-3) and citation dated 20.4.2005 (annexure-7) passed by the respondents No. 1, 3 and 6 respectively.Briefly stated that respondent No. 4 Arvind Kumar is an employee of the petitioner and was working in Jaspur Spinning Mill since 1991. He raised an industrial dispute, which was referred to Labour Court III, Kanpur for adjudication under Section 4-K of U.P. Industrial Disputes Act. The Labour Court passed in award on 12.3.2001 holding that the termination of respondent No. 4 is illegal and he was directed to be reinstated. The workman moved application before the Deputy Labour Commissioner, Kanpur Region, Kanpur under Section 6-H(1) of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, for implementation of award and the Deputy Labour Commissioner, Kanpur issued a recover...
Devi Singh and anr. Vs. Pratap Singh and anr.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: May-18-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ3792
ORDERJ.C.S. Rawat, J.1. Heard Sri Kuldeep Rawal learned counsel for the applicants and Sri G. S. Sandhu learned A.G.A. for the State.2. This is a petition under Section 482, Cr. P.C. for quashing the judgment and order dated 2-7-1983 passed by the Sessions Judge, Pithoragarh in Criminal Revision No. 5/1983 Pratap Singh v. Deb Singh.3. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent No. 1 moved an application before the S.D.M. under Section 133, Cr. P.C. alleging therein that there was a public path to the other villages and the applicants had created constructions on the public way. Thereafter, vide order dated 12-3-1981, the S.D.M. directed the applicants either to remove the obstructions of the public way or to present in his Court on the date fixed for showing cause why the aforesaid conditional order should not be made absolute. The applicants filed their reply of the aforesaid order, in which it was stated that there was no Bandobasti Rasta and nor the applicants had created any o...
Suresh Chandra Auli Vs. Uttaranchal Van Vikas Nigam and anr.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: May-13-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)AWC3107(UHC); [2005(106)FLR537]
Rajesh Tandon, J.1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 27th July, 1999 and order dated 7.2.1998 as mentioned in order dated 27th July, 1999. Further has prayed for a mandamus directing the opposite parties to re-consider the case of the petitioner for appointment under the provision of Government Servant Dying-in-Harness Rules, 1974.2. Briefly stated, the father of the petitioner was appointed on daily wage basis, on 10.12.1982 on the post, of daily sealer (passing munshi) Depot No. 2 U. P. Van Nigam Cheed Depot, Kanakpur, district Pithoragarh.3. According to the petitioner his father died on 4th March 1996. Father of the petitioner worked more than 13 years. He was only the bread-earner in the family and after his death the whole family of the petitioner has come on the verge of starvation. The applicant filed application for appointment under the provision of the Dying-in-Harness Rules, but the same was rejected i...
State of Uttaranchal and anr. Vs. Smt. Pholwati and anr.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: May-13-2005
Reported in: [2005(106)FLR812]
Rajesh Tandon, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.2. By the present writ petition the petitioners have challenged the award dated 23.1.2002 passed by the respondent No. 2.3. Briefly stated that the respondent No. 1 had been working on the post of part time Sweeper since 1982 under the control of Executive Engineer, Lakhwar Construction Dam Division-II, Dak Pathar, Dehradun on Rs. 75/- per month. The respondent No. 1 raised an industrial dispute in the year 1998 and conciliation proceedings were initiated. After failure of conciliation proceedings, the dispute was referred for adjudication to the Labour Court, Dehradun. The reference has been made under Section 4-K of the U.P. Industrial Act, 1947 by the Stale Government before the Labour Court to the following effect:D;k lsok;kstd }kjk viuh efgyk Jfed Jherh Qwyorh in va'kdkfyd Lohij dks iw.kZdkfyd Lohij u cuk;k tkuk mfpr rFkk @ vFkok oS/kkfud gS] ;fn ugh rks laacaf/kr Jfed D;k ykHk@vuqrks'k ikus dh vf/kdkjh.kh gS rFkk vU; f...
Smt. Brijesh Kumar Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: May-13-2005
Reported in: [2005(106)FLR569]
Rajesh Tandon, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties.By the present writ petition the petitioner has prayed for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to issue appointment letter to the petitioner as Class-IV employee under Dying in Harness Rules, 1974.2. Briefly stated the husband of the petitioner Sri Vijai Kumar who was working as daily wages for a continuous period of 15 years, she has accrued a right to seek appointment under Dying in Harness Rules.3. At the time of filing of the writ petition, on 2.11.1999 the Court had passed the following order:Heard Sri S.P. Shila learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.The petitioner claims that her husband Shri Vijai Kumar died on 25.11.1997, he worked with the respondents as daily wager employee on Class-IV post from 1983 till his death.The petitioner moved an application on 15.4.98 and 3.8.98 for appointment under Dying in Harness Rules. The petitioner has not been appointed. The p...
(Smt.) Devki Devi Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: May-12-2005
Reported in: [2005(106)FLR344]
Rajesh Tandon, J.1. Heard the learned Counsel for the parties at length.By the present writ petition the petitioner has prayed for the issue of a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to release family pension in favour of the petitioner.2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that the husband of the petitioner late Sri Chandra Ballabh Joshi was posted as Head Constable in P.A.C who retired after superannuating in the year 1969. Her husband was getting pension during his life time. On 9.3.1979 the husband of the petitioner received a letter from Commandant, 8th Btn. P.A.C. Bareilly that in case of the death of husband, wife will be entitled for family pension. The husband of the petitioner died on 22.6.2000. The petitioner has stated that after the death of her husband she moved a representation on 29.12.2001 for granting her family pension. She also wrote an application on 18.5.2002 to the Accountant General U.P....
Alpana Shankar Vs. Union Bank of India and anr.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: May-11-2005
Reported in: II(2006)BC452
Cyriac Joseph, C.J. 1. The petitioner was sanctioned a housing loan by respondent No. 1-Union Bank of India in the year 1999 and the amount was disbursed to her. She could not repay the loan amount in terms of the agreement. According to the petitioner, the loan amount could not be repaid in terms of the agreement due to failure of business and due to some family problems. The respondents issued to the petitioner a notice dated 9.10.2003 under Section 13(2) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 directing her to pay a sum of Rs. 15,73,644.00 together with interest from 1.8.2003 with monthly interests as per the terms and conditions of the loan document executed by her and to discharge her liabilities in full within 60 days from the date of receipt of the notice, failing which the Bank would be constrained to enforce the securities created by her in favour of the Bank by exercising the rights given under the said Act. ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »