Uttaranchal Court August 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.
Smt. Usha Sharma Vs. Prescribed Authority/Civil Judge (Jr. Div.) and o ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-08-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)AWC3870J(UHC)
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. By means of this writ petition, moved under Article 226 read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner/ landlord has sought writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 4.4.2005, passed by respondent No. 1 in Rent Control Case No. 3 of 2004, whereby the prescribed authority has stayed the proceedings under Section 21 (1) (a) of the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972, resorting to Section 10 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.2. Brief facts of the case, as narrated in the writ petition are that, the petitioner is owner and landlord of the shop in question, who filed an application (copy Annexure-2 to the writ petition) under Section 21 U) (a) of the U.P. Act No. 13 of 1972 for release of the shop. It appears that earlier proceedings under Section 12 of the aforesaid Act were initiated before the Rent Control and Eviction Officer on the ground that the defendant Nos. 1 and 2 have sublet the shop to the defendan...
Harish Lal Sah Vs. District Judge and anr.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-08-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)AWC3870G(UHC)
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. By means of this writ petition, moved under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner/landlord has sought writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 27.2.1999, passed by learned District Judge, Almora in Civil Revision No: 19 of 1997, whereby the order dated 12.12.1997 passed by Judge, Small Cause Court/Civil Judge (Senior Division), Almora, in S.C.C. Suit No. 3 of 1995 was set aside.'2. Brief facts of the case, as narrated in the writ petition are that, the petitioner instituted a S.C.C. Suit No. 3 of 1995 against respondent No. 2, Chandra Nath Sah (tenant) for recovery of arrears of rent and eviction from the shop in question which was part of house No. 207, Nanda Devi Marg, Lala Bazaar, Almora. It was alleged that petitioner along with Jagdish Lal Sah, Kailash Lal Sah and Deep Lal Sah, was a co-owner of the said house. Later, the shop in question came in the share of petitioner (plaintiff) in the family partition. Respondent No. 2...
Ram Saran Nautiyal Vs. State of Uttaranchal and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-05-2005
Reported in: 2006CriLJ1713
ORDERJ.C.S. Rawat, J.1. Heard Sri Sudhir Singh learned Counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A. and perused the record.2. This is a criminal revision against the order dated 10-12-1998 passed by Sri Ahmad Shamim, the then Special Judge, Gangsters & Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, Garhwal Mandal, Dehradun.3. The facts relating to this revision, in brief, are that respondent No. 2 Lata Gupta filed a complaint before the Special Judge under Section 2/3 of the U.P. Gangsters & Anti-social Activities (Prevention) Act against the revisionist, Harish Sehgal, Harbans Kapoor M.L.A., Dehradun, Vinod Chamoli and Surendra Agrawal with the allegations that there is a registered educational trust in the name of 'Guru Ram Das Educational Trust' (for short-the 'trust') which runs Guru Ram Das Academy since 1989 at 214-Rajpur Road, Dehradun. The trust has its property at 210, Rajpur Road, Dehradun and is the owner and in possession thereof. The accused persons are influential persons and...
Data Ram Vs. Shiv Prasad Bhatt and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-03-2005
Reported in: AIR2006Utr1
ORDERPrafulla C. Pant, J.1. This civil revision, preferred under Section 115 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, is directed against the order dated 5-2-2005 passed by learned District Judge, Tehri Garhwal, whereby the leave for filing suit under Section 92 of the Code has been granted to the plaintiffs. 2. Brief facts of the case are that, there is an ancient temple in District Tehri known as 'Maa Bhagwati Chandrabadni Siddha Peeth'. The plaintiffs (present respondents) filed a plaint before the learned District Judge, Tehri Garhwal with the application under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, stating that the plaintiffs are 'Pujarees' of said temple being Bhatt Brahmins of village Pujargaon. It was further stated that the revisionist (defendant) with the muscle power got possession of the temple and appointed himself Trustee. He stopped the plaintiffs from worshiping in the temple. Alleging misconduct on the part of the Trustees that they have not maintained the accounts ...
Commissioner of Sales Tax Vs. Omkar Rice Mills
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-02-2005
Reported in: [2006]144STC262(Uttra)
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. This sales tax revision was filed before the Allahabad High Court in the year 1992, from where it has been received by transfer by this Court, under Section 35 of the U.P. Reorganisation Act, 2000, for its disposal.2. The revision, preferred under Section 11(1) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, is directed against order dated November 25, 1991, passed by the Sales Tax Tribunal, Haldwani in S.A. Nos. 111 of 1991 and 146 of 1991, whereby the appeal of the assessee was allowed and the appeal of the Revenue was dismissed.3. The question of law involved in this revision is as under :Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Sales Tax Tribunal was justified in holding that the dealer had no mens rea in issuing form IIIC(2) to the purchaser, even though he had not actually paid any tax 4. Heard Shri Pitamber Maulekhi, learned counsel for the Revenue and Shri Syed Nadim, learned counsel for the assessee.5. The assessee is a dealer who runs a rice mill. He p...
State of U.P. Vs. Keshar Singh
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-02-2005
Reported in: 2006CriLJ503
J.C.S. Rawat, J.1. This is a criminal appeal preferred by the State against the judgment and order dated 13-12-1983 passed by the Sessions Judge, Uttarkashi in criminal appeal No. 19 of 1982 Kesar Singh v. State by which he allowed the appeal and set aside the conviction and sentence awarded by the Munsif Magistrate, Purola district Uttarkashi in criminal case No. 374 of 1980 by which the learned Magistrate convicted and sentenced the accused respondent under Section 51 of Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 to undergo imprisonment for two years and a fine of Rs. 2000/- and default of payment of fine to further undergo 3 months S.I.2: The brief facts are that a complaint was filed before the trial Court alleging therein that on 24-11-1980 at 7 a.m. from motor road in village Natwar four pods of musk weighing 10 Tolas 5 Anas worth Rs. 12,000/- was recovered from the possession of the respondent. The prosecution led evidence and the respondent in his statement Under Section 313 Cr. P.C. den...
Surendra Kumar Juneja Vs. State of Uttaranchal and anr.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-01-2005
Reported in: II(2006)BC536
J.C.S. Rawat, J.1. The petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the orders dated 29.1.2002 and 26.3.2002 passed by Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haldwani and Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haldwani respectively.2. Heard Mr. S.K. Mandal, learned Counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A.3. Perusal of the record reveals that the respondent No. 2 filed a complaint before the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Haldwani under Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act and the same was registered as Complaint Case No. 1241/2002. Thereafter, the accused applicant was summoned under Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act. The applicant filed certain representations against the summoning order and the said representations were taken up for disposal on 24.3.1999, but none was present from the side of the accused-applicant and the application was rejected and the non-bailable warrants were issued against the accused-applicant. On 29.1.2002 the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, ...
Kishan Chandra Pant Vs. State
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-01-2005
Reported in: I(2006)DMC714
Irshad Hussain, J.1. Both these accused Smt. Nirmala Pant and Kishan Chandra Pant, mother and son were convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life under Sections 302/109, I.P.C. and R.I. for three years under Section 498A, I.P.C. per judgment dated 28.11.1998 passed by then Sessions Judge, Almora in sessions Trial No. 16/1992. Khila Nand Pant was acquitted in the case.2. Smt. Manju Pant deceased of the case was the wife of accused Kishan Chandra Pant. They were married in the year 1984. The couple was residing in their house in Mohalla Ranidahra Road, Almora along with accused Smt. Nirmala Pant and Khila Nand Pant, the mother and father of the husband. The couple have school going son and a daughter.3. According to the prosecution Mr. Harish Chandra Pant, Advocate (PW 3) gave telephonic message to Police, P.S. Almora in the morning of 21.2.1991 that daughter-in-law of Khila Nand Pant had committed suicide by hanging in her marital home. This information was recorded in the general...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›