Uttaranchal Court September 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.
Dr. Satish JaIn Etc. Vs. State of Uttaranchal and anr.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Sep-28-2005
Reported in: 2006CriLJ1172
ORDERJ.C.S. Rawat, J.1. The challenge under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code (for the short 'Cr.P.C.') is the order of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar dated 14-11-2003 (annexure 11 to the petition) passed in complaint case No. 5292 of 2003 Ashok Kumar Khurana v. Dr. Satish Jain and Ors. P.S. Rudrapur district Udham Singh Nagar by which the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate took the cognizance and summoned the applicants under Sections 420 and 406 IPC.2. The facts in brief relating to these petitions are that the respondent No. 2 Ashok Kumar Khurana filed complaint case No. 5292 of 2003 in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar against the applicants and Smt. Manju Jain under Sections 420/406 IPC. It is alleged that the respondent No. 2 was resident of Adarsh Colony Rudrapur (Udham Singh Nagar). It was alleged that the relations between the parties were cordial and the applicants generally used to visit the house of the respondent No. 2....
Bhuwan Chandra Binwal Vs. Kumaon University and anr.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Sep-27-2005
Reported in: AIR2006Utr9
Cyriac Joseph, C.J.1. The petitioner is a final year student of B.A. Degree Course in the Almora Campus (Soban Singh Jeena Campus) of Kumaon University. He has filed this writ petition praying for quashing Annexure-3 order dated 19-9-2005 by which the petitioner was informed by the first respondent-Registrar, Kumaon University that according to Admission Rule 1.12 and the provisions of the Constitution of the Students' Union, it was not possible to permit the petitioner to be a candidate in the election to the Students' Union for the year 2005-2006. The petitioner also prays for a direction to the respondents not to cancel the nomination of the petitioner for the post of Vice-President ot the Students' Union, Soban Singh Jeena Campus, Almora for the year 2005-2006.2. It is not disputed that according to Clause 1.12 of the Admission Rules, a student who had taken regular admission but could not appear in the examination due to illness or such other valid reasons, can be given readmissio...
Ahuja Goods Carrier (P) Ltd. Vs. State of Uttaranchal
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Sep-23-2005
Reported in: II(2006)BC572
B.C. Kandpal, J.1. This petition has been filed under Section 482, Cr.P.C. by the applicants for setting aside the summoning order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Haldwani on 30.1.2004 and the revisional order passed by Sessions Judge, Nainital on 13.9.2004.2. Brief facts giving rise to this petition are that the proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act were instituted by respondents 2, 3 and 4 before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Haldwani. The evidence under Sections 200 and 202, Cr.P.C. were recorded before the learned Judicial Magistrate ! and thereafter petitioners were summoned vide Order dated 30.1.2004.3. Against the aforesaid summoning order the petitioners appeared before the lower Court and filed their objections. The complainant also filed his reply before the Court of learned Magistrate. The learned Court after having perused the entire material on record rejected the objection of the petitioner vide order dated 19.8.2004. The p...
Janpal Singh Vs. State of U.P.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Sep-23-2005
Reported in: 2006FAJ112
B.C. Kandpal, J.1. This criminal revision arises out against the judgment and order dated 07-01-1985 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (Special Judge), Nainital in Criminal Appeal No. 208 of 1982 thereby upholding the conviction and sentence of 6 (six) months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000/-and in default of payment of fine further rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months as recorded by the Judicial Magistrate, Nainital vide order dated 07-09-1982 in Criminal Case No. 494 of 1981 under Section 7/16 Prevention of Food Adulteration Act.2. Brief facts giving rise to this revision are that on 28-02-1978 Food Inspector - Sri S.S. Chilwal stopped the revisionist at about 08:15 a.m. on the Nainital Road crossing Rudfapur. The latter was carrying milk for sale. The Food Inspector served the revisionist with a notice in Form No. VI of his intention to take a sample and then purchased a sample of 660 ml. of milk after paying its price. The sample was sealed in a separa...
Sakila Vs. Banarasi Das and anr.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Sep-22-2005
Reported in: AIR2006Utr29
ORDERPrafulla C. Pant, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. This revision is directed against the order dated 5-4-2004, passed in Execution Case No. 01 of 1998 by learned III Fast Track Court/Addl. District Judge, Haridwar.3. Brief facts of the case are that a civil suit No. 92 of 1990 was instituted by plaintiff/decree holder, Banarasi Das, against the defendant/judgment-debtor, Jamshed, Ali, which was decreed on 10-11-1997 for specific performance of contract dated 28-6-1988. It appears that in execution of said decree, the sale deed was got executed on 21-3-1998/8-5-1998 through the Court. Meanwhile objections were filed on 16-4-1998 by the judgment-debtor (respondent No. 2), which were rejected on 22-4-1998. It appears that against said order the defendant/judgment debtor preferred a revision No. 31 of 1998 and the same was also dismissed on 23-2-2001. Meanwhile, a suit No. 12 of 2001 appears to have been filed by . Smt. Sakila (revisionist), who is wife of Sri Jamshed All...
Devi Dutt and ors. Vs. State of Uttaranchal
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Sep-17-2005
Reported in: 2006CriLJ1748
J.C.S. Rawat, J.1. This criminal appeal arises out against the judgment and order dated 21-7-1984 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (Special Judge), Nainital in S. T. No. 180 of 1981 whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the appellants to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- under Section 323/34, IPC and in default of payment of fine each of the appellants to undergo R.I. for a period of three months. Appellant Shanti Ballabh was convicted and sentenced under Section 304, Part I, IPC to undergo R.I. for a period of 3 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo six month R.I.2. At the time of hearing of argument of the learned Counsel for the parties, the learned Counsel for the appellants submitted that appellant-Hari Nandan (in Appeal No. 743 of 2001) has died during the pendency of appeal. In this regard, a report was called for from the chief Judicial Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar, who sent his report dated 4-6-2002 about ...
Mohd. HussaIn and ors. Vs. State of Uttaranchal and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Sep-17-2005
Reported in: 2(2006)DMC586
B.C. Kandpal, J.1. This petition under Section 482, Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants for quashing the charge-sheet dated 30.11.2003 submitted in Case Crime No. 505 of 2003 under Sections 498A, 420, 506, 120B, 323, I.P.C. and 3/4, Dowry Prohibition Act. The petitioners have also prayed for setting aside the summoning order dated 13.1.2004 passed by Civil Judge (J.D.)/Judicial Magistrate, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar in Criminal Case No. 44 of 2004, State v. Mohd. Hussain & Others.2. Brief facts giving rise to this petition are that the opposite party No. 2, namely, Mohd. Umar lodged a First Information Report against the petitioners under Sections 498A, 420,506,120B, 323, I.P.C. and 3/4, Dowry Prohibition Act. The police investigated the matter and submitted the charge-sheet against the petitioners on 30.11.2003.3. Learned Magistrate after having perused the charge-sheet took the cognizance and issued the summons to the petitioners vide order dated 13.1.2004.4. Feeling a...
Atar Singh Vs. Additional Commissioner (Administration), Garhwal Manda ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Sep-13-2005
Reported in: AIR2006Utr13
ORDERRajesh Tandon, J.1. By the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 2nd July, 2002 passed by the respondent No. 1 in Revision No. 25/1999-2000 25/1999-2000 so far as it has made a rider for cross-examining Sri Padam Singh i.e. respondent No. 2.2. Briefly stated, a suit for partition of the joint bhumidhari land was filed by Sri Padam Singh respondent No. 2. The said suit was decreed on 30-5-1996 ignoring the family settlement dated 14th January, 1971.3. The petitioner has preferred an appeal against the judgment and decree dated 30th May, 1996 passed by the Assistant Collector. The appeal was numbered as Z.A. Appeal No. 29/1995-96. The appeal was allowed by the Additional Commissioner on 14th January, 1999 and the Additional Commissioner remanded the matter back for fresh decision after framing issue No. 6 on the point of family settlement dated 14th January, 1971.4. Issue No. 6 was framed with regard to the fact as to whet...
Jagdish Lal Sah Vs. A.D.J., Iind Fast Track Court and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Sep-05-2005
Reported in: 2005(4)AWC3414(UHC)
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. By means of this petition, moved under Article 227 read with Article 226 of Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought direction, quashing the impugned judgments and orders dated 31.3.1998 and 12.7.2002, passed by respondent Nos. 2 and 1 respectively, whereby the release application of the petitioner/landlord was rejected, and the appeal was also dismissed.2. Brief facts of the case, as narrated in the petition, are that the petitioner is the landlord of accommodation in question, consisting of three rooms, a kitchen, bathroom and verandah, situated in 3rd floor of house No. 97/98, Bara Bazar, Mallital, Nainital. In said accommodation, Shri Gopal San was the tenant on rent at the rate of Rs. 500 per month. On 29.11.1987, the petitioner moved an application under Section 21(1)(a) of U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulations of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972, before the Prescribed Authority, Nainital. for release of the above accommodation. During the pendenc...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›