Uttaranchal Court April 2010 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.
Rajesh Upadhyay S/O Late Shri Cheetanand Upadhyay Manager, Programming ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-20-2010
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. Both these revisions are directed against the same judgment or order dated 14.05.2008, passed in case No. 32 of 2007, by Principal Judge, Family Court, Dehradun, whereby said court has directed that Rajesh Upadhyay (husband) to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs. 5,000/- per month to each one of the four namely Mithlesh Upadhyay (wife) Km. Rimi (daughter), Rakshita (daughter) and master Shardul (son) under Section 125 of Cr.P.C.2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the lower court record.3. Brief facts of the case are that Rajesh Upadhyay got married to Mithlesh on 2.10.1989. Out of the wedlock three children namely Rimi, Rakshita and shardul were born. The wife and the three children moved an application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. alleging that Rajesh Upadhyay having means, has neglected to maintain them, and they are unable to maintain themselves. It is pleaded by them that Rajesh Upadhyay has earning of Rs. 50,000/- per month as salary from Oil...
Dinesh Chandra Pokhriyal and ors. Vs. K. L. Arya and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-20-2010
Tarun Agarwala, J.1. Heard Mr. Jagdish Singh Bisht and Mr. Jitendra Chaudhary, Advocates for the applicants, Mr. Rajendra Dobhal, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. V. Kaparvan and Mr. Sudhir Singh, Advocates for the respondents.2. Objection against the affidavit of compliance has been filed by the applicants, which is taken on record.3. The applicants are aggrieved by the non-compliance of the order of the writ court as affirmed by the Supreme Court and have consequently filed the present contempt application under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act. It transpires that the applicants were working in the Forest Corporation and their services were retrenched in the year 1995. The applicants raised an industrial dispute with regard to the validity and legality of their order of termination. The labour court gave an award holding that the dispensation of service of the applicants was valid and that the employers were justified in terminating their services. The labour court also found ...
Phool Singh S/O Shri Bala Vs. State of U.P. (Now State of Uttarakhand)
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-19-2010
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. This revision is directed against the judgment and order dated 05.01.1988, passed by First Additional Sessions Judge, Saharanpur, in criminal appeal No. 66 of 1983, whereby said court has dismissed the appeal and affirmed the conviction and sentence recorded by the trial court [Judicial Magistrate (Economic Offences) Roorkee] under Section 7/16 of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, against the revisionist Phool Singh, in criminal case No. 386 of 1982.2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.3. Lower court record of the case could not be traced out even after the best efforts, after this revision is received by this Court under Section 35 of U.P. Reorganization Act, 2000 (Central Act No. 29 of 2000) for its disposal, from Allahabad High Court.4. Brief facts of the case are that P.W.1 Tej Pal Singh, Food Inspector, on 29.12.1980, at about 8:00 a.m. near DB Bend, Asifnagar, found the revisionist Phool Singh, taking buffalo milk for sale, in four canes. He pu...
Dharmanand S/O Late Mohananand, Vs. State of U.P. (Now State of Uttara ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-19-2010
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. This revision is directed against the judgment and order dated 31.08.1999, passed by the Sessions Judge, Chamoli, in Criminal Appeal No. 03 of 1996, whereby said court has dismissed the appeal affirming the conviction recorded by the trial court (Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chamoli), in Criminal Case No. 496 of 1992, State v. Dharmanand and Ors. relating to offences punishable under Section 452/34 and 427/34 of I.P.C., Police Station Ukhimath, District Chamoli (now District Rudraprayag).2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the lower court record.3. Brief facts of the case are that complainant P.W. 1 Bhyuraj Singh, moved an application under Section 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred as Cr.P.C.), before the District Magistrate, Chamoli, on 26.02.1992, on which the District Magistrate directed the In-charge of police station Ukhimath to register and investigate the case. It is alleged in the first information report by t...
Deewan Chandra Giri S/O Late Shri Hari Giri Vs. Pooran Giri S/O Late S ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-19-2010
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. This appeal preferred under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, is directed against the Judgment and decree dated 20.11.1998, passed by V Additional District Judge, Nainital, in civil appeal No. 97 of 1995, whereby said appeal has been dismissed, confirming the judgment and decree dated 11.12.1995, passed by Civil Judge(Jr. Div.) Nainital, in civil appeal No. 72 of 1994.2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused record.3. Brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that plaintiff/appellant instituted suit No. 72 of 1994, for a decree of permanent injunction against the defendant/respondent, restraining him from interfering in the peaceful possession of the plaintiff, over plot No. 276 situated in village Pandey Gaon, Bhimtal, District Nainital. It is pleaded by him that the parties to the suit are related to each other by following pedigree;(Common ancestor)_________________|_________________| |Mohan Giri Manorath Giri| ______________|_________...
Constable (M) Deepak Joshi and ors. Vs. State of Uttarakhand and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-19-2010
Tarun Agarwala, J.1. The respondents issued an advertisement dated 18th December, 2008 inviting applications for recruitment in the clerical cadre in the police department on the post of Constable (M) Clerk and Constable (M) Steno. As per Clause 11 of the advertisement, a procedure was provided for the recruitment process namely, a physical test and a written test. Candidates, who had passed the written test were thereafter required to give a typing test and, under Clause 14, the selected candidates were required to be subjected to a verification of their character/antecedents and, upon verification of the antecedents, appointment letters was to be issued for vacancies existing in various police departments. Under Clause 12 of the advertisement, it was provided that with regard to the recruitment process, directions could be given by the Director General of Police from time to time.2. Based on the aforesaid advertisement, the petitioners applied and underwent the various processes give...
Kundan Singh and ors. Vs. State of Uttaranchal (Now Uttarakhand) and a ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-17-2010
B.C. Kandpal, J.1. By means of this petition, moved under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioners have sought quashing of the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 3010 of 2001 State v. Mahesh Pokhariyal and Ors. under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 474 and 120(B) of I.P.C., pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun.2. Brief facts of the case are that on 22.07.2001, a First Information Report was lodged by respondent No. 2 - Amit Pokhariyal against the petitioners/applicants and co-accused - Smt. Vimla Devi. On the basis of the information, a case crime No. 58/455 of 2001 under Sections 420 and 120 of I.P.C. was registered at police Chowki Basant Vihar, District Dehradun. After completing the investigation of the case, chargesheet was submitted against the petitioners on 24.08.2001 under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 474 and 120(B) of I.P.C. Thereafter, a criminal Case No. 3010 of 2001 was registered against the applicants. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid proceedings pending ...
Pritam S/O Kabaj Singh Vs. State of U.P. (Now State of Uttarakhand)
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-17-2010
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. This revision is directed against the judgment and order dated 15.05.1987, passed by IV Addl. Sessions Judge, Saharanpur, in Criminal Appeal No. 225 of 1985, whereby the judgment and order dated 02.09.1985, passed by First Asstt. Sessions Judge, Saharanpur, in Sessions Trial No. 334 of 1983, convicting the accused/revisionist under Section 452, 366 and 376 of I.P.C. and sentence passed thereon, is affirmed.2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the lower court record.3. This revision is received from the Allahabad High court after its transfer under Section 35 of the U.P. Reorganization Act, 2000 (Central Act No. 29 of 2000), for its disposal.4. Prosecution story in brief is that complainant Phullu (since deceased), resident of Jhabredi, police station Jhabreda, District Saharanpur (now part of District Haridwar) lodged first information report (Ext. A -4) with police station Jhabreda on 07.02.1982, alleging that accused/revisionist Pritam, son of K...
Mohd HassIn S/O Hashik @ Hatam Vs. Smt. Arifa Sultana Daughter of Late ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-17-2010
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. This revision is directed against Judgment and order dated 27.07.2009, passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Udham Singh Nagar, Camp, Kashipur, in Criminal Misc. Case No. 132 of 2007, whereby, said court has directed the revisionist to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs. 2500/- per month, to the respondent, under Section 125 of Cr.P.C.2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the papers on record.3. Brief facts of the case are that the revisionist Mohd. Haseen got married to respondent Arifa Sultana on 20th of August 1993. Five sons were born out of the wedlock, but they could not survive, and died as infants. It is alleged by the respondent in her application under Section 125 of Cr.P.C that the revisionist harassed the respondent for non-fulfillment of demand of dowry, and compelled her to leave her husband's house on 15.05.2007. She has pleaded that she is unable to maintain herself. She has further alleged that the revisionist, who is engaged in ...
Mahesh Joshi and anr. Vs. State of Uttaranchal and anr.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-17-2010
B.C. Kandpal, J.1. This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants/petitioners for quashing the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 4346 of 2005, State v. Mahesh Joshi and Anr. under Sections 148(A), 323, 506 of I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, C.B.I., Dehradun.2. Brief facts of the case are that petitioner No. 1 Mahesh Joshi got married to respondent No. 2 Meeta Joshi on 28.06.2004 as per Hindu Rites and Customs. Respondent No. 2 lodged the First Information Report against the applicant No. 1 and his family members on 23.07.2004 with the allegation that they have harassed and tortured her for non-fulfillment their demand of dowry. It has further alleged that they demanded a motorcycle and Rs. 20.00 lakhs for fulfilling their demand of dowry. On the basis of the first information report a case crime No. 62 of 2004, under Sections 498-A, 323 and 506 of I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act was register...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »