Uttaranchal Court December 2012 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.
State of Uttarakhand and Others Vs. Daya Ram
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Dec-04-2012
Barin Ghosh, C. J. Oral: 1. We are not inclined to interfere with the judgment of the Tribunal in the instant case. We, accordingly, dismiss the writ petition. 2. In the instant case, facts, to which there is no dispute, are that the respondent was substantively appointed as Lekhpal and was working as such immediately before 22nd September, 2004. On 22nd September, 2004, an order was issued by the District Magistrate, Dehradun, whereby and under, it was stated that a Departmental Promotion Committee was constituted, which Committee made recommendation, having considered the entire service records of the respondent, that he may be permitted to serve in the post of Revenue Inspector. The order, further, provided that, in view of such recommendation, respondent is being transferred / promoted to the post of Revenue Inspector on temporary basis, which shall continue until training of Revenue Inspectors is made, or appointment of Revenue Inspectors, trained from Chief Revenue Commissioner, ...
State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Anand Mani and Others
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Dec-03-2012
Prafulla C. Pant, J. 1. This appeal, preferred under section 378 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short Cr.P.C.), is directed against the judgment and order dated 10.02.2000, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Pauri Garhwal, in Sessions Trial No. 32 of 1997, whereby said court has acquitted the accused/respondents Anand Mani and Purna Nand from the charge of offence punishable under section 498A/34 IPC, and under section 304B/34 IPC, and from the alternative charge of offence punishable under section 302/34 IPC. 2. Heard learned counsel for the State, learned Amicus Curiae for the respondents and perused the lower court record. 3. Prosecution story, in brief, is that accused/ respondent no. 1 Anand Mani got married to Kiran (deceased) in the intervening night of 9th and 10th of March, 1995. Customary dowry said to have been given in the marriage by the parents of the deceased but the accused/respondents were not satisfied with the dowry, and they used to make demand of dowry, an...
M/S Variety Lubes, 2nd Floor, Kumar Tower Vs. the Manager, Vijaya Bank ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Dec-03-2012
Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) 1. The petitioner has admittedly taken a loan from respondent-Bank, namely, Vijaya Bank. In default of re-payment of the loan, the bank has declared the assets of the petitioner as N.P.A. i.e. Non Performing Assets and consequently initiated proceedings under Section 13 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (from hereinafter referred to as the Act). After issuance of the notice under Section 13 (2) of the Act, when the borrower i.e. the petitioner failed to avail his remedy under Section 13 (3A), proceedings have been initiated under Section 13 (4) and possession of the property measuring 200 sq. mts. situated at Shivalik Nagar, Haridwar, have been taken by the Bank. 2. A statement has been given to this effect by the counsel appearing for the respondent bank Mr. K.K. Sah that on 23.11.2012 when the interim order was passed directing the bank not to take any coercive measure, by that time...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›