Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: allahabad Year: 1998 Page 1 of about 101 results (0.008 seconds)

Dec 08 1998 (HC)

S.L. Bathla Vs. State of Bank of India and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Dec-08-1998

Reported in : (1999)1UPLBEC233

..... ; keeping of a subject before the mind; attentive thought reflection, mediation; the action of taking into account; the being taken into account; taking into account of anything as a reason or motive; a fact or circumstances taken, or to be taken ..... is no more open to the petitioner to claim any such right.14. the word 'consider' means to view attentively to survey, examine, inspect, to look attentively; to think over, mediate on, give heed to, take note of according to the shorter oxford english dictionary, 3rd edition printed in 1980. the word 'consideration' means the action of looking at; beholding, contemplation .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 20 1998 (HC)

Vashishth Muni Pathak Vs. the State

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Aug-20-1998

Reported in : 1999CriLJ3723

..... decree was passed in favour of lalta prasad. the report was lodged in presence of p.w. 9 s.i bhuwaneshwar, therefore the investigation was entrusted to him. he im mediately recorded the statement of the complainant and thereafter proceeded to the place of the incident and got the dead body of deceased lalloo prasad removed from the well with the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 06 1998 (HC)

Smt. Luxmi Devi Vs. State of U.P. and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Mar-06-1998

Reported in : 1998CriLJ4140

orderb.k. sharma, j.1. this writ petition has been prepared by the petitioner smt. luxmi devi for issue of a writ in the nature of certiorary for quashing the order dated 5-10-1996 passed by the respondent no. 1, iiird additional district and sessions judge, kanpur dehat in criminal revision no. 97 of 1995, smt. madhuri devi v. smt. maya devi and another (annexure 13 to the writ petition).2. heard counsel for the parties at length.3. the following pedigree may be placed on record to help in proper appreciation of the merits of this writ petition.(see table below)shiv prasad (died in 1956)|ram behari = smt. raj kumari(died on 10-10-93) (daughter)| (died on 22-7-88)__________________________________________________________| | |smt. luxmi devi smt. madhuri devi smt. mayadevi(unmarried)(petitioner) (respondent no. 2) (respondent no. 3)|_______________________________________________________| | |krishna prakash shree prakash jaiprakash(respondent no. 4)4. the dispute relates to 6 plots in khata no. 61 of village gauri chaubey and 3 plots in khata no. 199 in village bhainsau, tehsil billaur, distt. kanpur dehat. the plots originally belonged to late shiv prasad. on his death the said plots came to his daughter smt. raj kumari smt. raj kumari was married to ram behari. she died on 22-7-1988. the petitioner claimed that ram behari got his name mutated on 2-12-1988 in respect of the disputed agricultural holdings on the death of smt. raj kumari, that at the stage no grievance was .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 01 1998 (HC)

Kanhaiya Prasad Vs. Assistant Collector, First Class/S.D.M., Banda and ...

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Dec-01-1998

Reported in : 1999(2)AWC1318

b.k. roy and r.k. singh, jj. 1. the petitioner has come up with a prayer to quash the order dated29.5.1992 passed by the additional collector (finance and revenue) pargana adhikari, banda in case no. 225 of 1991, under section 47a/33 of the indian stamp act (as contained in annexure-5 to the writ petition).2. a perusal of the impugned order and other documents shows following facts :(i) pursuant to inquiry and report, a notice was issued to the petitioner who had purchased the land vide deed dated 10.7.1988 executed by avanindra nath gupta. ratindra nath gupta and abhinendra nath gupta by getting it affirmed before a.d. singh. notary, banda to show cause as to why a sum of rs. 24,086 (rs. 2,175 on account of deficiency of the stamps. rs. 161 on account of registration fee and rs. 21,750 towards penalty) be not realised from him. (ii) upto 25.5.1992 on every date the petitioner prayed for grant of time to file objection but deliberately he filed no objection which proves his intention for not making payment and to keep the case deliberately pending. (iii) on 25.5.1992 the petitioner by filing his objection disowned the deed and pressed to summon avanindra nath gupta and others who had executed the deed, which was unjustified. (iv) even though the petitioner after constructing a house on the land covered by the deed is residing therein yet he has disowned the deed. (v) the petitioner wants to mislead the court in order to save him from payment of deficit stamps. (vi) the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 27 1998 (HC)

Roomi Prasad Vs. Iiird Additional District Judge, Etah and Others

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Apr-27-1998

Reported in : 1998(4)AWC445

d.k. seth, j.1. in a suit for injunction on the basis of an application for temporary injunction by an order dated 12.4.1990 passed in original suit no, 192 of 1990 by the learned munslf, kasganj district etah, ad interim injunction was granted against the defendant while directing issue of notice. an appeal was preferred against the said order being misc. appeal no. 41 of 1990. thereafter by order dated 23.5.1990 passed by the learned munsif the order dated 12.4.1990 was extended. by an order dated 22.10.1990 passed by iiird additional district judge, etah, the appeal was allowed and the order passed by the learned munsif granting ad interim order was set aside while directing the record to be sent back for disposing of the case in accordance with law.2. sri sharad sharma, learned counsel, holding brief of sri h. n. sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that since the appellatecourt had decided the application for injunction, at the ad interim stage, it was no more open to agitate the application any more before the learned trial court. at the same time the appellate court while allowing the appeal had relied on the affidavit filed on behalf of defendant appellant without giving opportunity to the plaintiff-petitioner to rebut the said affidavit, and, therefore, the finding is perverse. he further contends that since before the appeal was decided, the defendant had entered into appearance and had been contesting the application for injunction. therefore, the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 16 1998 (HC)

Sukhu and Others Vs. Ram Deo and Others

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Sep-16-1998

Reported in : 1998(4)AWC49

sudhir narain, j.1. this writ petition is directed against the order of the board of revenue dated 7.5.1984, allowing the appeal filed by the defendant-respondents and dismissing the suit filed by the plaintiff-petitioners.2. the facts in brief are that the petitioners filed suit no. 1053 of 1970 for declaration under section 229b of u.p.z.a. and l.r. act that they are bhumidhars of the land in dispute. they relied upon the following pedigree :durga|_____________________________________________________________________________| |munni lal chunni lal|____________________________________________________| | |jhagaru khannu sukhu-widow- |smt. shanti devi chhedilaltheir case was that munni lal was sole tenure-holder of plot no 534 area 1.03 acre situate in village sarai nandan, pargana dehat amanat, district varanasi. the petitioners are related to munnilal as given in the pedigree. munni lal had executed a gift deed duly registered on 8.9.1965 in favour of the petitioners. munni lal died on 1.1.1968. mangroo, father of respondent nos. 1 to 5, got his name mutated over the revenue records. the petitioners also filed an application for mutation but that was rejected on 25.4.1970. this has given the cause of action for filing the suit.3. mangroo, father of respondent nos. 1 to 5, who was impteaded as defendant no. 1 in the suit, filed written statement. his case was that munnilal had died in the year 1902. his widow smt. jhuna, after the death of munnilal started living with chunni .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 06 1998 (HC)

Maharaj Singh Vs. State Public Services Tribunal-i, Lucknow and Anothe ...

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Nov-06-1998

Reported in : 1998(4)AWC371; (1999)1UPLBEC157

d.k. seth, j.1. the petitioner was subjected to disciplinary proceedings in which the petitioner had submitted his reply, which is annexure-7 to the writ petition. in the enquiry the petitioner was found guilty of all the charges levelled against him in the charge-sheets dated 2nd of april, 1983 and 23rd of june, 1983, which is apparent from the enquiry report dated 21st of september, 1983. on the basis thereof a notice dated 31st of december, 1983 was issued to the petitioner asking him to show cause against the proposed punishment. the petitioner had shown cause. after considering the same, by an order dated 27th of february, 1984 dismissal from service was inflicted as punishment. this order was challenged by the petitioner before the state public services tribunal, lucknow in claim petition no. 118/1 of 1985. by a decision dated 5th of may, 1993, the claim petition was dismissed. in the enquiry report, the petitioner was found partially guilty of the charges levelled in the first charge-sheet ; whereas he was found guilty of the charges levelled in the second charge-sheet. the disciplinary authority concurred with the report of the inquiry officer and inflicted the punishment ; whereas the learned tribunal had discarded the findings of guilt in respect of the charges levelled through the first charge-sheet on the ground that partially proved charges cannot be sustained. however, the learned tribunal had concurred with the findings of the disciplinary authority and the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 13 1998 (HC)

Mewa Ram and Another Vs. Dy. Director of Consolidation, Faizabad and O ...

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Nov-13-1998

Reported in : 1998(4)AWC826

r.h. zaidi, j.1. heard the learned counsel for the parties.2. since learned counsel appearing for the parties agreed and requested that this petition may be disposed of finally at this stage, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 also does not propose to file any counter-affidavit in this case, this petition is being disposed of at this stage finally.3. by means of this petition under article 226 of the constitution of india, the petitioners challenge the validity of the order dated 26.10.1998 passed by respondent no. 1.4. it appears that land in dispute was recorded in the name of muneshwar in the basic year. according to the petitioners, sri muneshwar died on 11.2.77. after his death petitioners applied for mutation of their names in the revenue papers relating to the land in dispute, on the basis of a will dated 12.10.70, alleged to have been executed by muneshwar in their favour. the claim of the petitioners was objected to and opposed by respondent no. 2. it was pleaded that she happened to be the widow of predeceased son of muneshwar, namely, ram dutt, therefore, she inherited the land in dispute and her name was liable to be mutated in place of muneshwar. the execution of the will by muneshwar in favour of petitioners was also denied by respondent no. 2.5. the parties produced evidence, oral and documentary, in support of their cases. the consolidation officer by his judgment and order dated 5.9.81 allowed the objection of the petitioners and directed for mutation .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 06 1998 (HC)

Parma Pandey and ors. Vs. State of U.P. and anr.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Nov-06-1998

Reported in : 1999CriLJ1348

ordero.p. jain, j.1. this writ petition is directed against the revisional judgment dated 29th september, 1998 by district and sessions judge, mau who has dismissed the revision filed by the petitioners.2. the relevant facts of the case are that respondent no. 2 vijai bahadur pandey filed a criminal complaint against the present petitioners under sections 463, 464, 467, 468, 420 and 379, i.p.c. it was alleged in the complaint that on 27th april, 1981 the accused persons obtained the thumb impression of one sheo pujan pandey on a piece of paper and a forged will was fabricated by the accused persons. this forged will, it is alleged, was produced by the accused persons in mutation proceedings and later on in a civil suit instituted in the year 1996. it was also alleged in the complaint that the will was stolen from the record of revenue court by the accused persons. the complaint was filed in the court on 11th august, 1997.3. the learned magistrate summoned the accused by his order dated 4th december, 1997. an application was filed on behalf of the accused persons for recall of the order. by order dated 2nd april, 1998 the magistrate deleted section 379, i.p.c. and the rest of the order was confirmed. being aggrieved against order dated 2nd april, 1998 the present petitioners filed a revision before the court of sessions inter alia on the ground that the prosecution for the offences under the above sections is barred by the provisions of section 195(1)(b)(ii), cr.p.c. by the .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 08 1998 (HC)

Bankey Bihar Vs. Surya NaraIn Alias Munnoo

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : May-08-1998

Reported in : 1998(3)AWC1616

a.k. banerji, j.1. second appeal by the plaintiff-appellant is directed against the judgment and decree dated 14.11.1980 passed by the viith additional district judge, gorakhpur by which the said court had allowed the appeal filed by the defendant and set aside the decree passed in favour of the plaintiff by the trial court.2. the relevant facts, in brief, are that the plaintiff filed original suit no. 104 of 1976 against the defendant for cancellation of a gift deed dated 11.4.1969 executed by purshottam dass in favour of the defendant to the extent of 1/3rd share in the house in dispute. the plaintiff and the defendant are the real brothers and sons of the said purshottam dass, the plaintiff also sought possession over a portion of the house described in the plaint. if not found in possession, and also prayed for a decree of declaration to the effect that the plaintiff was the owner in possession of the portion of the housespecified in the sketch map annexed to the plaint. the plaintiffs case was that the property in question was an ancestral property which on partition came to the share of their father purshottani dass who remained in possession of the same as karta of the joint hindu family. the mother of the parties being dead and there having arisen some family dispute between the plaintiff and the defendant, their father made a family arrangement in the shape of partition deed on 19.7.1967 by which the disputed house was divided half and half between the plaintiff and .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //