Skip to content

Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: rationale Court: allahabad Year: 1981 Page 1 of about 4 results (0.008 seconds)

Mar 09 1981 (HC)

State of U.P. Vs. Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Mar-09-1981

Reported in : AIR1981All314

..... of law and, therefore, beyond courts' purview the learned counsel for the respondent contested the submissions made by the learned senior standing counsel on merits. first he gave us the rationale behind clause 1.11 of the contract in order to show that the interpretation given by the arbitrators was not at all perverse and was based on sound reasoning and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 14 1981 (HC)

Smt. Kaushalya Devi Vs. Housing and Development Board and ors.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Jul-14-1981

Reported in : [1983]53CompCas676(All)

..... case the payment of these amounts has been accelerated. it is not understood how the payment of the amounts has been accelerated' and even if that be so on what rationale could the same be deducted from the amount of compensation payable to the claimant. as we have already seen above, it is only a like which could be deducted from .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 12 1981 (HC)

Rajendra Prasad Vs. State of U.P. and anr.

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Feb-12-1981

Reported in : 1981CriLJ946

yashoda nandan, j.1. as a consequence of an order passed on the 19th september. 1980 by the secretary of u.p. government, confidential department in the name of governor of the state the petitioner is under detention under section 3(1) of the conservation of foreign exchange and prevention of smuggling activities act 1974, hereinafter referred to as the act. he was taken in custody on the 24th september, 1980 and was immediately served with a copy of grounds on which his detention had been recorded. his detention having been confirmed by the state government and the representation made by him having been rejected by the advisory board constituted under section 8 of the act he has filed this petition praying for quashing the order by which he has been detained and for a writ of habeas corpus directing his release from detention. he is at present lodged in the central jail, bareilly.2. the material facts which need to be set out for a proper appreciation of the contention raised in support of the petition are that on the 4th february,1980 central excise officers of gold and preventive branch, varanasi, carried out a raid on the business premises of the petitioner who is a dealer in electrical goods and carried on business in the name and style of m/s. maharaja electric company, mohalla senpura, varanasi and admittedly found three packages lying in front of m/s. maharaja electric company ready for removal on a rickshaw. the packages were seized and were found to contain 200 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 13 1981 (HC)

State of U.P. Vs. Prescribed Authority, Kiccha (Rudrapur) Nainital and ...

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Nov-13-1981

Reported in : AIR1982All151

orderk.p. singh, j.1. this writ petition is by the state of u. p. against the judgment of shri d. p. varshni, civil judge, nainital, dt. 21-2-1977 whereby the appeals preferred by the tenure-holder and his transferees were dealt with.2. a notice u/s. 10 (2) of the u. p. imposition of ceiling on land holdings act (hereinafter referred to as the act) was served upon the opposite party no. 2 mohammad sharwat yar khan in the present writ petition who contested the notice and claimed exclusion of land sold by him and by his divorced wife. it was also alleged that unirrigated land has been shown as irrigated one and it had also been asserted that land sold by sale deeds prior to 24-1-1971 was wrongly held as the tenancy of the tenure-holder on 8-6-1973 and various other pleas were taken.3. the prescribed authority through its judgment dt. 22-5-1976 declared 43.65 hectares of irrigated land as surplus area of the tenure-holder as is evident from annexure 1 attached with the writ petition. thereafter the tenure-holder as well as the transferees preferred appeals which were dealt with by the appellate authority through its judgment dt. 21-2-1977. against the judgment of the appellate authority the tenure-holder had come in writ to this court and had also gone to the supreme court but the judgment of the appellate authority has been confirmed.4. it appears that the state of u. p., has filed the present writ petition on 7-4-1978 against the judgment of the appellate authority dt. 21-2- .....

Tag this Judgment!

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