Created by Fuzzy Cloud

PIYUSH AGRAWAL

153 judgments · newest first · showing 1–153

SPML INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITEDversusALLAHABAD MUNCIPAL CORPORATION AND ANOTHER

Spml Infrastructure Limited filed a petition under Article 227 before the Allahabad High Court against Allahabad Municipal Corporation and another respondent. The petition sought relief pending a decision by the lower court. Counsel for the High Court informed that the lower court had fixed a date …

NAGENDRA SINGH AND ANOTHERversusSUNIL KUMAR GUPTA AND 3 OTHERS

The petitioners, Nagendra Singh and another, filed a petition under Article 227 seeking a direction to the Special Judge (EC Act) in Banda to decide SCC No. 20/2024 within a stipulated period, alleging irreparable loss due to the pending matter. The petitioners argued that the delay was causing them …

M/S KEC INTERNATIONAL LIMITEDversusNORTH CENTRAL RAILWAY AND ANOTHER

M/S Kec International Ltd entered into a contract with North Central Railway for supply and erection of a 25 kV feeder wire. After delays attributable to the railway, Kec sought an extension, which was granted, and later submitted a claim for prolongation that the railway rejected. On 30 March 2026 …

M/S UTTAM MODERN RICE AND OIL MILLSversusCOMMISSIONER OF TRADE/COMMERCIAL TAX

M/s Uttam Modern Rice and Oil Mills filed a revision petition (Sales/Trade Tax Revision No. 62 of 2018) against the Commissioner of Trade/Commercial Tax. The petition was presented before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. Counsel for the revisionist, Krishna Agarawal, informed the court …

M/S HARI NARAYAN RAIversusMS GMR INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED

M/S Hari Narayan Rai entered into a contract with GMR Infrastructure Ltd for earthwork under the DFCC project. Work was delayed by monsoon, after which a second purchase order was issued and the work was completed. The respondent later issued a notice of liquidated damages of Rs. 50,000 and …

M/S LORDS DISTILLERY LIMITEDversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

The petitioners, licensed distilleries, challenged a demand of Rs 54,52,731 for QR‑code costs imposed by the Uttar Pradesh Excise Department without any show‑cause notice or hearing. They argued that the demand violated natural justice, was based on an audit objection rather than an independent …

JAN AUSHADHI MEDICAL STORE AND 6 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

The applicants filed an application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of a sole arbitrator. The arbitration agreement between the parties contains a clause stipulating that the place of arbitration shall be Lucknow. Respondents raised a preliminary …

M/S KESARWANI SHEETALAYAversusSMT. PARWATI DEVI AND 6 OTHERS

M/S Kesarwani Sheetalaya filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court under Article 227 against Smt. Parwati Devi and six others. The petition sought relief, the specifics of which are not detailed in the judgment. The Court, after consideration, allowed the writ petition. The operative …

M/S KESARWANI & COMPANYversusSMT. PARWATI DEVI AND 6 OTHERS

M/s Kesarwani & Co. challenged a Commercial Court order that summarily rejected its applications (Ga/31 and Ga/33) seeking execution of a 2016 arbitral award. The petitioners argued that the order was unsustainable because it was passed without any reasons, violating the principle that every …

RAVINDRA KUMAR TIWARIversusTHE COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAX, UP

The revisionist, Ravindra Kumar Tiwari, challenged a series of reassessment orders issued by the Commercial Tax authorities for Assessment Year 2000-01, alleging that the reassessments were based solely on an alleged undisclosed royalty payment of Rs. 9,67,587 and not on any fresh material. The High …

RAVINDRA KUMAR TIWARIversusTHE COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAX, UP

The petition filed by Ravindra Kumar Tiwari sought revision of a sales/trade tax assessment. The High Court examined the revision petition and, without providing detailed reasoning in the excerpt, allowed the revision. The Court directed that the orders be issued as per the order dated in STRE No. …

MAHENDRA KUMAR MISHRAversusSMT CHANDRA LEKHA AND 6 OTHERS

Mahendra Kumar Mishra filed a second appeal (Defective No. 84 of 2025) before the Allahabad High Court against Smt Chandra Lekha and six others. The appeal was listed under Chapter XII, Rule 4 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952. Counsel for the appellant, Arvind Srivastava, appeared, but no …

MAHENDRA KUMAR MISHRAversusSMT. CHANDRA LEKHA AND 3 OTHERS

Mahendra Kumar Mishra filed a second appeal before the Allahabad High Court against Smt. Chandra Lekha and three others. The appeal was listed under Chapter XII, Rule 4 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952. No counsel appeared on behalf of the appellant, and no steps could be taken pursuant to …

SMT SAMPAT DEVIversusState of UP AND 3 OTHERS

Smt Sampat Devi, a licensee of a country liquor shop in Kotra, Jalaun, challenged the cancellation of her licence on the ground that her husband, a history‑sitter, was merely accused in a criminal case. The licensing authority cancelled the licence under Section 34 of the U.P. Excise Act, 1910 and …

THE C.C.T. U.P. LUCKNOWversusM/S HEMRAJ FOODS PVT. LTD.

The Commercial Tax Department (CCTUP) filed multiple sales/trade tax revisions against M/s Hemraj Foods Pvt. Ltd., alleging that the toffee sold by the company, having a sugar content of less than 95%, should be classified as a sugar product and taxed at 4% under Schedule‑II Part A, Serial No. 137. …

THE C.C.T. U.P. LUCKNOWversusM/S HEMRAJ FOODS PVT. LTD.

The C.C.T. of Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow filed a revision petition (Sales/Trade Tax Revision No. 533 of 2017) challenging an order dated in S.T.R.E. No. 532 of 2017 against M/s Hemraj Foods Pvt. Ltd. The petition sought relief from the earlier decision of the Sales/Trade Tax Tribunal. The High Court of …

THE C.C.T. U.P. LUCKNOWversusM/S HEMRAJ FOODS PVT. LTD.

The case is Sales/Trade Tax Revision No. 534 of 2017 filed by the C.C.T. U.P., Lucknow against M/s Hemraj Foods Pvt. Ltd. The revisionist was represented by counsel Bipin Kumar Pandey and the opposite party by counsel Nishant Mishra. The Hon'ble Justice Piyush Agrawal of the Allahabad High Court …

THE C.C.T. U.P. LUCKNOWversusM/S HEMRAJ FOODS PVT. LTD.

A revision petition (Sales/Trade Tax Revision No. 535 of 2017) was filed by the C.C.T. U.P. Lucknow against M/s Hemraj Foods Pvt. Ltd. The matter was heard before Hon'ble Justice Piyush Agrawal of the Allahabad High Court. The court examined the earlier order passed in S.T.R.E. No. 532 of 2017 …

THE COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAXversusM/S. HEMRAJ FOODS PVT. LTD.

The Commissioner of Commercial Tax filed Revision No. 536 of 2017 against M/s Hemraj Foods Pvt. Ltd. The matter was heard before Justice Piyush Agrawal in Court No. 7 of the Allahabad High Court. The Court dismissed the revision petition. The dismissal referred to the earlier order dated in S.T.R.E. …

THE C.C.T. U.P. LUCKNOWversusM/S HEMRAJ FOODS PVT. LTD.

The C.C.T. Lucknow filed a revision (Sales/Trade Tax Revision No. 538 of 2017) against M/s Hemraj Foods Pvt. Ltd. The High Court of Allahabad examined the revision and referred to the earlier order passed in S.T.R.E. No. 532 of 2017 (C.C.T. Vs. M/s Hemraj Foods Pvt. Ltd.). After consideration, the …

S/S NISHANT TRADERSversusTHE COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAX U.P. LUCKNOW

S/S Nishant Traders, a dealer in cement and steel bars, was assessed for the AY 2010-11 based on a diary seized from a third‑party dealer, M/s Suraj Building Material, which contained entries marked "NT" and the name of Satya Narayan Jaiswal, the uncle of Nishant Traders' proprietor. The assessing …

S/S NISHANT TRADERSversusTHE COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAX U.P. LUCKNOW

S/S Nishant Traders filed a revision petition challenging the assessment of commercial tax by the Commissioner Commercial Tax, U.P., Lucknow. The petition was heard by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Court No. 7, before Hon'ble Justice Piyush Agrawal. The court disposed of the revision …

S/S NISHANT TRADERSversusTHE COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAX U.P. LUCKNOW

S/S Nishant Traders filed a revision petition (Sales/Trade Tax Revision No. 438 of 2017) against the Commissioner of Commercial Tax, U.P., Lucknow. The matter was heard by Justice Piyush Agrawal in Court No. 7 of the Allahabad High Court. Counsel for the petitioner was Aditya Pandey and counsel for …

S/S NISHANT TRADERSversusTHE COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAX U.P. LUCKNOW

S/S Nishant Traders filed a revision petition challenging the commercial tax assessment made by the Commissioner of Commercial Tax, Uttar Pradesh, Lucknow. The petition was heard before Hon'ble Justice Piyush Agrawal. The court disposed of the petition, referring to the order passed in Sales/Trade …

THE COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAX LKO.versusS/S KANOHAR ELECTRICALS LTD.

The Commercial Tax Tribunal allowed a credit‑note exemption for S/S Kanohar Electricals Ltd. even though the sale invoice did not show any credit amount and the dealer had not obtained a debit note from the purchaser as required under Section 21 of the U.P. VAT Act. The Assessing Authority and the …

PROELECTRIC PROJECTS PRIVATE LIMITEDversusPRASAD PSYCHO PRIVATE LIMITED

The parties filed an application under Section 11(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking the appointment of an arbitrator to resolve their commercial dispute. The Court recorded the consent of former Judge R.B. Mishra to act as arbitrator, as per the order dated 28‑07‑2026. The …

DR. SUDHEER KUMAR AGRAWALversusM/S VINAYAKA EXPO PLAZA PVT. LTD.

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad heard an application under Section 11(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of an arbitrator. The court recorded the consent of former Judge O.P. Garg to act as arbitrator and, pursuant to Section 11(8), appointed him to …

SMT. SUNITA JALANversusMS VINAYAKA EXPO PLAZA PVT. LTD.

The applicant, Smt. Sunita Jalan, filed an arbitration application under Section 11(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking appointment of a former High Court judge as arbitrator. The court examined the consent given by former Judge O.P. Garg, as required by Section 11(8), and …

MUKUL PANDE AND ANOTHERversusM/S VINAYAKA EXPO PLAZA PVT. LTD.

The applicants, Mukul Pande and another, filed an application under Section 11(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking the appointment of an arbitrator. The court recorded the consent of former Judge O.P. Garg to act as arbitrator, as per the requirements of Section 11(8). The court …

SHRI ANIL KUMARversusM/S VINAYAKA EXPO PLAZA PVT. LTD.

Shri Anil Kumar filed an application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of an arbitrator against M/S Vinayaka Expo Plaza Pvt. Ltd. The court examined the consent of former Judge O.P. Garg to act as arbitrator under Section 11(8). Upon satisfaction of …

M/S ARCHANA CONSTRUCTIONversusUNION OF INDIA AND 4 OTHERS

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad heard an application under Section 11(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 filed by M/s Archana Construction seeking appointment of an arbitrator. The court considered the consent of former Supreme Court Judge Pankaj Mithal to act as arbitrator, …

M/S RATAN LAL AND COversusState of UP AND 2 OTHERS

The applicant, M/s Ratan Lal & Co, filed an arbitration application under Section 11(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking appointment of a sole arbitrator. The court considered the consent of former Judge Justice Dilip Gupta to act as arbitrator under Section 11(8) of the Act. …

M/S RAM CHANDRAversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

M/S Ram Chandra entered into a contract on 10‑02‑2025 to renovate the Bhaisahi Approach road for the Magh Mela. The work was completed on 09‑03‑2025 but the State of U.P. and two other respondents failed to make full payment despite repeated requests. On 16‑06‑2026 the applicant invoked the …

M/S A.M. FABRICATORSversusSTATE OF UP AND ANOTHER

M/S A.M. Fabricators filed an application under Section 11(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before the Allahabad High Court. The applicant sought relief but later, through counsel Vinayak Mithal, indicated that it did not wish to pursue the application. The respondent State of U.P. …

MR. SRINIVASAN A.versusBHARAT ECOFUELS PRIVATE LIMITED

The applicant, Mr. Srinivasan A., filed an application under Section 11(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking the appointment of an arbitrator. No counsel appeared on behalf of either the applicant or the opposite party, Bharat Ecofuels Private Limited, on the date of hearing. …

VED PRAKASH GARGversusSMT SUNITA DAYAL

The appellant, Ved Prakash Garg, claimed ownership of a residential plot and obtained a decree for a simpliciter injunction against the respondent, Sunita Dayal. The respondent appealed, arguing that the plaintiff's title was clouded by a competing sale deed and that a Court Commission report …

SUNIL HITECH ENGINEERS LIMITEDversusBHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LIMITED

Sunil Hitech Engineers Ltd filed an application under Section 11(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking the appointment of an arbitrator to resolve its dispute with Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. The court examined the consent of former High Court Judge O.P. Garg to act as …

M/S GLOBLE STEELversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

M/S Globle Steel filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court against the State of U.P. and two others. No counsel appeared on behalf of the petitioner on the hearing date. The Court observed that the petition was not being prosecuted. Consequently, the petition was dismissed for want of …

MOHD. FAROOQ AND ANOTHERversusSRI HARI KRISHNA AGARWAL AND 5 OTHERS

The petitioners, Mohd. Farooq and another, filed an application under Section 11(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking the appointment of an arbitrator to resolve their dispute with the respondents, Sri Hari Krishna Agarwal and five others. The High Court examined the consent of …

M/S KRISHNA UDYOGversusCENTRAL ORGANIZATION FOR RAILWAY ELECTRIFICATION

M/S Krishna Udyog filed a petition under Article 227 seeking a direction to the executing court to expedite Execution Case No. 59 of 2020 within three months, citing a similar order the High Court had earlier passed in Matter U/A 227 No. 2660/2026. The petitioner argued that the same relief should …

JITENDRA SINGHversusState of UP AND 4 OTHERS

The petitioner, Jitendra Singh, filed a writ petition (Writ Tax No. 1589 of 2024) before the Allahabad High Court. No counsel appeared on behalf of the petitioner during the hearing. Consequently, the Court dismissed the petition for want of prosecution and vacated any interim order that may have …

AZAD KUMAR BHATIversusMANAGING DIRECTOR NOIDA POWER COMPANY LTD

Azad Kumar Bhati filed an arbitration application before the Allahabad High Court seeking appointment of a sole arbitrator. The opposite party, Managing Director of Noida Power Company Ltd, objected, alleging that the agreement annexed to the application was forged and differed from an earlier …

SMT. SHAILBALAversusPRAVEEN KUMAR SINGH

Dismiss

Smt. Shailbala filed an appeal before the Allahabad High Court, which was later withdrawn by the appellant. The appellant, through counsel, filed a withdrawal application seeking to discontinue the appeal. The court considered the request and, for the reasons stated in the application, permitted the …

SMT. SHAILBALAversusAKHILESH SINGH AND 2 OTHERS

The appellant, Smt. Shailbala, filed a civil miscellaneous application seeking to withdraw Second Appeal No. 1049 of 2016 pending before the Allahabad High Court. The application was presented by counsel Rakesh Pande and Vishakha Pande. The court examined the reasons provided in the withdrawal …

SACHIN KUMAR AND ANOTHERversusSOLITAIRE REALINFRA PVT LTD AND ANOTHER

The applicants, Sachin Kumar and another, filed an arbitration petition before the Allahabad High Court. Their counsel sought to withdraw the petition while requesting liberty to file a better petition later. The court considered the request and, noting the applicants' intention, dismissed the …

RAVI KANT MITTAL AND ANOTHERversusM/S GAURSONS PROMOTERS PRIVATE LIMITED

The applicants, Ravi Kant Mittal and another, filed an arbitration application before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. During the hearing, counsel for the applicants sought to withdraw the pending arbitration application and requested liberty to file a fresh application. The court …

HAFIZ ULLAHversusABDUL RASHID

In Second Appeal No. 570 of 1994 before the Allahabad High Court, appellant Hafiz Ullah challenged a decree against him. The parties subsequently entered into a compromise, which was verified by the trial court and a report was filed on 19 January 2026. The appellant's counsel submitted the …

M/S FASHION POINT PARTNERSHIP FIRM AND ANOTHERversusRAYMOND APPAREL LTD.

The partnership firm M/s Fashion Point entered into a franchise agreement with Raymond Apparel Ltd. and a nine‑year lease deed with a third party, subsequently demanding payment of the lease amount which the respondent failed to pay. The applicant invoked the arbitration clause on 18‑02‑2025, but …

M/S JAI RAM MARBLE AND GRANITEversusTHE COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAX

M/S Jai Ram Marble and Granite filed a Sales/Trade Tax Revision (No. 30 of 2019) before the Allahabad High Court challenging an order of the Commissioner of Commercial Tax. The revisionist was represented by counsel Vishwjit, while the opposite party was represented by C.S.C. During the hearing, the …

M/S JAI RAM MARBLE AND GRANITEversusTHE COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAX

M/s Jai Ram Marble and Granite filed a Sales/Trade Tax Revision (No. 29 of 2019) before the Allahabad High Court challenging a demand by the Commissioner of Commercial Tax. The revisionist was represented by counsel Vishwjit, while the opposite party was represented by C.S.C. During the hearing, the …

S/S UNIVERSAL ENTERPRISESversusTHE COMMISSIONER COMMERCIAL TAX UP LUCKNOW

S/S Universal Enterprises, a fuel‑wood dealer, challenged a best‑judgment assessment for AY 2016‑17 under the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2008. The assessing authority had rejected the assessee’s books and enhanced tax liability solely on information that a third‑party firm, S.S. Enterprises, …

M/S CALSTAR STEEL LIMITEDversusNORTH EASTERN RAILWAY

Calstar Steel Ltd filed an arbitration application under Section 11(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 against North Eastern Railway. The court examined the consent of former High Court Judge Justice Bharati Sapru to act as arbitrator under Section 11(8) of the Act. Finding the consent …

YELLOWBIRD HOTELS AND RESORTS PVT. LTD.versusBABU LAL PRAJAPATI AND ANOTHER

Yellowbird Hotels And Resorts Pvt. Ltd. filed a petition under Article 227 seeking direction regarding the remaining properties of a judgment debtor. The petitioner alleged that the properties were within the jurisdiction of the District Judge, Gautam Buddha Nagar. The respondent submitted an …

RATI TRADERS 2versusSTATE OF UP AND 2 OTHERS

Rati Traders filed a writ petition challenging an order of the State of Uttar Pradesh and two other respondents. The standing counsel for the respondents raised a preliminary objection, contending that the petitioner had an efficacious alternative remedy under Section 112 of the Goods and Services …

GYAN PRAKASH YADAVversusState of UP AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioner Gyan Prakash Yadav filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court. The petitioner's counsel, Anurag Yadav, was later engaged as subsequent counsel but reportedly had no instructions. No petitioner appeared before the court on the revised list to pursue the petition. Consequently, …

BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITEDversusM/S L.E. AND M.W. WORKS AND ANOTHER

The petitioner, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, filed a petition under Article 227 seeking a direction to respondent No.2, M/S L.E. and M.W. Works, to decide an application filed under section 36(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act within the stipulated time. The petitioner alleged that the …

VINEETversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

The petition filed by Vineet was listed before the Allahabad High Court but no counsel or parties appeared on the scheduled date. Consequently, the court dismissed the petition for want of prosecution. The interim order, if any, was vacated. No substantive facts or legal arguments were considered. …

M/S EFFICIENT DISTRIBUTORS P LTDversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

M/S Efficient Distributors P Ltd filed a writ petition challenging an order that granted a 90% waiver after a part‑waiver was allowed by the first appellate authority. The Assistant Chief Secretary (ACSC) raised a preliminary objection that the petition was not maintainable because the petitioner …

M/S SHUBHRA MOTEL PRIVATE LIMITEDversusUNION OF INDIA AND 5 OTHERS

M/S Shubhra Motel Private Limited filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court. The respondents submitted that an earlier order of the same Court had rendered the petition infructuous. The petitioner did not contest this submission. The Court accepted the respondents’ claim that the …

M/S SERVOKON SYSTEMS LIMITEDversusUINION OF INDIA AND 5 OTHER

The High Court of Allahabad heard a civil miscellaneous review application filed by M/S Servokon Systems Ltd. seeking clarification and modification of an order dated 25 March 2026 that directed the company to deposit 10 % of an alleged liability but did not specify the deposit forum. The applicant …

M/S MAPLE LEAF INTELLIGENT SOLUTION PVTLTDversusUNION OF INDIA AND 5 OTHER

The High Court of Allahabad entertained a review (actually a correction/modification) application filed by M/s Maple Leaf Intelligent Solution Pvt Ltd against an order dated 25‑03‑2026. The applicant sought clarification on the computation and deposit of a 10% amount and pointed out errors in the …

M/S CHHONKAR ASSOCIATES MATHURAversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

The applicant, M/s Chhonkar Associates, filed an arbitration application under Section 11(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking appointment of an arbitrator. The court recorded the consent of former High Court Judge Justice Satish Chandra to act as arbitrator under Section 11(8). …

HARVIR SINGHversusSTATE OF UP AND 3 OTHERS

Harvir Singh, a contract employee since 2004, claimed that after his termination on 22-02-2025 his employer failed to pay full dues. He invoked the arbitration clause in his contract, but the State of Uttar Pradesh and other respondents did not respond. The applicant filed an application under …

NEERAJ SRIVASTAVAversusMANOJ RASTOGI

The applicant, Neeraj Srivastava, filed an application under Section 11(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, against Manoj Rastogi. The matter was listed before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, with counsel Vishesh Rajvanshi for the applicant and Syed Ali Murtaza for the …

M/S VERMA ELECTRICALSversusUNION OF INDIA AND 2 OTHERS

Verma Electricals filed an application under Section 11(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking the appointment of an arbitrator in a dispute with the Union of India and two other parties. The court examined the consent of former High Court Judge S.N. Agarwal, which was submitted on …

RAJA RAM AND OTHERSversusSUMER SINGH AND OTHERS

The appellant filed a withdrawal application (No.3 of 2026) seeking to withdraw the pending appeal. The court heard counsel J.P.S. Chauhan for the appellant. The application was allowed, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal as withdrawn. No substantive merits of the original dispute were …

ANJANA VERMA AND ANOTHERversusNARPENDRA KUMAR VERMA AND ANOTHER

The appellant, Anjana Verma and another, filed a withdrawal application (No.2 of 2026) in the Second Appeal No. 552 of 2023 before the Allahabad High Court. The application sought to withdraw the pending appeal against the respondents, Narpendra Kumar Verma and another. Counsel for the appellant, …

M/S JITCO OVERSES PRIVATE LIMITEDversusUNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

M/s Jitco Overses Private Limited filed an application under Section 11(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking the appointment of an arbitrator to resolve its dispute with the Union of India and others. The court examined the consent of former Allahabad High Court Judge Justice …

M/S SHIKHAR PRINT-N-PACKSversusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

M/S Shikhar Print‑N‑Packs filed a writ petition challenging an order of the State of Uttar Pradesh. The State, through its standing counsel, raised a preliminary objection that the Central Government had already constituted the GST Appellate Tribunal and, under Section 111 of the GST Act, issued …

BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTDversusSUSHMA AND 2 OTHERS

The appellant, Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd, filed a first appeal against an order dated 2024. During the proceedings, the appellant expressed a desire to withdraw the appeal. The respondent, Sushma and two others, were represented by counsel but did not oppose the withdrawal. The …

SHARAD AGARWALversusSRIKANT SHARMA SINCE DECEASED AND 2 OTHERS

The appellant, Sharad Agarwal, filed a first appeal against the order dated 2026. The respondent raised a preliminary objection concerning the maintainability of the appeal. The appellant's counsel indicated a willingness to withdraw the appeal and seek alternative remedies. The court accepted the …

LOKENDRA @ KANHAIYAversusARJUN SINGH and OTHERS

Dismiss other than merit(DD/Non Prosec./Abated)

Lokendra (appellant) filed a first appeal against Order Defective No. 602 of 2009. The matter was listed on a revised list but no counsel appeared on behalf of the appellant. Counsel for the respondents was present before the court. The bench observed that the appeal could not be proceeded with due …

YASEENversusMOHAMMAD RASHID AND 3 OTHERS

Appellant Yaseen filed a first appeal against the order of the lower court. No counsel or parties appeared before the High Court. The bench, noting the lack of prosecution, dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution. Consequently, any interim order that had been in force was vacated. The judgment …

HAZI MUKHTAR WASIMversusDISTT. MAGISTRATE BAREILLY

Petitioner Hazi Mukhtar Wasim filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court challenging an order of the District Magistrate, Bareilly. The petition remained pending for an extended period, and the court observed that, due to the passage of time, the petition had become infructuous. No …

SUBHAM SUGAR LTD. AND ANOTHERversusCOLLECTOR STAM BIJNOR AND ANOTHER

The petitioners Subham Sugar Ltd. and another filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court. The court observed that, due to the passage of time, the petition had become infructuous. Consequently, the court dismissed the writ petition on the ground that it was no longer maintainable. The …

SMT.KRISHNA DEVI UPADHYAYversusD.M. ETAH AND OTHERS

Smt. Krishna Devi Upadhyay filed a writ petition (Writ‑C No. 52805 of 2000) before the Allahabad High Court against D.M. Etah and others. The petition was listed as “likely to be infructuous” and, on hearing, the court observed that no case was called out and that the passage of time had rendered …

RAM CHANDRAversusCOMMISSIONER BAREILLY DIVISION AND ANOTHER

The petitioner, Ram Chandra, filed writ petition No. 53317 of 2000 before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. The petition was listed as "likely to be infructuous" and no further case was called out. The Court observed that, by the efflux of time, the petition had become infructuous. …

U.P.S.R.T.C. THROUGH ITS REGIONAL MANAGER JHANSIversusBANNE KHAN AND OTHERS

The Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (UPSRTC) filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief. Over time, the petition became moot as the circumstances that gave rise to it ceased to exist. The Court observed that the petition was now infructuous due to the efflux …

AMAR SINGH AND ANOTHERversusTHE COMMISSIONER KANPUR AND OTHERS

Amar Singh and another filed a writ petition (Writ No. 53416 of 2000) before the Allahabad High Court challenging the actions of the Commissioner, Kanpur and others. The petition was listed as "likely to be infructuous" and no further case was called out. The Court observed that, due to the passage …

NAQLI RAMversusADDL. COMMISSIONER JUDICIAL AND OTHERS

The petitioner, Naqli Ram, filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court. Over the course of the proceedings, a substantial lapse of time occurred. The Court examined whether the petition remained viable after this delay. It held that the petition had become infructuous due to the efflux of …

BABU LALversusD.D.C. AND OTHERS

Petitioner Babu Lal filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court. No counsel appeared on behalf of the petitioner for the priority hearing. The court noted the absence of the petitioner and dismissed the writ petition for want of prosecution. Consequently, any interim order that had been …

RAMA NAND CHAUBEYversusD.D.C.AND OTHERS

The petitioner, Rama Nand Chaubey, filed Writ Petition No. 3678 of 1978 before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against the respondents, D.D.C. and others. The petition was listed under the "Oldest Pending Cases" for priority hearing. No counsel or party appeared on behalf of the petitioner …

RAM DAS SINGHversusMANDE LAL

Ram Das Singh filed a writ petition (Writ B No. 4303 of 1979) before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief. The petition was listed under the "Oldest Pending Cases" for priority hearing. No counsel or party appeared on the scheduled date to prosecute the petition. The Court observed that the …

KULLU AND OTHERSversusDEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION AND OTHERS

The petitioners filed Writ Petition No. 2514 of 1980 in the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against the Deputy Director of Consolidation and others. The case was listed under the "Oldest Pending Cases" for priority hearing. No counsel or party appeared on the scheduled date to prosecute the …

SRI NATH AND OTHERSversusJ.D.C.AND OTHERS

The petitioners filed Writ Petition No. 4763 of 1980 in the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against the respondents. The case was listed under the oldest pending cases for priority hearing. No counsel or party appeared on behalf of the petitioners to prosecute the petition. The Court observed …

SHIV NATHversusD.D.C. AND OTHERS

The petitioner, Shiv Nath, filed a writ petition (Writ No. 3212 of 1982) before the Allahabad High Court. No counsel or party appeared to prosecute the petition. The court noted that the case was listed under the oldest pending cases for priority hearing. Since the petitioner failed to pursue the …

SMT. LAKHPATIversusD.D.C.AND OTHERS

Smt. Lakhpati filed a writ petition (Writ‑B No. 218 of 1980) in the Allahabad High Court seeking relief against D.D.C. and others. The case was listed under "Oldest Pending Cases for Priority Hearing". No counsel or party appeared to prosecute the petition. Consequently, the Court dismissed the …

KUNJEE LAL AND 3 OTHERSversusMUNNA AND 2 OTHERS

Kunjee Lal and three others filed a first appeal against Munna and two others before the Allahabad High Court. No counsel or parties appeared before the court on the scheduled date. The court dismissed the appeal on the ground of want of prosecution. Consequently, any interim order that had been …

DAL CHAND AND ANOTHERversusTHE UNION OF INDIA

Dal Chand and another filed a first appeal before the Allahabad High Court against an order of the Union of India. No parties appeared before the court on the scheduled date. The court dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution and vacated any interim order that may have been in force. The …

JAGDEESH CHANDRA SHARMAversusSANJEEV KUMAR AND ANOTHER

Jagdeesh Chandra Sharma filed a first appeal against the order dated No. 949 of 2019. No parties appeared before the court. The High Court dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution and vacated any interim order that may have been in force. The order was pronounced by Justice Piyush Agrawal in the …

SATYENDRA SINGHversusRAKAMVEER SINGH AND 2 OTHERS

The appellant, Satyendra Singh, filed a first appeal against the order dated 1246 of 2015. No counsel or party appeared on behalf of the appellant during the hearing. The court dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution, finding that the appellant had failed to pursue the matter. Consequently, any …

SURYAMANI PANDEYversusTHE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER

The appellant, Suryamani Pandey, filed a first appeal against an order of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. No parties appeared before the court on the scheduled date. The court dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution, indicating that the appellant failed to pursue the matter. …

SMT. SUMAN AND 2 OTHERSversusVINESH VERMA AND 2 OTHERS

Smt. Suman and two others filed a first appeal (No. 593 of 2022) before the Allahabad High Court against Vinesh Verma and two others. No parties appeared before the court on the scheduled date. The court dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution, finding that the appellant had not pursued the …

MOTI LAL DWIVEDIversusUNITED INDIAN INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. AND 2 OTHERS

Moti Lal Dwivedi appealed against United Indian Insurance Company Ltd. and others before the Allahabad High Court. No counsel or parties appeared before the court. The appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution, and any interim order that had been passed was vacated. The judgment was delivered by …

RAKESH KUMAR GUPTAversusRAMSANVARI DEVI AND 5 OTHERS

Rakesh Kumar Gupta filed a first appeal against Order Defective No. 1350 of 2019 before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. The matter was listed on March 19, 2026, but no parties or counsel appeared before the bench. The court noted the absence of prosecution and consequently dismissed the …

MR. PANKAJ PRASADversusMS. PRATEEK REALTORS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

The applicant, Mr. Pankaj Prasad, filed an arbitration application under Section 11(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking the appointment of an arbitrator to resolve a dispute with Ms. Prateek Realtors India Private Limited. The court recorded the consent of former Judge Justice …

M/S GPT INFRA PROJECTS LTDversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

M/s Gpt Infra Projects Ltd filed an arbitration application under Section 11(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking the appointment of an arbitrator against the Union of India and another party. The court examined the consent given by former High Court Judge Justice Bharati Sapru …

ANIRUDDH JAIN AND 2 OTHERSversusESS AAR UNIVERSAL PVT LTD AND 4 OTHERS

The petitioners, Aniruddh Jain and two others, filed a petition under Article 227 before the Allahabad High Court. Their counsel, Puneet Arun, informed the court that they did not wish to pursue the petition. Consequently, the court dismissed the petition as withdrawn. The connected matter was …

LALLU SINGH AND ANOTHERSversusSAGAR SINGH

The matter before the Allahabad High Court was a second appeal (No. 2781 of 1983) filed by Lallu Singh and others against Sagar Singh. The appeal had been listed under the heading of "Oldest Pending Cases in this High Court for Priority Hearing". No counsel or party appeared on behalf of the …

KISHUN DEV YADAV AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

Petitioners Kishun Dev Yadav and another filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court. The State respondents filed a supplementary counter‑affidavit on 16‑11‑2022, to which the petitioners responded with a supplementary rejoinder affidavit on 12‑03‑2023. Neither of these affidavits had been …

M/S ANAND TYRE HOUSEversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 2 OTHER

M/S Anand Tyre House filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court seeking relief because the GST Appellate Tribunal had not been constituted, preventing it from filing an appeal under sections 107 or 108 of the GST Act. The Court noted that the Central Government had subsequently …

M/S ANAND TYRE HOUSEversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 2 OTHER

M/S Anand Tyre House filed a writ petition challenging the non‑existence of a GST Appellate Tribunal for filing an appeal under sections 107/108 of the GST Act. The Court noted that the Central Government had subsequently constituted the Tribunal and issued procedural rules under section 111. The …

ANUPAM KUMAR MISHRA AND 7 OTHERSversusANIL KUMAR VERMA

Anupam Kumar Mishra and others filed a contempt application alleging that Anil Kumar Verma, District Basic Education Officer, Mirzapur, had failed to comply with a writ Court order. The respondent submitted an affidavit stating that the order had been complied with. The applicant's counsel did not …

DUKHBHANJAN PRASAD JAISWALversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS

The petitioner, Dukhbhanjan Prasad Jaiswal, filed a writ petition challenging the inability to appeal orders under sections 107 and 108 of the GST Act because the GST Appellate Tribunal had not been constituted under section 112. The High Court noted that the Central Government subsequently …

M/S P P SUPARI TRADERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 3 OTHERS

M/S P P Supari Traders filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court challenging the non‑constitution of the GST Appellate Tribunal for hearing appeals under sections 107 and 108 of the GST Act. The Court noted that the Central Government had subsequently constituted the Tribunal and issued …

M/S GOPAL JEE NAMKEENversusUNION OF INDIA AND 4 OTHERS

M/s Gopal Jee Namkeen filed a writ petition challenging the inability to appeal GST orders because the GST Appellate Tribunal had not yet been constituted. The High Court noted that the Central Government subsequently constituted the Tribunal and issued procedural rules under Section 111 of the GST …

M/S VARUN BEVERAGES LIMITEDversusSTATE OF U.P. AND 2 OTHERS

M/s Varun Beverages Ltd filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court challenging the inability to appeal orders under sections 107 or 108 of the GST Act because the GST Appellate Tribunal had not yet been constituted. The Court noted that the Central Government subsequently constituted the …