Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.19 seconds)
Smt. Sudha Devi vs Union Of India And Others on 20 April, 2023 cites

Saurav Mittal vs Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. And 2 Others on 3 December, 2015

15. Judgement of Saurav Mittal vs Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (supra) relied upon by the petitioner is not applicable in the present case because from the fact of the relied judgement, it is clear that the land was purchased from exclusive owner of the land, which he himself demarcated and specified the portion sold to the person concerned but in the present case petitioner had purchased 1/3rd share of Sidh Gopal who was not owner of exclusive part in Plot No.370/1 but he was co-sharer with other two persons namely, Sri Jageshwar Prasad and Sri Kesan Prasad.
Allahabad High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 1 - D Maheshwari - Full Document

Madhu Singh vs Union Of India And Others on 22 August, 2012

14. Similarly, Division Bench of this Court in the case of Madhu Singh Vs. Union of India & Others 2013 ADJ Online 0398 clearly observed that affidavit of co-owners regarding consent filed after the submission of application cannot be taken into consideration. Therefore, awarding of zero marks under category of capability to provide infrastructure and facility is correct. Relevant part of the said judgment is being quoted as below :
Allahabad High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 1 - H S Yadav - Full Document

Sangeeta Gupta vs Union Of India & Others on 30 July, 2021

13. From perusal of record, it appears that in Plot No.370/1 there were three co-sharers namely, Sidh Gopal, Sri Jageshwar Prasad and Sri Kesan Prasad and each was having 1/3rd share and there were no partition in Plot No.370/1 and all the three persons were joint owner of the above land. Petitioner purchased 1/3rd share of Sidh Gopal and her husband also purchased part of the share of another co-sharer Sri Jageshwar Prasad, therefore, petitioner has become co-sharer in Plot No.370/1 with other co-sharer including her husband. But at the time of submitting the application form for retail outlet, petitioner has submitted the consent of her husband and consent of other co-sharer was not submitted at the time of submitting the application form. As per the guidelines of Indian Oil Corporation regarding the allotment of retail outlet which was annexed by the petitioner herself at page 11 of her rejoinder affidavit specifically shows that if any land is owned by the petitioner along with other persons and share of the petitioner was more than required by Indian Oil Corporation then petitioner was required to submit registered agreement with other co-sharer showing their consent alongwith demarcated part of his share but in the present case petitioner has not complied the above direction by not filing consent of other co-sharers through registered agreement along with the application form, and even not at the time of interview which was held on 12.11.2010. The Division Bench of this Court in the case of Smt. Sangeeta Gupta Vs. Union of India & Others 2009 (7) ADJ 534 (DB) observed that required document should be filed on the last date of submission of application form. Any document filed subsequently cannot be taken into consideration. Paragraph no.21 of the above judgement is being quoted as below :
Allahabad High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 1 - S Agarwal - Full Document
1