That against the said order dated 05.05.1998, the bank filed an FAFO in the
Hon'ble High Court, Allahabad being FAFO No. 419/1998 ... Counsel Shri Navin Sinha, for filing the
same in the said appeal - FAFO No. 419/1998. The counsel was also directed by
the then Branch
That against the said order dated 05.05.1998, the bank filed an FAFO in the
Hon'ble High Court, Allahabad being FAFO No. 419/1998 ... Counsel Shri Navin Sinha, for filing the
same in the said appeal - FAFO No. 419/1998. The counsel was also directed by
the then Branch
administration and
polluters. Just compensation and negligence has been discussed in
FAFO No.430/2011 Uttar Padesh Rajya Sadak Parivahan Nigam Vs. Smt.
Shalini Pratap
challenged this order dated 24th February, 2005 before the UPERC in appeal FAFO No. 50 of 2005 before the High Court of Lucknow
awarded compensation to the complainants. This judgment has been upheld in FAFO No.80 of 2009 Smt. Rama Sood and others Vs. Shri Chavan singh
allowing the complaint of the complainant which is of the nature of FAFO arising out of the judgment of MACT. The complainant has sought enforcement
stay order of the
Allahabad High Court in the Civil Appeal no. FAFO no. 1414/2003.
2. Vide CPIO Order dated 14 February 2011, CPIO ... stay order of the Allahabad High Court in the Civil Appeal no. FAFO no.
1414/2003 to Appellant.
11 Information is to be provided within
September 2004 from the Family
Court, Lucknow which she has contested vide FAFO no. 73 of
2004 and FAFO no. 72 of 2004 which
