Patna Court October 1994 Judgments

Hazari Bagh Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs. Smt. Jaitunissa and ors ...

Court: Patna

R.N. Sahay, J.1. These first appeal and civil revision application have been heard together since the same order has been challenged both in appeal and civil revision.2. The brief facts for disposal of these matters are as follows:Hazaribagh Central Co-operative Bank Ltd., Hazaribagh (appellant in the fire appeal and petitioner in civil revision) (hereinafter to be referred to as the plaintiff) filed Money Suit No. 86/73 in the court of Subordinate Judge, Hazaribagh against one Md. Hafiz and Md. Rafique (to be referred to as the defendants) who were own brothers. Defendant No. 1 Md. Hafiz died during the pendency of the suit and his heirs have been substituted. The defendants deal in ready-made garments under the name and style of M/s. Bangalore Dresses in the town of Hazaribagh. The plaintiff had advanced a loan of Rs. 45,286.49 to the defendants which was not repaid. The defendants on receiving summons appeared and applied for time to file written statement, but despite several adjo...

Ram Kishun Upadhyaya and Etc. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.

Court: Patna

Nagendra Rai, J. 1. In Cr.W.J.C. No. 561/94 the petitioner has challenged the order dt. 12-7-1994 of the District Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram, in Arms Case No. 84/94 (Annexure-2) asking the petitioner to show cause as to why the licence for holding rifle granted to him under the provisions of the Arms Act be not cancelled for violation of the provisions as contained in Section 14(3)(b) of the Arms Act and suspending the licence during the pendency of cancellation proceeding with immediate effect. 2. In Cr.W.J.C. No. 418/94 the petitioner has challenged the order dt. 19-3-94 passed by the Commissioner, Purnea Division, Purnea, in Arms Appeal No. 12 of 1993-94, affirming the order dt. 10-7-1994 of the District Magistrate, Purnea, in Case No. 42/93, by which the petitioner licence granted under the Arms Act to hold pistol has been suspended. 3. The only question for determination is as to whether these two applications are maintainable as criminal writ jurisdictioncases or not. 4. Le...

Suman Kumar Sinha Vs. State of Bihar and anr.

Court: Patna

Nagendra Rai, J.1. In Cr. W. J.C. No. 561/94 the petitioner has challenged the order dated 12-7-1994 of the District Magistrate, Rohtas at Sasaram, in Arms case No. 84/94 (Annexure-2) asking the petitioner to show cause as to why the licence for holding Rifle granted to him under the provisions of the Arms Act be not cancelled for violation of the provisions as contained in Section 14(3)(b) of the Arms Act and suspending the licence during the pendency of cancellation proceeding with immediate effect.2. In Cr.W.J.C. No. 418/94 the petitioner has challenged the order dated 19-3-1994 passed by the Commissioner, Purnea Division, Purnea, in Arms Appeal No. 12 of 1993-94, affirming the order dated 10-7-1994 of the District Magistrate, Purnea, in Case No, 42/93, by which the petitioner's licence granted under the Arms Act to hold Pistol has been suspended.3. The only question for determination is as to whether these two applications are maintainable as criminal writ jurisdiction cases or no...

Smt. Krishna Rai and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.

Court: Patna

Radha Mohan Prasad, J.1. In this writ application the petitioners, six in number have prayed for quashing of the office order dated 4.1.1993, whereby respondent No. 10 has been promoted in the Junior Selection Grade and the office order dated 11th February, 1993 whereby respondent Nos.5 to 9 have been promoted in the Senior Selection Grade in the scale of Rs. 1800-3300 with effect from 7.9.1990 as contained in Annexures-5 and 6 respectively; and for directing the respondent State to promote the petitioners of Junior Selection Grade with effect from 7.9.1987 and as Senior Selection Grade Assistant with effect from 7.9.1990 in the aforementioned scale and further to direct the respondent State to place the petitioners above the private respondents in the seniority list and to give all consequential benefits in the service for which they are entitled. In course of hearing Mr. Jha, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners also prayed for quashing of the office order dated 3-6-...

Rajendra Prasad and Co. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna

Reported in: (1995)52ITD142(Pat.)

An intimation sent by the assessing officer under s. 143(1)(a)(i) is not an `order' within the meaning of section 263 and is hence not revisable.The word "intimation" has been used for the first time in the Income Tax Act by virtue of the Amendment to the scheme of assessments with effect from 1-4-1989. Since it is a new word, it is evident that its menaing will be not the same as the meaning of the earlier expression "order" or "assessment". The Legislature has not thought it fit to deem such an intimation to be an order for the purpose of section 156 and section 264. The fact that the amendment in the Explanation below section 143(5) relates to section 264 only and not to section 263 is a clear pointer that it was not the intention of the Legislature to bring an intimation under section 143(1)(a)(i) within the purview of section 263. A separate clause became necessary to enable rectification of intimations under section 143(1). This also shows that an intimation under section 143(1)...

Jagdeo Das Vs. State of Bihar

Court: Patna

Dharampal Sinha, J.1. In this case a somewhat unusual question has arisen for consideration in the following background:One Jagdeo Das was tried by the Sessions Judge, Darbhanga in Sessions trial No. 40 of 1989 on three heads of charge, one relating to offence punishable under Section 20(b)(i), second punishable under Section 23 and third punishable under Section 25 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act for short) and he was found guilty of all the three offences. He was also charged of the offence punishable under Section 47(a) of the Excise Act but that the learned Sessions Judge had held that there is no necessity for convicting him of that offence and we are not concerned with that offence. Learned Sessions Judge passed sentence of rigorous imprisonment for 5 years for the offence punishable under Section 20(b)(i) of the NDPS Act, 10 years for the offence punishable under Section 23 and for the same period (of 10 years) for the offence punishable un...

Trident Tubes Limited Vs. the Government of Bihar and ors.

Court: Patna

Asok Kumar Ganguly, J. 1. This writ petition has been filed by M/s. Trident Tubes Limited, a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter called the said Company) through its Director Sri Sudarshan Kumar Saboo for a commend upon the respondents concerned directing them to pay to the petitioner the outstanding sum of Rs. 15,06,597.33 P. together with interest thereon. According to the petitioner, the said amount is payable by the respondents, the Government of Bihar, on account of price for the materials supplied by the petitioner Company to the respondents pursuant to the orders issued by the Government of Bihar. 2. The case of the petitioner is that the said Company is engaged in manufacturing and producing plastic tubes and strainers of various ranges and specifications. The Engineering-Chief-cum-Special Secretary, Government of Bihar, Patna (respondent No. 2) invited tenders as usual for supply of materials such as UPVC Ribbed Strainer. The petitioner participa...

Hem NaraIn Singh and ors. Vs. Ganesh Singh and ors.

Court: Patna

Asok Kumar Ganguly, J. 1. This is an application for review of the judgment and order passed on 24th Sept. 1974 in Second Appeal No. 485 of 1970 whereby the said second appeal was dismissed by a learned single Judge of this Court. 2. For deciding this review petition, no detailed investigation into the fact is necessary. Therefore, the bare facts which are necessary for decision in this case are as follows:-- The second appeal was filed by the plaintiffs-petitioners against the judgment and decree passed in Title Appeal No. 33 of 1964/49 of the 1966 on 29th April, 1970 by the Additional District Judge, Darbhanga whereby he was pleased to affirm the judgment and decree dated 21st February, 1964 passed by the Subordinate Judge, Additional Court of Samastipur in Title Suit No. 13/12 of 1958/1960. The said second appeal was admitted by this Court on 27th March, 1973. Thereafter the matter was taken up for hearing on the basis of an office notes by a learned single Judge of this Court. Af...