Patna Court January 1995 Judgments
Prayag Gope Vs. Mrs. Etnal Smart and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-31-1995
Bisheshwar Prasad Singh, J.1. Since questions which appeared intricate and of public importance arose in this Second Appeal, the appeal, has been referred by a Division Bench to the Full Bench for an authoritative decision. The two questions formulated by the referring Bench are the following :(a) Whether the -property, inherited by a Christian convert daughter from her deceased Hindu father by virtue of Caste Disabilities Removal Act 1850 on her death prior to Hindu Woman's Right to Property Act will pass to the reversioners of her father or to her own Christian progeny under the Indian Succession Act?(b) Whether the law laid down in the cases of Fakeer Bux v. Saira Bagum : AIR1972All475 , Mathongin Gupta v. Ramratan Roy ILR 19 Calcutta 289 and Miter Sen Singh v. Maqbul Hasan Khan AIR 1930 Privy Council 251 is in conflict with the views expressed by the Privy Council in Abraham v. Abraham (9) Moor's Indian Appeal 195; Khunni Lal v. Kunwar Gobind Krishna Narain Indian Appeals 875 and ...
Tag this Judgment!Birendra Singh Vs. Dasrath Kumar Singh and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-25-1995
R.N. Sahay, J.1. By this application under Sections 80, 80A and 80(1) of the Representation of Peoples Act, 1951 the petitioner has questioned the election of Dasrath Kumar Singh who was elected from 324-Hussainabad Assembly Constituency in 1990 General Election. As many as many as 30 candidates had filed their nomination paper including the petitioner and the respondents. The Returning Officer rejected the nomination paper of Ashok Kumar Singh, Laxman Ram and Rabindra Singh at the time of scrutiny. After scrutiny nomination papers of 42 candidates were found valid. Out of 42 candidates, 17 candidates withdraw from the context. 25 candidates remained in the field as the contesting candidates including the election petitioner and respondent No. 1. The petitioner was not official candidate of Janata Dal whereas first respondent was official candidate of B.J.P. The petitioner has been polled 16047 votes whereas returned candidates had bagged 16210 votes. The first respondent was declared...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Taj Singh Lakshmana and Bihar Industries Association Vs. State of ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-25-1995
Banwari Lal Yadav, J. 1. These three analogous writ petitions have been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India as public interest litigation (for short 'P.I.L.') and the points involved are similar in nature. Hence, it is convenient to dispose of them by this common judgment. These petitions would, however, be referred as first, second and third writ petitions.2. In the first writ petition filed by Dr. Taj Singh Lakshmana (in person), chairman of the Bihar Sick Industries Association, the petitioner has stated that about 7000 entrepreneurs have obtained separate loans from the Bihar State Financial Corporation, Frazer Road, Patna (respondent No. 2), and separate agreements have been executed in respect of all the entrepreneurs. But those agreements have not been filed and only one of them was shown in the court. Nothing can be ascertained with certainty from the alleged prayer made in paragraph 10 of the first writ petition. However, the prayer in the first writ petitio...
Tag this Judgment!Brijnandan Singh Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-24-1995
K. Venkataswami, C.J.1. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 28-6-1989 issued under the signature of the Under Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, vide his letter bearing No. 0/14/G/24678/74. By the impugned order the Freedom Fighter's pension granted to the petitioner at the rate of Rs. 200/- per month has been cancelled with a direction to the Government of Bihar to initiate legal action against the petitioner for mis-representation to get the pension and further to recover the amount of pension already drawn by the petitioner. The petitioner also further prays for issue of a writ of mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to restore the pension already granted with arrears and to continue to pay the same.2. Brief facts may not be noted. The petitioner, claiming to be a Freedom Fighter and in this connection has suffered imprisonment first in the year 1930 from July to December and second time in 1942 from February to March, ap...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Sewak Singh Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-24-1995
Bisheshwar Prasad Singh, J.1. These three matters have been heard together and are therefore, being disposal of by common order. C.W.J.C. No. 10357 of 1994 has been filed by Ram Sevak Singh (hereinafter referred to as 'the petitioner' challenging the order of transfer dated 15th November, 1994 (Annexure-12), whereby the petitioner has been transferred from the post of Block Supply Officer, Chapra, to the post of Block Supply Officer, Siwan Sadar Circle.M.J.C. No. 1608 of 1994 has been filed by Vidya Singh and Ors. for initiating proceedings under the Contempt of Courts Act against the State of Bihar and its authorities for passing the order dated 1-10-1994, whereby the order transferring the petitioner from Chapra had been recalled. The aforesaid application proceeds on the basis that the opposite parties therein had misled the court into disposing of the writ petition filed by the applicants by informing the Court that the petitioner had been transferred, and thereafter within a few ...
Tag this Judgment!Mithila Motors (P) Ltd. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-23-1995
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. All the writ petitions filed by the common petitioner involves common point of law and in all the cases the revisional order passed by the Bihar Commercial Taxes Tribunal is common, thereby they have been heard together and disposed of by this common order.2. The petitioner is a private1 Limited Company having its Registered Office at Jamshedpur and Branch Offices at different places in the State of Bihar. By these writ petitions, the petitioner has challenged the orders passed by the Respondents imposing penalties under Section 25 (3) of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and/or penalties imposed by the Respondents under Section 16 (9) of the Act, the appellate orders confirming the penalties and the order passed by the Chairman of the Commercial Taxes Tribunal, Bihar, Patna in the Revision applications.3. The petitioner has not only challenged the order imposing penalties for nonpayment of Sales tax 'Surcharge' in time and the re...
Tag this Judgment!Shiv Chandra Pandey and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-23-1995
Aftab Alam, J.1. What is the precise stage in a land ceiling proceeding at which the land-holder may prefer an appeal under Section 30 of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act ('the Act' for short) against the rejection of his objections to the draft statement published under Section 10(2) of the Act? This is the question that falls for consideration in this case.2. The facts are brief and simple and can be stated as follows. The petitioners objections to the draft statement were rejected by the Collector by an order, dated 30.4.93, passed under Section 10(3) of the Act. The petitioners did not prefer an appeal within thirty days from the date of this order. The draft statement was then finally published in the official gazette and its occupy was served on the petitioners, in terms of Section 11(1) of the Act on 3.11.94. On 4.11.94, the petitioners applied for the certified copy of the order dated 30.4.93 passed under Section 10(3) of th...
Tag this Judgment!Ashok Poddar and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-20-1995
O.N. Asthana, J.1. This is the criminal appeal against the judgment and order dated 21st September, 1994 passed by the Sessions Judge, Deoghar in Sessions Trial No. 198 of 1992 where the learned Sessions Judge held all these three accused-appellants guilty for the offence punishable Under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code and awarded the sentence of ten years rigorous imprisonment.2. The informant Ram Prasad Poddar (father of his young married daughter Sudama Devi) gave a long written report at the Police Station on 25th May, 1992 with me allegation that he married his daughter Sudama Devi with accused-appellant, Ashok Poddar in the month of Asardh of the year 1991 and he gave Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) cash and ornaments worth Rs. 5,00()/- (five thousand) by way of dowry in the marriage of his daughter Sudama Devi and he promised to pay a balance sum of Rs. 2,000/- (two thousand) to the son-in-law and his father later on. This accused-appellant, Ashok Poddar and Vijay Poddar sta...
Tag this Judgment!Choubey Trader Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-20-1995
K. Venkataswami, C.J. and S.J. Mukhopadhyaya, J.1. In this case the petitioner challenges Annexure '9' and '10' of the writ petition. Annexure '9' is an order levying penalty under Section 20(1)(b) of Bihar Finance Act, 1981 (in short 'Act') and Annexure ' 10' is the demand notice.2. The short point that arises for our consideration is when the assessee/petitioner has disclosed the turnover in his return but claimed exemption on certain turnover, can the Assessing Officer levy penalty under Section 20(1)(b) of the Act.3. In support of the contention that no penalty can be levied, learned Counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on a Division Bench judgment of this Court, reported in 1985 Bihar Revenue & Labour Journal 7, wherein this Court has considered the predecessor Section, namely, Section 19(1)(b) of Bihar Sales Tax Second Ordinance, 1979. While construing the scope of that Section, this Court has held that if a particular turnover is disclosed and exemption was claimed that c...
Tag this Judgment!Arun Kumar JaIn Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-18-1995
K. Venkataswami, C.J.1. This L.P.A. is preferred against the judgment and order dated 9.2.1994 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 8745 of 1993.2. The appellant in this appeal is respondent No. 6 in C.W.J.C. No. 8745/93. Respondent No. 6 to 10 herein were the petitioners in the said G.W.J.C. Before the learned single Judge and orders passed by the fourth respondent herein in Municipal Survey Appeal Nos. 171 and 172 of 1988 dated 24.9.1989 were challenged. The learned single Judge found that at the relevant time when the impugned orders were passed on the appeals the fourth respondent had no power to pass the same. On that ground alone, without going into the merits of the case, the learned single Judge allowed the writ application with liberty to the parties to prefer Municipal Survey appeals before an appropriate authority if so advised. Aggrieved by the above decision of the learned single Judge the present appeal is filed.3. As the only question that has to be decided in this appeal is with ref...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »