Patna Court December 1995 Judgments
Kashi Nath Tapuriah Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-22-1995
S.K. Chattopadhayaya, J. 1. The petitioner, Kashinath Tapuriah, the Chairman of M/S Incab Industries Ltd. has impugned the order taking congnizance dated 25.2.1995 and also prayed for quashing of the entire proceeding.2. Before dealing with the grievances made by the petitioner, it would be appropriate to portray the factual backgrounds:On the basis of a written report lodged by one Uday Kant Sharma (opposite party No. 2) and F.I.R. was lodged on 5.5.1994 giving rise to Golmuri P.S. case No. 88/94 under Sections 406,420 and 34 of the Penal Code3. Allegation, inter alia, was made that the petitioner being the Chairman of the Incab Industries Ltd (company in short), in connivance with Tulsi Prasad, Vice Chairman of the Cable Cooperative Society Ltd. (Society in short), misappropriated a sum of Rupees 40,15,152.70 paise which amount was the deductions made from the salaries of the employees of the company and interest thereto for the months of June, July and August, 19934. After investi...
Tag this Judgment!Basudeo Besra Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-22-1995
D.P. Wadhwa, C.J.1. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner, a convenor of certain social, cultural and literary organisation of Santhal Paraganas and Chotonagpur divisions, has claimed a declaration that the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 (in short the Act) is not applicable to the Scheduled Areas in the State of Bihar, and consequently to restrain the State Election Commission and the State of Bihar from holding any election under the Act in that area.2. Field of controversy is quite small but arguments some what extensive. Part IX of the constitution deals with the Scheduled and Tribal Areas. Under Article 244 falling in that part the provisions of the Fifth Schedule to the Constitution shall apply to the administration and control of the Scheduled Areas and Scheduled Tribes in any State, the State of Bihar being one of such States. If we now refer to the Fifth Schedule, Part C thereof defines the 'Scheduled Areas'. The expression 'Scheduled Areas' me...
Tag this Judgment!Raj Mangal Singh and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-22-1995
S.K. Chattopadhyaya, J.1. The order taking cognizance dated 24.2.1995 under various sections of the Penal Code is being impugned in this application under Section 482 Cr. P.C. A prayer has also made to quash all subsequent proceedings against the petitioners.2. The opposite party No. 2 lodged an FIR alleging, inter alia, that the petitioners alongwith 50-60 persons forming an unlawful assembly armed with lethal weapons, including fire arms, illegally trespassed into the house of the informant. Their main intention was to disclose the informant from his possession from the house and landed property. While entering the premises, they also resorted to fire and forcibly looted household goods of the informant namely Sankar Prasad. One Laloo Babu was assaulted when he tried to resist. The occurrence, it is further alleged, took place in presence of the police personnel, who were posted at the place of occurrence for protection to the informant. Named witnesses had seen the occurrence.3. O...
Tag this Judgment!Shiv Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-21-1995
D.P. Wadhwa, C.J.1. The petitioner, an employee of the Bihar State Hydroelectric Power Corporation Limited (for short, the Corporation), a Government of Bihar undertaking, has filed this writ application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution seeking writ, order or direction quashing the notification appointing Mr. Ramkaran Pal, respondent No. 4 as the Chairman of the corporation on various grounds. The Corporation is a company registered under the Companies Act,1956 and is governed by the Companies Act and its Memorandum and Articles of Association. There are five respondents, namely, (i) the State of Bihar through the Chief Secretary, (ii) Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Department of Power (Electricity), Government of Bihar, (iii) Secretary-incharge, Department of Power (Electricity), Government of Bihar, (iv) Mr. Ramkaran Pal, Chairman of the Corporation and (v) the Corporation itself through its Managing Directors.2. The petitioner has challenged the appointment of Mr. Ramkar...
Tag this Judgment!Sumitra Devi Vs. Executive Engineer, Udar Asthan Irrigation Division
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-21-1995
Nagendra Rai, J. 1. The present appeal has been filed under Section 30(1) of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') againstthe judgment dated March 18, 1980, passed by the Commissioner under the Workmen's Compensation Act at Patna, in Workmen's Compensation Case No. 12 of 1977/6 of 1978, by which theapplication filed by the appellant for compensation under Section 3 of the Act has been dismissed. 2. The deceased Narendra Kumar was appointed as seasonal khalasi under the Irrigation Department by the Assistant Engineer, Udar Asthan in the district of Gaya on July 21, 1975 for a period up to October 20, 1975. On October 1, 1975 he was on duty at Dhawal Bigha Canal Regulator under Udar Asthan Irrigation Scheme. According to the appellant, her husband Narendra Kumar while on night duty on October 1, 1975 at Dhawal Bigha Canal Regulator was done to death. She filed a claim application under Section 3 of the Act claiming Rs. 16,800/- as compensation. ...
Tag this Judgment!Metallurgical and Engineering Consultants (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissione ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-21-1995
Gurusharan Sharma, J. 1. The petitioner is a Government company and an assessee under the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act'), It is deriving income from imparting technical consultancy 'know-how' to its customers. After completion of the assessment for the assessment year 1977-78, a notice dated July 29, 1977 (annexure-1), was issued to the petitioner under Section 156 of the Act for the payment of advance tax for the assessment year 1978-79, enclosing therewith an order passed under Section 210 of the Act, whereby a sum of Rs. 44,80,690 was determined to be payable by the petitioner for the financial year 1977-78 relating to the assessment year 1978-79. In compliance with the said notice, the petitioner paid advance tax of Rs. 53,00,000 in addition to Rs. 3,26,414 as tax deducted at source, without accepting the validity thereof. 2. Similar notice dated November 24, 1978 (annexure-3), was issued to the petitioner, whereby a sum of Rs. 77,05,134 was dete...
Tag this Judgment!Metallurgical and Engineering Consultants (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissione ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-21-1995
GURUSHARAN SHARMA, J. :The petitioner is a Government company and an assessee under the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act'). It is deriving income from imparting technical consultancy 'know-how' to its customers. After completion of the assessment for the asst. yr. 1977-78, a notice dt. 29th July, 1977 (Annexure-1), was issued to the petitioner under s. 156 of the Act for the payment of advance tax for the asst. yr. 1978-79, enclosing therewith an order passed under s. 210 of the Act, whereby a sum of Rs. 44,80,690 was determined to be payable by the petitioner for the financial year 1977-78 relating to the asst. yr. 1978-79. In compliance with the said notice, the petitioner paid advance tax of Rs. 53,00,000 in addition to Rs. 3,26,414 as tax deducted at source, without accepting the validity thereof.2. Similar notice dt. 24th November, 1978 (Annexure-3), was issued to the petitioner, whereby a sum of Rs. 77,05,134 was determined to be payable during the financi...
Tag this Judgment!Sheo Nandan Lal and ors. Vs. Jai Ram Lal and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-20-1995
S.K. Chattopadhyaya, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 19.7.88 (decree signed on 27.7.88) passed by Sri Suresh Prasad Sinha, Subordinate Judge, III, at Jamshedpur in Title (Partition) Suit No. 109/28 of 1985/88 decreeing the suit of the plaintiff-respondentNo. 1.2. The appellants before this Court were defendants 1 to 3 whereas respondentNo. 1 was the plaintiff and respondent Nos. 2 to 6 were defendants 4 to 8 before the lower court. The suit was filed for partition of the property mentioned in the schedule of the plaint according to the share of the parties.According to the plaintiff the house premises described in schedule formerly belonged to one Parbat Lal who died in 1955 leaving behind his four sons, namely, Murari Lal, Banwari Lal, Jairarm Lal and Kanhaiya Lal. Jatram Lal is the plaintiff and Kanhai Lal is defendant No. 8. Murari Lal died about 10 years ago leaving behind defendant Nos. 1,2 and 3 as his son, daughter and widow respectively. The heirs of Mu...
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Shakoor and anr. Etc. Vs. State of Bihar and ors. Etc.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-20-1995
S.N. Jha, J.1. The petitioners in these two writ petitions are aggrieved by the constitution of Jamsoti and Chalkusa Gram Panchayat in the district of Hazaribagh and Daludih-Maheshpur Gram Panchayat in the district of Dhanbad respectively. The ground urged is that in terms of the Proviso to Section 11 of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 1993, it is mandatory for the District Magistrate to consult the Panchayats concerned before effecting any change in the geographical limits of the existing Panchayat formed under the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 1947, which continues to be legal entity under Section 157(f) of the 1993 Act till the first sitting of the Panchayat under the new Act. The crux of the dispute involves inclusion, exclusion of certain villages or bifurcation of the existing Panchayat. Counsel for the parties in course of hearing also referred to the factual aspects. In support of the contention that consultation with the Panchayat concerned is mandatory, reliance was placed on the d...
Tag this Judgment!Raghunath Ram Vs. Sahodra Devi
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-20-1995
R.N. Sahay, J.1. The appellant, Raghunath Ram, is the husband of the respondent. He instituted a suit for divorce on the ground of adultery but could not succeed. The suit was dismissed and hence he has preferred this appeal for setting aside the judgment of the 3rd Addl. Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi.2. I have heard Sri Laik in support of the appeal at length. The wife despite notice has not appeared to contest the appeal. Sri Laik stated that the respondent is not interested in contesting the appeal and that she has left the village and that is why notice issued by this Court could not be served on her, although notice was directed to be served at the concerned police station.3. The facts of the case are that the parties were married on 28.4.1977 according to Hindu rites. The appellant is serving as spy in the Indian Army. After marriage the respondent lived with the appellant for same time. A female child named Sushma was born in 1978. It is .alleged that on 5.10.79 the respondent ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »