Patna Court May 1995 Judgments
United Bank of India Vs. Drolia Mineral Industries and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-09-1995
S.K. Chattopadhayaya, J.1. Heard Mr. M.Y. Eqbal on behalf of the appellant and Mr. Marathia on behalf of the Respondents on the petition at flag 'A'.2. United Bank of India, the appellant has filed this application with a prayer to stay the operative portion of the order dated 10.4.1995 passed by the Subordinate Judge No. 1 Bokaro at Chas in Money Suit No. 7/91.3. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass:This first Appeal is directed against the order dated 10.4.1995 passed by the learned court below dismissing the suit holding that the same was barred by limitation. Relief in the suit claimed was for realisation of Rs. 21,51,786.39 paise against the defendants. It further appears that reason for filing of the suit was that this Court by order dated 7.5.1987 passed in Cr. Misc. No. 734/87 while granting anticipatqry bail to the respondent directed him to furnish Indira Vikas Patra before the Certificate Officer. The total value of the said Indira Vikas Patra was rupees three lacs...
Tag this Judgment!Vivekanand Kumar Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-09-1995
B.P. Singh, J.1. The instant writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner, who is an accused in case pending before the Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class Patna, in G.R. No. 494 of 84/T.R. No. 1055 of 92 under Sections 341, 323, 324, 448 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code. He prays for quashing of the order dated 21.6.1993 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Patna, in the aforesaid case, refusing to drop the criminal case pending against the petitioner. In effect, the prayer of the petitioner is that the case pending against the petitioner should be directed to be withdrawn, in view of the policy decision of the Government, as contained in the letter No. 1791 dated 30th March, 1986, of the Secretary of the Department of Law addressed to all District Magistrate.2. It appears that originally this application was filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the order of the Magistrate rejecting the ap...
Tag this Judgment!Hiralal Agarwal Vs. Most. Sumitra Devi
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-09-1995
Narayan Roy, J.1. This civil revision application under Section 14(8) of the Bihar Buildings (lease, Rent and Eviction) Control, Act 1982 (hereinafter to be referred to as the 'Act') has been filed by the defendant-tenant against the judgment and decree dated 8.10.1991 passed in Eviction Suit No. 15 of 1990 by which the suit on the ground of personal necessity has been decreed.2. It appears that the plaintiff brought the suit aforementioned on personal necessity for setting up business for his one of the grand-son, namely, Om Prakash Banshal, who was unemployed. The defendant, however, contested the suit by taking leave of the Court and the learned Court below on the basis of the pleadings of the parties and evidence on records decreed the suit holding that the plaintiff required the suit premises reasonably and bonaftdely for engaging his grand-son, namely, Om Prakash Banshal.3. Mr. Kameshwar Prasad, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner mainly assailed the judgment i...
Tag this Judgment!S.M. Mazhar and ors. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-04-1995
S.K. Chattopadhyaya, J.1. In the instant application a prayer has been made for quashing of the first information report lodged under Section 9(B) of the Explosives Act, 1884 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) read with Rule 5 of the Explosives Rules (shortly the rules) as well as the order taking cognizance dated 7.9.1994 for an offence under Section 5 of the Explosive Substance Act (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Substance Act). 2. Before dealing with the points raised on behalf of the parties, the facts, in brief, are necessary to be stated; The Sub-Inspector of Police, Daltonganj police station on getting secret information that a jeep bearing registration No. BHH 5610 was carrying 10 K. Gs. of explosive articles with detonators and fues from M/s Paramount Explosive Magazine to the offence of the Bihar State Mineral Development Corporation (hereinater referred to as ('Corporation') whereas, under law, they were entitled to carry only 5 K.Gs. of explosives at a time, and t...
Tag this Judgment!Sanjay Kumar Singh and anr. Vs. the Patna Regional Development Authori ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-02-1995
Aftab Alam, J.1. The petitioners in this application seek to challenge the directions and orders contained in Annexures-8, 10 and 11. Annexure-8 is a copy of the communication dated April 2, 1987 addressed to Respondent No. 5 (from whom the petitioners had purchased the flat in question) intimating that the allotment of Flat No. 123 in Block No. 14 situated at Rajendra Nagar, Patna in her favour had been cancelled from the date of the issuance of the letter. It was stated in this letter that respondent No. 5 had transferred the flat to respondent No. 4 without obtaining prior permission from the Patna Regional Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as 'the Authority') and had also constructed two rooms on the roof of the flat in an illegal manner. The action of the allottee, it was alleged, constituted breach of the conditions of the lease and for this reason the allotment was cancelled.2. Annexure-10 is an order of eviction passed in purported exercise of power under Section ...
Tag this Judgment!Devendra Prasad Nayak Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-02-1995
Aftab Alam, J.1. The petitioner in this application challenges the orders passed in a proceeding under the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act directing the Eviction of the petitioner from the disputed land. The order of eviction was passed by the Original Authority, the Circle Officer-cum-Block Development Officer, Rosera on 4.10.1976 (Copy at Annexure-2) in Encroachment Case No. 15/23 of 75-76. The petitioner's appeal against this order was rejected by order dated 15.6.1982 passed by the Collector, Samastipur (Copy at Annexure-4). A further appeal by the petitioner before the Commissioner, Darbhanga Division was rejected as not maintainable by order dated 7.1.1991 passed by the Commissioner, Darbhanga Division (Copy at Annexure-5).2. The subject matter of the proceeding has been described in detail in paragraph 4 of the writ petition. The disputed land measures 6 kathas 1/2 dhurs, equivalent to about 26 decimals, and is part of a bigger plot bearing No. 1187 within Ward No. 3, now Wa...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›