Patna Court July 1995 Judgments

Nand Kishore Singh and ors. Vs. State of Bihar

Court: Patna

S.K. Chattopadhayaya, J.1. A very interesting question has been raised in this case to Whether after an accused has been examined under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code), the Trial Court can recall a witness for examination and cross-examination in exercising of its power under Section 311 of the Code.2. The facts of the case, in short, is that the charge-sheet against the petitioners was submitted under Sections 342, 384 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and cognizance was taken on 14.12.1985. On 25.1.1991 the informant Shri S.N. Singh was examined and was discharged. On 14.9.1992 an application was filed on behalf of the petitioners to recall Sri Singh for further cross-examination. Prayer was allowed and by order dated 19.9.1992 the Court below directed the prosecution to produce Sri Singh in the Court for his further cross-examination. It appears that as Sri Singh was not produced by the prosecution for further cross-examination his...

Steel Authority of India Ltd. Vs. Raj Kumar and Bros. and anr.

Court: Patna

Prasun Kumar Deb, J.1. The judgment and order dated 29.4.1995 passed by Subordinate Judge, 4th Court, Dhanbad in Title (Arbitration) Suit No. 81 of 1994 has been challenged in this civil revision application by the plaintiff-petitioner.2. The fact of the case run in a very narrow compass. On invitation of tender for transportation of middlings from the dams lying on the east of Dugdha Coal Washery and loading into wagons at No. 4 sidding, the defendants along with others made their offers and after negotiation, the defendant was found to be fit for entrusting the contract and as such the letter of intent was issued on 25.10.1992 to defendant No. 1 vide Ext. 13 in the suit. The defendant asked for work order, but it is the case of the plaintiff that before the contract cold be finalised it was decided by the authorities of the plaintiff that the work would be done departmentally through Bharat Coking Coal Limited and not by a third party and as such the defendants were asked to take ba...

Krishna Chandra Mandal Vs. Smt. Mandavi Devi and anr.

Court: Patna

B.L. Yadav, J. 1. This is a defendant's tenant's Second Appeal in a suit for eviction, as the building is reasonably and in good faith required by the landlord, and for arrears of rent. The suit under Section 11 of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent & Eviction) Control Act, 1982 (compendious 'the Act') was filed by the plaintiffs respondents with the averment that the plaintiffs required the accommodation for personal necessity. In fact the accommodation in dispute was let out to the defendant-appellant on a monthly rental of Rs. 125 / - with the understanding that the rent would be paid at the end of every month and in case of non-payment of rent for two consecutive months, the defendant would be treated to be defaulter and will be liable to pay interest at the rate of Re. 1/- per cent per month on the arrears of the amount of rent. The rent was paid only till 1-2-1985 and thereafter the defendant became defaulter. It was said in paragraph 9 of the plaint that the plaintiffs requi...

Mohammad Abuzar Vs. Akbar Imam Saheb and ors.

Court: Patna

B.L. Yadav, J.1. This is a plaintiff's Second Appeal preferred under Section 100 of the Civil Procedure, Code, 1908 (compendiously 'the Code') against the concurrent decree dated 4-4-1986 passed by the First Additional District Judge, Nalanda at Bihar sharif dismissing the First Appeal, and the trial court decree dated 31-7-1982 rendered by the 2nd additional Subordinate Judge, dismissing the suit, for the relief of partition of 50 paise share in the suit land 'having an area of 1 acre 18 decimal of Plot No. 1321 Khata No-. 3, Tauzi No. 10633 situate in village Rampur Bagnabad, P.S. Bihar sharif District Nalanda mentioned in Schedule 1 at the foot of the plaint and to carve out separate Takhta of 50 Paisc share, with a consequential prayer to give possession of the aforesaid separate share to the plaintiff.2. Eschewing the irrelevant facts, the material facts are that the suit land belonged to one Md. Hussain who settled an area of 59 decimals by a registered settlement deed 17-2-1948...

indu Singh Vs. Dr. Ranjeet Singh

Court: Patna

S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. 1. The petitioner opposite party has challenged the order dated 17th September, 1994, passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court in Matrimonial Case No. 75/93, rejecting the prayer of the petitioner (the wife), relating toad-interim maintenance claimed under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act.2. The opposite party (the husband) is the petitioner in Matrimonial Case No. 75/93 filed against the petitioner (the wife) for dissolution of marriage under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act.3. Admittedly, there are four female children born out of wedlock; the eldest being about 21 years of age and the youngest 5years of age. The petitioner opposite party (the wife) filed a petition under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act, praying therein interim maintenance @Rs, 2,500/-per month and a sum of Rs.5,000/-as a lumpsum amount as cost of litigation, as according to the petitioner (the wife), the income of the opposite party (the husband) is more than Rs. 10,000/- per m...

Magniram Baijnath Vs. Wealth-tax Officer

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna

Reported in: (1996)56ITD97(Pat.)

1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against an order of the CIT(A) declining to accept the contention of the assessee that by virtue of provisions of Section 5(1) read with Section 5(1 A) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1957, financial assets in excess of Rs. 5 lakhs were includible in the net wealth but could not be subject to tax.2. The assessee is an HUF. Assessment order is a brief one where the computation of net wealth has been summarised as under : property Rs. 3,32,400(ii)Value of movable property Rs. 18,53,438 --------------of one house restricted to Rs. 5,00,000in terms of Section 5(1 A) of the W.T. --------------Act, 1957 Rs. 16,85,838Less : Current year liability :(ii) W.T. Rs. 34,074 Rs. 1,71,414 -------------- 3. The movable property of Rs. 18,53,438 included shares of Premier Vinyak Flooring Ltd. valued at Rs. 9 lakhs and shares of Premier Irrigation Equipment valued at Rs. 24,000. These are covered by the exemption provided in Section 5(1)(xxiii) of the Wealth-tax Act, 1...

Magadh Stock Exchange Association Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Patna

G.B. Patnaik, C.J. 1. The order passed by the Appropriate Authority dated January 25, 1990, under Section 269UD(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), is the subject-matter of challenge in C.W.J.C. No. 879 of 1990, and the petitioner therein is thetransferee. The petitioner challenged the constitutional validity of Chapter XX-C of the Act as well as the impugned order passed by the appropriate authority, inter alia, on the ground that the said order had been passed without affording an opportunity of hearing to the affected parties. The further stand of the petitioner is that the consideration money not having been tendered to the transferor, as required under Section 269UG of the Act, the property in question must be held to have been revested and, consequently, possession of the Central Government is without jurisdiction. 2. When this writ application was listed before this court, on February 9, 1990, this court had passed an interim order to the effe...

Sushma Kumari Vs. Om Prakash

Court: Patna

Onkar Nath Asthana, J.1. This is the Miscellaneous Civil Appeal preferred against the order dated 26th April, 1995 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Patna in Matrimonial Case No. 105 of 1989, whereby the Trial Judge disallowed the application of Sushma Kumari for her examination as a witness in the case.2. Briefly the facts of the case are that the husband Om Prakash filed matrimonial Case No. 105 of 1989 against Sushma Kumari for restitution of conjugal rights. Om Prakash pleaded that his love marriage with the inter-caste girl Sushma Kumari was solemnised according to Hindu rites by a Pandit in Kali Mandir at Darbhanga house in presence of the well-wishers.3. Earlier Om Prakash managed to get filed a forged and fictitious vakalatnama on behalf of Sushma Kumari and obtained the ex parte decree against her. When Sushma Kumari came to know, she moved a petition in the Family Court in the case for the cancellation of that vakalatanama and by the order dated 6th July, 1990 Sus...

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Anand Electricals and ors.

Court: Patna

P.K. Deb, J.1. This civil revision application has been filed by the above named petitioner challenging the order dated 28.5.1994 passed by Shri R.P. Sharma, Subordinate Judge-I, Ranchi, in Miscellaneous Case No. 30 of 1992, whereby and whereunder, the application filed by the petitioner under Section 33 of the Arbitration Act (the Act) was rejected.2. The opposite party No. 1 contained a policy from the petitioner-Insurance Company regarding the electrical goods lying the shop of the opposite party covering burglary risk upto the limit of rupees one lac. A claim was made by the opposite party to the Insurance Company for payment as burglary was committed in its shop premises, the liability of the Insurance Company was not denied but regarding the quantum, there was a dispute and, as such, a surveyor was appointed and on the report of the surveyor, the Insurance Company assessed the loss at Rs. 46,031/- and offered the same to the opposite party.3. It is the case of the petitioner tha...

Smt. Sumati Oraon Vs. Shri Lalit Oraon

Court: Patna

Prasun Kumar Deb, J.1. This election petition under 80A and 81 of the Representation of People Act, 1951 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act') has been filed by the abovenamed petitioner against the respondent who has been declared elected as Member of Lok Sabha from 53 Lohardaga (ST) Parliamentary Constituency in the Chotanagpur Division, Bihar, on 17.6.1991.2. The notification for election of the said Parliamentary Constituency was published in the month of March, 1991 and the poll date was fixed on 20.5.1991. The repelling of nine booths was made on 12.6.1991 and after counting of votes on 16.6.1991, the result of the election was published on 17.6.1991 declaring the respondent as elected candidates from the said Constituency.3. The petitioner was a sitting Member of the Parliament and she was earlier elected as Member of the Parliament from the said Constituency after the death of her husband Late Kartik Oruon in the year 1982, 194 and 1989 as a Congress (I) candidate. The...