Patna Court August 1995 Judgments
Mohd. AlauddIn Vs. Bibi Jaibunnissa and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-11-1995
P.K. Deb, J.1. This Review petition has been filed by the abovenamed person, who alleges himself to be the sole heirs of Bibi Fatima, who was respondent No. 1 in the Second Appeal No. 142 of 1987 (R).2. The Second Appeal No. 142 of 1986 (R) was disposed of on 8.3.1994 while this Civil Review application has been filed on 16.5.1994, which is totally barred by Limitation as per Order 47 Rules 1 and 2 of the C.P.C. For condonation of delay, a petition under Section 5 of the Limitation Act has also been filed. The Civil Review application alongwith its Limitation matter has come up for admission and a lengthy argument was placed by Mr. P.K. Bhowmik, appearing for the petitioner.3. Mr P.K. Prasad, appearing for and on behalf of the Opposite parties has refuted all the allegations brought in the Civil Review application and his first contention is that the civil Review application is not maintainable in its present from because the petitioner was neither a party in the Second Appeal or in s...
Tag this Judgment!Bibi Riajan Khatoon and ors. Vs. Sadrul Alam and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-11-1995
B.L. Yadav, J. 1. This Second Appeal by the plaintiffs has been preferred under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908(compendiously the 'Code') against the decree and judgment of the 3rd Additional District Judge, Purnia, setting aside the decree of the Subordinate Judge in a title suit brought by them for declaration that gift deed dated 25-3-1972 executed by Haji Zakiruddin the original Plaintiff No. I in favour of the defendants was a sham and collusive transaction, and it did not create any title in favour of the defendants and the plaintiffs have got till, over the suit land to the extent of -/8/10 paise. 2. Shorn of details the case of the plaintiffs-appellants is that the suit property having an area of 3.49 acres of land mentioned in Schedule A of the Plaint belongs to original Plaintiff No. 1 Haji Zakiruddin and was recorded in his name. Plaintiff Nos. 2 and 3 are daughters of Haji Zakiruddin. The third daugher named Bibi Aliman had pre-deceased Hazi Zakiruddin, P...
Tag this Judgment!Kamleshwar Prasad Choudhary Vs. Bihar State Board of Religious Trust a ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-09-1995
N. Pandey, J. 1. The salient and meaningful question which arises for determination in this reference to the Full Bench may be formulated in the following terms:Whether in absence of any statute or rules, framed thereunder or any express term of contract of employment, an employee of the Bihar State Board of Religious Trust (in short 'the Board') can be placed under interim suspension and whether in such a situation such employee can legitimately be entitled to full remuneration or part of it as per different provisions, prescribed for the employees of the State Government?2. In view of the legal issue, noticed above, the briefest reference to the facts would suffice our purpose. The petitioner at the relevant time was serving as Clerk in the office of the Bihar State Board of Religious Trusts. By means of this application under Article 226 of the Constitution, he prayed for quashing of the order of the Administrator dated 22.10.1992 (Annexure-1), whereby, he was placed under suspens...
Tag this Judgment!Manju Kumari Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-09-1995
S.K. Homchauduri, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 4.4.1995 passed by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C. No. 1398 of 1994(R). By the impugned judgment, the writ-petition, C.W.J.C. No. 1398 of 1994(R) of respondent No. 5 of this appeal, was allowed.2. Respondent No. 5 filed the writ-petition (C.W.J.C. No. 1398 of 1994 (R) for issue of an appropriate writ or direction commanding the Civil Surgeon, Sadar Hospital, Ranchi (Respondent No. 2) to act in accordance with the notification dated 6.6.1992 (Annexure 1 to the writ petition) issued by the State Government and not to accept the joining report of the appellant of this appeal, who was impleaded as respondent No. 5 in the writ petition. In the writ petition, respondent No. 5 contended as follows-(i) She was an M.S. in Gynecology and Obstetrics and she was appointed as Lady Medical Officer in the Department of Health Services, Government of Bihar, on and from 8.8.1983 and that while working as Lady Medi...
Tag this Judgment!Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Smt. Sandhya Rani Dutta
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-09-1995
S.K. Homchaudhuri, J. 1. In this case, pursuant to the direction of this court under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal (Patna Bench), Patna, referred the following questions, framed by this court, for opinion : '(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the female heirs of a Hindu governed by the Dayabhaga school of Hindu law dying intestate could form a joint Hindu family by means of agreement ?(ii) Whether the female heirs of a Hindu governed by the Dayabhaga school of Hindu law dying intestate could impress upon their inherited property the character of joint family property ?(iii) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, one-third of the properties inherited from her husband was assessable in the hands of the assessee in the status of an individual ?'2. For answering the questions referred for opinion, it is necessary to state the material facts in br...
Tag this Judgment!Rajendra Prasad Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-09-1995
S.K. Homchaudhuri, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 3.1.1995 passed by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C. No. 2948 of 1994 (R).2. While the appellant and respondent No. 2 were working as the Motor Vehicle Inspector (In short 'M.V.I.') by the Government notification dated 18.10.94, respondent No. 2 was transferred from Jamshedpur to Chaibasa and the appellant was transferred from Ranchi to Jamshedpur and the incumbent who was working as M.V.I. at Chaibasa was transferred to Ranchi, Respondent No. 2 impugned the notification dated 18.10.94 in C.W.J.C. No. 2948 of 1994 (R) in this Court, contending that he was transferred from Jamshedpur only after working there for about one year four months in violation of the policy decision of the Government for extraneous reason at the behest of respondent No. 6, who was the Member of Parliament.3. C.W.J.C. No. 2948 of 1994 (R) was filedon 8.11.94. By the order dated 17.11.94 notice was issued to the respondents and also an int...
Tag this Judgment!Mohd. Nayeem Vs. Noor Alam Khan
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-08-1995
P.K. Deb, J.1. None appears for the Opposite Party, although notice had been properly served on him.2. The petitloer is the defendant in Title (Eviction) Suit No. 233/1988. The Opposite Party being landlord filed the abovementioned suit against the petitioner for eviction under the B.B.C. Act, but the suit was decreed ex-parte in absence of the petitioner-defendant, and the said decree was also executed by evicting the petitioner from the suit premises. The petitioner filed a petition under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C. for setting aside the ex-parte decree which was registered as Misc. case and ultimately restoration petition was allowed and the ex-parte decree was set aside. When the suit has again been brought to file, the petitioner filed a petition under Section 144 CPC being Misc. Case No. 5/91 before the Munsif, Jamshedpur who passed the ex-parte decree for restitution of possession but the learned Munsif without deciding the matter in issue ordered that the restitution matter would b...
Tag this Judgment!Shyamlal Ojha Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-08-1995
P.K. Deb, J.1. The petitioner is the Project Officer under the Central Coalfields Limited. In the year 1971, he joined the Bharat Coking Coal Limited, a subsidiary of Coal India Limited as a Second Class Assistant Manager. While he was posted as Area Manager (Planning), Sijua Area of Bharat Coking Coal Limited, Dhanbad, he was served with a charge sheet on 3.7.1991 for misconduct as per Annexure 1. The fact is that a huge quantity of coal stock was found short and for such shortage the petitioner and others were charge sheeted. Specifically, the petitioner was charged of misconduct for dishonesty in connection with the business/property of the Company. The specific allegation as per the charge sheet was as follows:Out of the above shortage, you are, therefore, responsible for a shortage of 17662 MT (i.e. 51034-33372 MT) on account of Sri R.N. Mishra during your tenure from 3.10.1989 to 18.1.1990.2. After submission of show cause notice, the disciplinary authority was not satisfied and...
Tag this Judgment!The Tata Iron and Steel Company Ltd. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-04-1995
A.K. Ganguly, J. 1. In this writ petition the validity of a certificate proceeding being Certificate Case No. 3 (Sairat) of 1994-95, pending before the Sub-Divisional Officer-cum-Certificate Officer, Dhalbhum, has been impugned. In the said certificate proceeding a notice (Annexure-1) under Section 7 of the Bihar Public Demand Recovery Act (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) has been issued by the Certificate Officer to the petitioner-company raising certain demands mentioned in the said notice. 2. In Order to appreciate the controversy raised between the parties, the following facts may be briefly noted : The admitted position is that the petitioner, a well known Public Limited Company, is carrying on its business in the Industrial town of Jamshedpur which had been established on acquisition of various plots of land which have been transferred to the said Company by various deeds of conveyance with which this Court in this proceeding is not concerned. After some litigation bet...
Tag this Judgment!Barister Singh and ors. Vs. Lahori Sao and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Aug-04-1995
B.L. Yadav, J.1. This is a defendants Second Appeal in a suit filed by the plaintiffs respondents for declaration that the deed of gift dated 23-9-1979 purported to have been executed by Gyanchand in favour of Sitapati in respect of the suit property measuring about 8 decimals of land situate in Mauza Telpa Kalampurr Shahartelpa, Police station Karpi, District Jehanabad was fraudulent, sham and inoperative and also for declaration that the Mutation Case No. 519 of 1985 was illegal and also for temporary injunction restraining the defendants from making any alienation of the suit property.2. The case of the plaintiffs-respondents was that one Jhauri Sao, grand-father of plaintiff No. 1 Lohari Sao has two sons, namely, Ramdhani Sao and Devi Charan Sao. Ram Dhani Sao had a son named Gyanchand who married one Marchhi after the death of his first wife. The plaintiff No. 1 Lohari Sao is the son of said Devi Charan Sao, and that the deed executed by Gyanchand Sao was illegal and sham transac...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »