Patna Court January 1996 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Kanak Paul and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-18-1996
P.K. Deb, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the above-named insurance company under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 against the award passed in favour of the respondents by the Additional District Judge, Dhanbad in Title (M.V.) Suit No. 154 of 1992.2. The compensation claim was filed by the respondent No. 1 Kanak Paul for herself and on behalf of her minor children on account of death of Ambuj Chandra Paul, husband of the plaintiff-respondent Kanak Paul. Admittedly, Ambuj Chandra Paul was an employee in the F.C.I and while going towards Sindri Basti from Domgarh on his scooter on 23.10.1992 at 5.30 p.m. he met with an accident on being dashed by a truck bearing registration No. BIR 3291 due to rash and negligent driving of the driver of the offending truck. The injured sustained multiple injuries and he succumbed to his injuries on the same date at F.C.I. Hospital. A police case was also registered being Sindri P.S. Case No. 138 of 1992 under Sections 279 and 304A of ...
Bihar State Electricity Board Vs. Smt. Kiran Devi
Court: Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Patna
Decided on: Jan-18-1996
B.N. Sinha, President: 1. This appeal and Appeal 171 of 1994 have been filed against common order dated 27.4.95 passed by the District Forum, Sitamarhi disposing of Cases No. 107/93 and 108/93 and these two appeals have been dismissed as time barred by this Commission by a common order dated 18.7.95. But the respondents were directed to show as to why some of the directions given by the District Forum in its impugned order be not quashed as such directions can not be given under the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act (hereinafter called the Act). 2. The learned Counsel for the respondents have been heard on this point. 3. For the disposal of this question some of the facts of the case may be noticed with utmost brevity. The complainants in the two cases filed before the District Forum alleging inflated and excessive electric bills on the basis of higher tariff and for the period when there was no electric supply to them as the transformer concerned was burnt. 4. The District For...
Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-17-1996
Bisheshwar Prasad Singh, J.1. In this batch of writ petitions the issues involved being identical, they have been heard together, and are being disposed of by this common judgment. In all the write petitions the petitioners have challenged the constitutional validity of the Cess and other Taxes on Minerals (Validation) Act, 1992, which replaced the Cess and other Taxes on Minerals (Validation) Ordinance, 1992, The Ordinance was published in the Gazette of India (Extraordinary) on February 15, 1992, whereas the Act was assented to by the president of India on 4th April, 1992, and published in the Gazette on the same day.The petitioners have also impugned the demands made for payment of cess under the said Ordinance and the Act. The impugned demands in C.W.J.C. No. 1280/92(R) are Annexures 7, 8, 13 and 14, in C.W.J.C. Nos. 1711/92(R) and 1702/92(R) are Annexures 4 and 5, in C.W.J.C. No. 1507/92/(R) are Annexure 8 series and in C.W.J.C. No. 1639/92(R)and Armexures 5 to 5/5. The impugned ...
Dasrath Prasad and ors. Vs. Catholic Charities and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-16-1996
R.N. Sahay, J.1. The Addl. Claims Tribunal dismissed the claim preferred by the appellants on the ground of limitation. Admittedly the deceased Pankaj Kumar Sahu died in a road accident on 30.11.1986. Under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, the claim could have been preferred within six months from the date of accident. There was provision for condoning the delay if the claim was not filed within the period prescribed in the Act. The Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, was repealed by Section 217(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, which came into force on 1.7.1989. The period of limitation for filing the claim petition both under the 1939 Act and the new Act is six months. In the instant case the claim petition was filed on 4.10.1989.2. In view of the decision of the Supreme Court in Vinod Gurudas Raikar v. National Insurance Co. Ltd. 1991 ACJ 1060 (SC), the claim application was time-barred and since the maximum period of limitation prescribed under the new Act is one year which too had expired w...
Dhrub Prasad Singh Alias Dhrub Kumar Singh Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-10-1996
A.K. Ganguly, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by the four petitioners for quashing the impugned order dated 24.4.1993 (Annexure-1) passed by the Collector, Madhepura (respondent No. 2).2. Petitioner No. 1 is the land holder and the petitioners case is that petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 purchased some portions of the land in question from petitioner No. 1 and/or his mother in between the year 1963 and 1974 and petitioner No. 4 purchased some land from petitioner No. 2.3. In respect of the land in question a ceiling case was started against one Late Bimala Sundar Devi, mother of petitioner No. 1, Dhrub Prasad Singh alias Dhrub Singh on 19.2.1973 which was numbered as Ceiling Case No. 541 of 1973-74. The case as made out in the writ petition is that the total land, as per the verification report, held by the land holder was 339 acres and 98 decimals and accordingly a draft publication under Section 10(2) of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land...
Indian Builders Vs. Awadhesh Kumar Mishra and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-10-1996
P.K. Deb, J.1. The application for modification in the Original case namely, CWJC No. 1423 of 1995(R) is taken up together for disposal as the matters are inter related.2. The petitioner moved this Court in CWJC No. 1423 of 1995(R) praying for direction to the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 i.e. the Executive Engineer, Subarnarekha Canal Division, Jamshedpur and Executive Engineer, Halubani Subarnarekha Canal Division for return of the bank guarantees since no work was done during several last years. The petitioner was engaged as a Contractor with the respondents for excavation and bed lining of Chandil Canal and also the work of excavation of residual canal work. On the basis of the agreement, the works was to be completed within six months but it appears, for many reasons, it continued till 1990 and according to the petitioner, 80 per cent of the work was completed and running bill was submitted by it being Bill Nos. 1 to 57 and payments were also made on the basis of those bills. For the...
Lalan Kishore Prasad Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-10-1996
S.N. Jha, J.1. In this application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner seeks quashing of his prosecution in Pindrajore P.S. Case No. 81 of 1993 in which cognizance has been taken against him and others for offences under Sections 465, 466, 468, 471, 474 and 476 read with Section 120B, Indian Penal Code. The facts of the case so far as relevant for the purpose of this application are as follows:2. One Sanjay Kumar Singh figures as an accused in B.S. City P.S. Case No. 205/93 under Sections 394, 397 and 411 of the Penal Code. His prayer for bail was rejected by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chas and, in course of time, by the Additional Sessions Judge, Chas as well as by this Court on 31.3.1993. On 22.7.1993 one Bir Bahadur Singh, advocate practicing at Chas, filed an application to the effect that Sanjay Kumar Singh has been granted bail by the High Court in Criminal Misc. No. 2706 of 1993 (R). Along with the application certified copy of the order dated 9.6....
Britannia Industries Ltd. and anr. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-09-1996
Prasun Kumar Deb, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by the abovenamed petitioners for quashing the seizure of the raw materials being Vanaspati, wheat flour and Sugar by the seizure list (Annexure 4) by respondent No. 3 on 15.5.1990 on the ground of violation of the Bihar Trade Articles (Licenses Unification) Order, 1984 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Unification Order').2. The grounds for seizure were mentioned in the seizure list and also in the first information report lodged with Chakradharpur Police Station which may be mentioned here:(i) the stocks of both the Companies were found lying in the same place:(ii) the stock registers were not found certified and appeared to have been written at one stroke;(iii) certain volumes of stock receipt notes of Britannia Company, petitioner No. 1, were not produced for verification and though at the back of the stock register it was endorsed that stocks are transferred to petitioner No. 2 but the aforesaid stock register does not...
Principal, Loyola High School Patna Vs. Bhudeo NaraIn Nand Kuliar.
Court: Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Patna
Decided on: Jan-08-1996
B.N. Sinha, President: 1. This appeal is directed against order dated 11/12.7.94 passed by the District Forum, Patna in Complaint Case No. 349 of 94 in which the appellant here was the opposite party and the respondent here was the complainant before the District Forum. 2. The facts of the case as put in by the complainant may be briefly noticed for the disposal of this appeal. One Amit Kumar who happens to be the son of the complainant was student of Class VIII during the Session 1993-94 in Loyola High School and he was not promoted to Class IX because he failed in two subjects. The allegations of the complainant is that though other students have also failed in two subjects but they were promoted and thus he had been discreminated against by the Head Master of the school. 3. On being noticed the opposite party the Head Master of the school appeared and controverted the allegations made by the complainant stating inter alia that as Amit Kumar railed in three papers he was not promote...
Phatik Chandra Ganguly Vs. Raghubar Das and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-05-1996
Prasun Kumar Deb, J.1. These two Election Petitioner are taken up together for the purpose of decision of preliminary issue regarding the maintainability of the Election Petitions and are being disposed of by this common order.2. Election Petition No. 1 of 1995 (R) has been filed by one Phatik Chandra Ganguly challenging the election of the returned candidate i.e. Shri Raghubar Das, respondent No.1 from 291 Assembly Election, Jamshedpur East Assembly Constituency held in the Year 1995. The petitioner is a voter having Serial No. 907, Part No. 147 of Jamshedpur East Assembly Constituency. He has challenged the election on the ground that the Returning Officer illegally rejected the nomination paper of Shri Vijay Kumar Dev and Shri Haldar Soren.3. In Election Petition No. 2 of 1995(R), the same election was challenged by Shri K.P. Singh who contested the election and, according to him, he got the majority number of votes but due to mis-counting and so many illegalities done at the time ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »