Patna Court November 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.
Suraj Prasad Singh Vs. Joint Director of Consolidation and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-19-1996
Radha Mohan Prasad, J.1. In this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 12.6.1992 passed by the Joint Director, Muzaffarpur in Revision case No. 2424 of 1996, contained in Annexure-4 and, further, has sought for issuance of a direction against the respondents not to give effect to the said order. By the said impugned order the Joint Director (respondent No. 1) has set aside the order passed by the Asst. Director, Consolidation (respondent No. 2) in appeal No. 14 of 1986 and the order passed by the Consolidation Officer (respondent No. 3) in objection case No. 54 of 1985.2. The dispute is in respect of land appertaining to Khata No. 316 measuring 9.86 acres of village Dharampur Madan alias Chaurahiya. Khata No. 316 comprises altogether 18 plots.3. In short, the case of the petitioner, is that one Jagdish Singh had five sons, namely, Kasturi Singh, Ganaur Singh, Laljee Singh, Khobhari Singh and Khaderan Singh. Laljee Singh died issueless. The petitioner ...
Ganesh Jute Trading Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-15-1996
1. This is an application under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, against an order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Bench, whereby it has dismissed the application of the assessee filed under Section 256(1) of the Act.2. It appears, the assessee by filing the application required the Appellate Tribunal to state the following questions of law arising out of the order of the Tribunal dated January 12, 1995, in ITA No. 511/Pat of 1992 to this court : '(i) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the finding of the Tribunal in upholding the rejection of the book profit shown by the petitioner is not vitiated by reason of its reliance upon suspicion, surmises as also on wrong facts ?(ii) Whether, the addition sustained by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is perverse as the same is based on wrong facts ?(iii) Whether, even otherwise there is no justification for confirming the addition of gross profit which calculates at 28 per cent. against the gros...
Smt. Tarang Sahu Vs. Surendra Sahu
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-15-1996
S.K. Chattopadhyaya, J.1. The instant civil revision application under Section 14 (8) of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 has been filed by the defendant-petitioner impugning the judgment dated 12.3.1996 passed in Eviction Title Suit No. 27/92.2. Before dealing with the grievances made by the petitioner it would be appropriate to portray the factual backgrounds:The opposite party-Landlord filed the said Eviction Suit on the ground that after expiry of the period of lease on 31.5.1992 the defendant-petitioner had no right to remain in occupation of the said premises. According to the plaintiff-opposite party, he is the owner and landlord of the suit premises and on the request made by the defendant-petitioner for letting out the same for the purposes of opening a Beauty Parlour, the opposite party agreed and on the basis of an oral lease for a fixed period of 11 months the suit premises was rented to the petitioner. A memorandum of oral deed in respect o...
Raj Kumar Sodera Vs. Chief Commissioner of Income-tax and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-15-1996
B.N. Agrawal, J.1. Heard the parties.2. This application has been filed for quashing the prosecution of the sole petitioner under Sections 276C and 277 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). It has been stated in this application categorically, that no valid sanction as required under Section 279 of the Act has been obtained. In the petition of complaint it has been mentioned that the sanction has been accorded by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Ranchi, and a copy thereof was enclosed with the petition of complaint. The said enclosure is annexure 2 to this application. From annexure 2 it appears that the same is a show-cause notice given to the assessee requiring him to show cause why a criminal prosecution be not launched against him. This notice obviously cannot be treated as an order according sanction. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Income-tax Department has not taken the stand that the Commissioner of Income-tax has accorded sanction and t...
Narsingh Ram Ashok Kumar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-13-1996
1. In this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, there is challenge to the constitutional validity of Sections 269SS and 271D of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'). These two Sections may be set out as under : '269SS. Mode of taking or accepting certain loans and deposits.--No person shall, after the 30th day of June, 1984, take or accept from any other person (hereafter in this section referred to as the depositor), any loan or deposit otherwise than by an account-payee cheque or account payee bank draft if,-- (a) the amount of such loan or deposit or the aggregate amount of such loan and deposit ; or (b) on the date of taking or accepting such loan or deposit, any loan or deposit taken or accepted earlier by such person from the depositor is remaining unpaid (whether repayment has fallen due or not), the amount or the aggregate amount remaining unpaid ; or (c) the amount or the aggregate amount referred to in Clause (a) together with the amount or t...
ishwar Prasad Agrawalla Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-13-1996
S.K. Chattopadhyaya, J.1. In this writ application, the petitioner has impugned the orders passed by. different authorities under the Chotanagpur Tenancy Act, by reason of which, on an application made by Bhuswa Munda, respondent No. 5 under Section 46(4A) of the Act, the concerned authority restored the possession of the disputed land in his favour.2. Before averting to the respective submissions advanced at the bar, it would be appropriate to portray the factual background.3. Bhuswa Munda filed an application for restoration of lands of plot Nos. 1053, 2187 and 2820, all of Khata No. 121 of village Rambagh, on the ground that since about 5 years he was dispossessed from the aforesaid lands on the basis of forged documents. On such application being filed by the respondent No. 5, a Land Restoration Case No. 25/85-86 was registered and being noticed, the petitioner filed his show cause contending, inter alia, that plot Nos. 2817, 2819 and 2820 of the said khata were surrendered by the...
Shiv Kumari Vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd.
Court: Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Patna
Decided on: Nov-13-1996
B.N. Sinha, President: 1. The complainant had filed this case claiming compensation for non-settlement of the insurance claim in respect of her Maruti Van stolen away on 15.12.1990. 2. The facts of the case as put in by the complainant may be briefly noticed. The complainant had purchased a Maruti Van bearing No. 4699 and she got it insured by the opposite party under Insurance Policy No. 3154050105119 dated 17.10.1990 for Rs. 1,00,000.00 for a period of one year. The van was stolen away on 15.12.1990 at Dehri-on-Sone and the information with regard thereto was filed at the Dehri-on-Sone P.S. on the basis of which Dehri-on-Sone P.S. Case No. 440/90 was registered. Information was given with regard thereto to the opposite party and the claim in respect thereof was also lodged. 3. According to the complainant in spite of several reminders, the Insurance Company did not settle the claim and therefore this case has been filed for a direction to the Insurance Company-opposite party to pay r...
State of Bihar Vs. Dilip Kumar and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-08-1996
P.K. Deb, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.This appeal has been preferred by the above named appellant against the judgment and award dated 18.12.1993 passed by the Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi,-cum-Motor Vehicle Accident Claims Tribunal,' Ranchi, in Compensation Case No. 88 of 1991.2. The respondent-claimant (Dilip Kumar) filed the aforementioned case for compensation of Rs. 2,50,000/- with interest for the accidental multiple injuries caused on his person on 13.3.1991. It has further been submitted that because of such accident, he has become permanently disabled and he is not in a position to discharge his duty.3. The claimant-respondent No. 1 is stated to be a Mistry. The accident occurred on 13.3.1991 when he was going on his bicycle at about 9 A.M. and when he reached near Kishoreganj Chowk, he noticed that a truck bearing No. DLA 9809 was coming in high speed from the opposite direction and dashed against him, as a result whereof, the front wheel of the truck has com...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Urmila Devi and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-07-1996
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. The question involved in this appeal is whether Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act of 1988’) shall have retrospective operation. In other words, whether the order of the Claims Tribunal awarding Rs. 25,000/- as interim compensation in proposed exercise of jurisdiction under Section 140 of the Act of 1988 in respect of a claim arising out of an accident occurred when the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1939') was in force, is in accordance with law?2. The fact of the case before me is very short. The claimant-respondent No. 1 filed a claim petition before the District Judge, Purnia, under Section 110-A of the Act of 1939 for grant of compensation alleging therein that, on 24.6.1989, his son Dilip Kumar Yadav aged about 23 years, while going to Purnia on a bus bearing registration No. PHK 8919, fell down in a ditch near Roskagarh in village Baniapati, Purnia; as a result of which ...
Bihar State Tourism Development Corporation Limited Vs. Ram Padarath S ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-07-1996
Narbdeshwar Pandey, J. 1. This appeal under Section 39(1) of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (in short 'the Act') is against an award of the sole arbitrator dated 17-7-1987 as also the order and decree of the Subordinate Judge dated 2-1-1988, whereby, the award was made absolute.2. Before proceeding to adjudicate the points at issue, it would be advisable to notice some of the relevant facts of this case. The respondent Ram Padarath Shanna entered into an agreement with the appellant, namely, Managing Director, Bihar State Tourism Development Corporation, for operating aerial ropeway chairlift project at Rajgir in the district of Nalanda. The respondent was to function as a commission agent of the appellant. As per Clause 9 of the agreement, in the event of closure of the chairlift for seven days or more for want of repairs or for any other valid reason, parties were at liberty to extend the period of agreement. Clause 12 of the agreement provides for settlement of dispute through arbitrat...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »