Patna Court March 1996 Judgments
Boc India Limited Vs. Zinc Products and Co. Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-22-1996
S.N. Jha, J. 1. This is an application for winding up of the company, namely, Zinc Products and Company Private Limited, under Sections 433 (e), (f), 434 and 439 of the Companies Act, 1956. The company has challenged the maintainability of the application on the ground that it has been filed through Vinod Singh, area sales manager of the petitioner-company who is not properly authorised for the purpose and, therefore, the application is fit to be summarily rejected. The petitioner has filed a rejoinder to the affidavit filed a in opposition to the winding-up petition. Counsel for the parties have made submissions on the point of maintainability.2. On behalf of the petitioner reliance is placed on the power of attorney executed in favour of Sri S. S. Prasad, managing director and Sri S. Chatterjee, Vice-President Finance, pursuant to the resolution of the board of directors, and the delegation of power by the said Sri S. Chatterjee in favour of Sri Vinod Singh. The said two documents ...
Tag this Judgment!New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Md. Akhtar HussaIn and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-22-1996
Radha Mohan Prasad, J.1. The appeal is directed against the judgment and award dated 12.5.1992 passed in Claim Case No. 12 of 1987/A.C. 14 of 1991 by the 1st Additional Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Purnia, whereby and whereunder total compensation amount awarded is Rs. 30,800/-.2. In short, the relevant facts are that the deceased Md. Imran, aged about 16 years, who was the son of the original applicant-respondent No. 1, Mohammad Yasin and in whose place after his (respondent No. 1) death his heirs have been substituted, met with accident on 11.3.87 while travelling in bus No. BRK 9727 going to his school. It is alleged that he was standing at the entrance gate of the bus. As the bus reached Lahtora Bus Stand, the deceased fell down from the bus and came under the wheel of the bus, as a result of which he sustained injuries. Thereafter he was rushed to the hospital where he succumbed to his injuries.3. It is not in dispute that the bus in question was insured with the appellant co...
Tag this Judgment!Sunil Kumar Keshri Vs. Smt. Sadhana Ganguli
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-21-1996
Gurusharan Sharma, J.1. The plaintiff-opposite party filed Title (Eviction) Suit No. 30 of 1989, against the defendant petitioner for eviction under Section 14 of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Act' for short). According to the plaintiff, the fixed term of tenancy of the defendant expired on 30.11.1988 and, thereafter he became liable for eviction from the suit premises detailed in the schedule to the plaint under Section 11(1)(c) of the Act.2. The defendant appeared, filed written statement and contested the suit on the ground, inter alia, that the tenancy was renewed and rent for the month of December, 1988 was accepted by the plaintiff and for that on 4.1.1989 rent receipt was security. According to the defendant he never deposited one month's rent together with one month's electric charges as security. The plaintiff fixed an iron made stair case in front of the shop of the defendant and thereby violated the t...
Tag this Judgment!Tuntun Prasad Chaurasia and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-21-1996
N. PANDEY, J. 1. In this bunch of writ petitions the petitioners, who are brick manufacturers, have questioned the constitutional validity of rule 26-A of the Bihar Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1972, substituted by S.O. No. 59, dated 26-3-1987, whereby and whereunder the State Government had in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 15 (1) and (3) of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957 (hereinafter called 'the Act') made a provision to determine consolidated amount, of royalty to be paid by Brick kiln owners/ Brick. earth removers per kiln, per annum a fixed number of bricks for every classified area. As a result of introduction of this system, the previous method to fix amount of royalty on brick earth to be paid @ Rs. 2.50 per cubic metre provided in Schedule II framed under Rule 26(i)(b) had ceased to operate. 2. The grievance of the petitioners is that provisions as incorporated under Rule 26-A and notifications issued therein by the State Gove...
Tag this Judgment!Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Guljar Paswan and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-20-1996
Radha Mohan Prasad, J.1.All these four appeals arise out of the claim cases filed by the claimants on account of the death or permanent disablement in the accident which occurred by the bus bearing No. BPP 515 at Jamuhar on G.T. Road for which Dehri P.S. Case No. 106 of 1992 was registered. The claimants filed the certified copy of the F.I.R. and photocopy of the post-mortem report as well as the medical report to substantiate their claims. In some of the cases, the claimants also filed photocopy of the certificate of the appellant company which shows that the vehicle in question was insured with the said company.2. The appellant company as well as the owner of the vehicle appeared in the claim cases and the company filed its written statement.3. From the impugned order it appears that in the written statement the company admitted the accident on the alleged date and place of the occurrence and also the death of the deceased in each of the claim cases. The insurance of the alleged veh...
Tag this Judgment!Munarma Devi Alias Manorama Devi Vs. Gango Devi Alias Gangia Devi and ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-20-1996
B.L. Yadav, J. 1. This is a plaintiffs second appeal in the suit for return of the property, transferred to the defendant under a transaction which was apparently a conditional sale dated 4-7-1979, of a mortgage by conditional sale. 2. The plaintiff or appellant filed the suit with the averment that she executed a conditional sale on 4-7-1979 for a sum of Rs. 5,000/ - (five thousand) in favour of defendants. The stipulation was that on payment of consideration of Rs. 5,000/- the defendant would return back the property (in schedule-A) to her. She even though requested several times the defendant-respondent to take the amount of Rs. 5,000/ - and to execute the deed for re-conveyance but they did not accept the money nor executed the sale deed in her favour. The plaintiff gave a registered notice through the advocate which was served on the defendant indicating that the plaintiff is ready and willing to perform her part of contract but the defendants did not perform their part of contr...
Tag this Judgment!Kanu Charan Deep Vs. Bimla Deep
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-20-1996
Prasun Kumar Deb, J.1. A short question has been involved in this revision petition regarding the executability of the decree by a judgment-debtor.2. The opposite party (Bimla Deep) filed Matrimonial Suit No. 9 of 1993 before the 3rd Additional District Judge, Jamshedpur for the reliefs under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for restitution of conjugal rights with an alternative prayer for grant of maintenance and also custody of child etc. The husband Kanu Charan Deep appearing in the suit admitted the claim of the petitioner regarding restitution of the conjugal rights and on such admission, the suit was decreed and observations were made in the following manner:'If it is not obeyed forthwith by the respondent, the applicant may move the Court regarding the custody of the child or the articles presented at or about the time of marriage or maintenance Under Sections 26, 27 or 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act or any other law thought proper, apart...
Tag this Judgment!Umesh Pandey Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-20-1996
Aftab Alam, J. 1. This writ petition was filed on 19-12-1986 seeking a direction to the respondent Housing Board to allot a middle Income group (M.I.G.) house at Arrah to the petitioner. During the pendency of this application, the Housing Board (vide its letter dated 27-8-92, brought on record as Annexure 1 to a supplementary affidavit filed on 16-10-95 allotted a house to the petitioner at Dalpatpur, Arrah at a cost of Rs. 1,49,379/-as estimated on 30-9-1992.2. Thus in so far as the allotment of a house is concerned, the grievance of the petitioner does not subsist any longer. However, a limited dispute between the parties relating to the price of the house being charged by the Board still remains subsisting. According to the petitioner, he is entitled to a house at the initial estimated cost of Rs. 90,000/- and the action of the Housing Board in charging the enhanced price of Rs. 1,50,000/- is illegal, unfair, unjust and unreasonable.3. The petitioner in response to an advertiseme...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Sona Devi Vs. Nagina Singh and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-20-1996
B.L. Yadav, J. 1. Whether the suit of the plaintiff-respondent was within time and whether Sections 91 and 92 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (compendiously the Act) have been correctly interpreted and whether the judgment of the lower appellate court was consistent with the statutory requirements of Order 41 Rule 31 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short the Code), if not, its effect, are the substantial questions of law involved in the present Second Appeal preferred by the Defendant-Appellant, under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (compendiously the Code) in a suit for declaration of title and confirmation of possession. 2. The averments in the plaint were that the plaintiff-respondent was the owner of plot No. 4312 are 2 decimals, with house thereon pertaining to khata No. 1339 in Village Digha Bujurg, P. S. Digha, Patna. The property was usufructuarily mortgaged to Hussaini (P.W. 3) who came in possession but created a Sub-mortgage in favour of Sheo Puj...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Shanti Devi Vs. Surendra Sahu
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-20-1996
Prasun Kumar Deb, J.1. The defendant in Eviction Suit No. 7/17 of 1987-89 before the Additional Munsif, Ranchi, is the appellant in this case. The plaintiff-respondent filed the above mentioned eviction suit against the defendant-appellant for ejectment from the suit premises on the ground of default and in course of proceeding the case, amendment was sought for inclusion of relief for arrears of rent. The said amendment was rejected by the learned Additional Munsif Ranchi, against which the plaintiff-respondent came up before this Court Civil Revision No. 220 of 1989 (R) and the same was allowed vide order dated 18.1.1990 and the relief for arrears of rent was also included.2. The case of the plaintiff is that the defendant-appellant (Smt. Shanti Devi) was inducted as tenant by the plaintiff-respondent in Holding No. 738 within Ward No. II of Ranchi Municipal Corporation over M.S. Plot No. 12.23 at the rental of Rs. 75/- per month which was agreed to payable by the tenant within the ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »