Patna Court March 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.
Smt. Pushpa Bharadwaja Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-19-1996
Aftab Alam, J. 1. The petitioner in this application seeks quashing of the proceedings in Certificate Case No. 7/86-87 pending in the court of Certificate Officer, Bhojpur. The aforementioned certificate case was filed at the instance of the Central Bank of India for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 62,581.11 which, according to the bank, accrued by way of interest on the cash credit facility given to the petitioner by the bank. 2. The petitioner is a war widow ; her husband, Col. Kapil Bharadwaja, was admittedly killed in action. The widowed wife was given certain loans by the bank under a scheme of financial assistance for rehabilitating disabled members of the defence services/border security forces and widows/dependents of those killed in action (copy of the scheme is at annexure 1). Under this scheme financial assistance was to be provided for establishing supply outlet for cooking gas, etc. The scheme, under the marginal heading 'Nature of advance' provided as follows : 'Credit faci...
Krishna Kumar Mishra and anr. Etc. Etc. Vs. State of Bihar and ors. Et ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-19-1996
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. 1.The controversy relating to reservation in the matter of education and service, which started since 1951, was ultimately set at rest in the end of 1992, by the Supreme Court in Indra Sawhney v. Union of India, AIR 1993 SC 477.Immediately thereafter, by the Constitution's (73rd Amendment) Act, 1992, a new principle of reservation has been laid down under Article 243D of Constitution of India, in the matter of Panchayat election. The Respondent-State of Bihar then came out with Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 (for short 'Panchayat Act, 1993') The aforesaid Constitutional Amendment and Panchayat Act, 1993 have now given rise to the new controversy relating to 'reservation in Panchayat election'. By the aforesaid 73rd Amendment of Constitution, followed by Panchayat Act, 1993, a new Provision has been laid down, reserving seats in favour of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward class persons, in the matter of Panchayat election. As to whether such reservat...
Sk. KamruddIn and ors. Vs. Sk. AjimuddIn and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-19-1996
Gurusharan Sharma, J.1. The plaintiffs-petitioners filed Partition Suit No. 99 of 1980 'for' partition of their 1/4th share in the properties detailed in Schedule B to the plaint.2. According to the plaintiffs, Sk. Rojan had four sons, Sk. Hassan Ali, Sk. Amar Ali, Sk. Kigan and Sk. Pachu. The plaintiffs are the four sons and one daughter of Sk. Panchu, whereas the defendants 1 to 8 are the descendants of Sk. Hassan Ali the defendants 9 to 12 and 19 are descendants of Sk. Amar Ali and the defendants 13 to 18 are descendants of Sk. Bigan, Defendant No. 13, Sk. Dilawar is said to be the son of Sk. Bigan from his first wife Pariba.3. According to the defendants 14 to 17, Sk. Rojan had five sons and the plaintiffs omitted one of his sons, namely Sk. Rahim, who was married with Pariba and died issue-less. Thereafter, Pariba got a son Sk. Dilawar from one Sk. Sahijan. Neither Pariba was the first wife of Sk. Bigan, nor Sk. Dilwar is his son and both of them had no interest in the suit prope...
Rambilas Mahto Vs. Mahabir Mahto and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-19-1996
Gurusharan Sharma, J.1. Kedar Mahto, father of opposite parties 9 to 11 herein, filed Partition Suit No. 8 of 1959 in the court of Subordinate Judge, Falamu at Daltonganj for partition of his share in, the properties described in the Schedule to the plaint. The Predecessors-in-interest of the petitioner as well as Opposite Parties 1 to 8 herein were defendants 1 and 2 as well as defendants 70 to 73 in the suit. The suit was decreed.2. In the judgment and preliminary decree dated 26.7.1976 it was held that the plaintiff was entitled to the extent of one share out of 96 shares 'in all the other Khatas and 25 shares out of 96 shares in Khata No. 20, whereas in other Khatas defendant Nos. 70 to 73 were entitled to 5 Out of 96 shares. Defendants 70 to 73 the four daughters of Ramdihal Mahio were sisters among themselves and they jointly got 5 shares out of 96 shares in the disputed lands including Khata No. 20. The trial court, therefore, observed 'Thus there is no evidence contrary to hol...
Dr. Shashi Ranjan Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-19-1996
A.K. Ganguly, J.1. This conempt application has been filed on 3rd July, 1990 on which notice was issued to the Secretary. Department of health, Government of Bihar (respondent No. 1) and the Joint Secretary, of the said department (respondent No. 2) to show cause as to why a proceeding for contempt be not initiated against them for violation of order dated 2-5-1988 passed in Service Case No. 367 of 1987 by the Bihar Administrative Tribunal.2. The facts which are relevant for the purpose of the present proceeding are noted below :The petitioner filed a service case being Service Case No. 367 of 1987 before the then existing Bihar Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter-referred to as the said Tribunal) for commanding the respondents to decide the petitioner's seniority and not to fill up the post of Assistant or Associate Professor, Pathology, Darbhanga Medical College and further to quash the order of the State Government transferring the petitioner from Darbhanga Medical College to Pat...
Shree Goshala and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-19-1996
A.K. Ganguly, J.1. The question which falls for decision before this Court in this writ petition is whether a 'Goshala' is entitled to the statutory exemption from the Ceiling Law as provided in Chapter-XI under Section 29 (b)(v) of the Bihar Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling Area and Acquisition of Surplus Land) Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), Section 29 (b)(v) of the said Act is set out below;Such extent of land held on the date of commencement of this Act by such public or charitable bodies or religious institution of public nature, running educational institutions, hospital, maternity homes and orphanages as may be notified by the State Government in this behalf, so long as they continue as such.2. On a plain reading of the said Section it appears that the exemption under the aforesaid provisions is available only to such public or charitable bodies as are running educational institutions, hospital, maternity homes and orphanages to the extent notified by the ...
Anil Kumar Alias Anil Kumar Jaiswal Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-15-1996
Loknath Prasad, J.1. This revision is directed against the judgment of conviction passed in Criminal Appeal No. 145 of 1986 by Shri P.N. Yadav 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh through which the order of conviction and sentenced as awarded against the petitioner by Shri N.C. Gupta S.D. J.M., Hazaribagh in C.R. Case No. 1030 of 1982 against the petitioner was duly confirmed and upheld.2. The fact in short for the purpose of this revision is that it is the prosecution case that the petitioner was running grossry shop in village Barkagaon within the Hazribagh and on 28.3.1982 the Food Inspector alongwith his witness, namely, Rauf Khan visited the shop of the accused and the expressed his desire and intention to purchase sample of Hatdi stored for analysis and after complying all the formalities, sample of Haldi stored for sale in the shop of the accused was obtained and it was kept in three separate phials and after proper sealing, one sealed sample was sent to public analyst who...
Kailash Pati Sahu Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-14-1996
B.P. Singh, J. 1. Heard counsel for the parties.2. This is yet another case of a Government servant, who retired as early as on 31st January, 1991,running from pillar to post for payment of his provident fund dues as also certain monetary benefits to which he became entitled by reason of grant of 2nd time bound promotion with effect from 30th May, 1984. The grand of, time bound promotion affects the pensionary due to which the petitioner becomes entitled on the basis of salary last drawn by him, and obviously, the petitioner has been kept deprive of the same for so many years. The usual excuse given by the State is that its various officers do not know that is he penning in the other office. The only suffers are the government employees who are made to run from pillar to post and ultimately to approach this Court for grant of relief. It is not disputed that an order was passed in the year 1991 granting 2nd time bound promotion to the petitioner with effect from 30th May, 1984. The pet...
Dhirendra Kumar JaIn Vs. Md. Hassim and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-12-1996
Guru Sharan Sharma, J.1. Eighteen tenants including one Md. Quashim filed Title Suit No. 52 of 1983, an Inter Pleader suit in the court of Subordinate Judge, Hazaribagh against the State of Bihar and Khas Mahal Officer, Hazaribagh, as defendants first set and the three sons of Sugan Chand Jain as defendants second set, for declaration as to which of the two sets were their landlord. 2. Three sons of Sugan Chand Jain filed six suits for eviction of six tenants out of the aforesaid eighteen under the provisions of the Bihar Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') The Inter Pleader suit as well as six Eviction suits were tried together. The trial court disposed of the Inter Pleader suit in terms of judgment dated 31.3.1989 and held that the three sons of Sugan Chand Jain were landlord and were entitled to receive the rent. The six Eviction suits were also decreed.3. The tenants preferred First Appeal No. 283 of 1989 (R) before this C...
Om Prakash Kapila Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-12-1996
S.K. Chattopadhyaya, J.1. Invoking the jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the entire proceeding as well as the investigation and order issuing warrant of arrest arising out Patna Vigilance P.S. Case No. 5/89 now pending in the court of the Special Judge (Vigilance), Ranchi.2. As both the writ petitions arise out of the same FIR and similar points are involved they have been heard together and they will be government by this common judgment.3. During the course of hearing an English translation of the 'First Information Report was submitted on behalf of the petitioners from perusal of which it appears that one Mohan Rajak, Deputy Superintendent of Police, CID (Vigilance) of the Bihar State Electricity Board (shortly 'the Board'), opposite party No. 2, lodged it on 16.6.1989. It was expressly averred therein that the petitioners, Brij Kishore Jhawar as the owner and O.P. Kapila as the Chief Exec...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »