Patna Court July 1996 Judgments
Hindalco Industries Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-19-1996
B.P. Singh, J.1. Petitioner No. 1 Hindalco Industries Ltd. is a Public Limited Company within the meaning of the Companies Act. Having its registered office at Century Bhavan, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Bombay. It has also an office at Court Road, Lohardaga. Petitioner No. 2, Sri Nawal Kishore Birla is a shareholder of petitioner No. 1 -Company is engaged in the business of producing primary aluminium metal and its alloys at its factory at Renukoot in Uttar Pradesh. The basic raw material for manufacture of Aluminium is Bauxite, and in order to meet its requirement of Bauxite, petitioner No. 1-Company has obtained mining leases in the State of Bihar under the provisions of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957. One of the leases held by the petitioner-Company is in respect of lands located in the district of Lohardaga consisting of both forest as well as non-forest land. The mining operations carried on over the said lease hold area is known as Maidanpat Bauxite Mi...
Tag this Judgment!Sanju Lampu and anr. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-19-1996
1. These two writ petitions are similar on facts and involve the same question of law and hence they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. Both the writ petitions relate to the seizure of truck carrying lottery tickets and the passing of an order of penalty in terms of Section 31(3) of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981. 3. In C.W.J.C. No. 5582 of 1992 the petitioner is the driver of a truck bearing registration No. WB-37-1107 which alongwith the lottery tickets loaded on it was seized on June 17, 1992 on the orders of the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Intelligence Branch, Patna Division, Patna, under Section 31(1) and 31(2)(a) of the Bihar Finance Act. On the next day June 18, 1992 an order was passed in purported exercise of power under Section 31(3) of the Act imposing penalty amounting to Rs. 15,13,712,10. 4. C.W.J.C. No. 5529 of 1992 is filed by the driver of a truck bearing registration No. DDL-3675. This truck alongwith the goods being carr...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Rajesh Kumar Paswan Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-19-1996
Asok Kumar Ganguly, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. In this writ petition some interesting questions of constitutional law arise from the undisputed facts of this case. 3. The petitioner's father Sri Ram Komal was originally a resident of Village -- Bhai-shali Buzurg, P. O. Kanaicha, District --Gorakhpur in the State of Uttar Pradesh and he belongs to caste 'Pasi'. The petitioner's father while working as Electric Loco Driverof the South Eastern Railways and posted at Tatanagar in the State of Bihar was alloted official quarters at Tatanagar in the month of April, 1979 and since then he has been living there. The petitioner who is the son of the aforesaid Sri Ram Komal did his schooling in St. Mary Hindi High School, Bishtupur and from there he passed S. S. Examination in 1985 in First Division. Thereafter, he did his I. S. C. from Jamshedpur Co-operative College in the examination conducted by the Bihar Intermediate Education Council, Patna through Ranchi University,...
Tag this Judgment!Satish Kumar Singh @ Situ (C-2 Singh) @ Ashok Kumar Singh Vs. State of ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-19-1996
S.K. Chattopadhyaya, J.1. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution has been filed by the petitioner challenging the correctness and validity of the detention order dated 28.10.1995 passed by the District Magistrate, Ranchi detaining the petitioner in exercise of his powers under Sub-section (2) of Section 12 of the Bihar Control of Crimes Act, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') with a view to prevent the petitioner-detenu from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. The said order of the District Magistrate was subsequently approved by the State Government on 8.11.1995 and also by the Advisory Board by its order dated 22nd December, 1995.2. Before adverting to the contentions raised by the earned Counsel for the parties it will be useful to state the grounds on which the petitioner-detenu was detained. The grounds of detention which were served on the detenu in jail on 28.10.1995 itself are reproduced hereinbelow:(1) On 17...
Tag this Judgment!Life Insurance Corporation of India Vs. Dr. Braj Kishore Singh.
Court: Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Patna
Decided on: Jul-19-1996
B.N. Sinha, President: 1. This appeal is directed against order dated 21st September, 1994 passed by the District Forum, Hazaribagh in Complaint Case No. 112 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 stated. Swarsati Devi (wife of the complainant Dr. Braj Kishore Singh) had taken three policies against her life and she paid the premium in respect thereof till her death. The first policy was for Rs. 35,000.00. The second policy dated 28.10.89 is for Rs. 65,000.00. The third policy dated 27.3.91 is for Rs. 75,000.00. Swarsati Devi died on 28.8.91 due to cancer of stomach. Her death was reported to LIC, the opposite party and the opposite party L.I.C. thereupon supplied to the complainant a form which was to be filed by him with details of the three policies and other details which the complainant did. Thereafter the opposite party made...
Tag this Judgment!New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Yasoda Devi and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-18-1996
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 Claim Tribunal awarding Rs. 25000/- as interim compensation in purposed 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. BHK 8919, fell down in a ditch near Roskagarh in village Baniapati, Purnia, as a result of which the said Dilip ...
Tag this Judgment!Oriental Fire Insurance Company Vs. Saroj Gupta and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-16-1996
S.N. Mishra, J.1. The Oriental Fire Insurance Company through the Deputy Manager has filed this Miscellaneous Appeal challenging the judgment and award passed by the Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Muzaffarpur, whereby the Tribunal has awarded a compensation of Rs. 1,87,200/- against the appellant-insurer as compensation to the claimant-respondent No. 1, after deducting a sum of Rs. 50,000/- which was already paid along with interest at the rate of 12% per annum. According to the applicant, on 16.7.1988 her son Alok Kumar Gupta alongwith others was proceeding on a Rajdoot Motor Cycle bearing registration No. BHF 350 from Patna to Muzaffarpur when a Jeep bearing registration No. BPK 8615 dashed against the motor cycle because of the rash and negligent driving, as a result the motor cycle was badly damaged and the said Alok Kumar Gupta sustained server head injury. The victim was first treated in the General Hospital at Muzaffarpur but in view of his serious condition he was ...
Tag this Judgment!Bihar State Electricity Board Vs. Patna Aluminium Udyog and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-15-1996
Sachchida Nand Jha and M.Y. Eqbal, JJ.1. In 1973 the Government of Bihar announced its industrial policy as contained in Resolution No. 16808 dated 29.9.73 of the Department of Industries & Technical Education granting different kinds of incentives and concessions to Small-scale Industrial units. One such incentive was in the form of confessional supply of electricals energy. Paragraph 6 of the Resolution contains the details of the incentive in that regard. The relevant part of the said Resolution which, in fact, is the basis of the claim of the writ petitioners, reads as follows:Confessional rates of electricity tariff6(a) No minimum fixed charge will be levied by electricity undertaking under the control of State Government for five years from the date of production.(b) Small-scale units will be given subsidy of 9paise per unit over the electrical energy actually consumed. Electricity Board/Supply Cos. will prepare bills of consumers after deducting the amount available as subsidy....
Tag this Judgment!Central Bank of India Vs. All India Central Bank Officers Federation a ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-15-1996
1. Appellant Central Bank of India, is aggrieved by the decision of the learned Single Judge on the point of vires of Regulation 20(1) of the Central Bank of India (Officers) Service Regulations, 1979, framed under Section 9 read with Section 12(2) of the Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970. The validity of various provisions of the said Regulations was challenged by the Officers Association, called All India Central Bank Officers Federation. While the challenge to the other provisions did not find favour with the learned Judge, as regards Regulation 20(1) he held the same to be violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, conferring arbitrary and unbridled power on the employer to terminate the services of even permanent employees and accordingly struck down the same.2. The Regulation 20(1) read as follows:-- '20. Termination of Service(1) Subject to sub regulation (3) of Regulation 16 the bank may terminate the services of any officer by giving him...
Tag this Judgment!Shankar Lal Gupta Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-15-1996
S.N. Mishra, J.1. With consent of the parties, both these appeals are being heard together and are being disposed of by this common order, since the point involved in both the appeals is common.2. The plaintiff Shankar Kumar Gupta is the appellant in both the Miscellaneous appeals. Miscellaneous Appeal no, 197 of 1993 arises out of an order dated 26.2.1992, in Claim Application No. 3/8/75 and Miscellaneous Appeal No. 198 of 1993 arises out of an order dated 11.9.1992 in R.C.T. No. 3/8/74, both passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Patna Bench.3. The only grievance of the appellant in these appeals is that the Railway Claims Tribunal has interpreted the relevant Rule, namely, Rule 141 (1)(a)(xvi) of General Rules, under Part I of Goods Tariff No. 39, issued under Section 77-B (4) of the Indian Railways Act, 1890.4. Learned Counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the aforementioned Rule has been interpreted in favour of the appellant in other claim case filed by him, namely, C...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »