Patna Court November 1997 Judgments
Manik Chand Sonar @ Manik Chand Saraf Vs. Biharijee and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-18-1997
S.N. Jha, J.1. The defendant is the petitioner in this civil revision. He is aggrieved by an order by which his petition for amendment of the plaint has been rejected.2. The plaintiffs-opposite party filed Eviction -Suit No. 8 of 1988. In paragraphs 1 to 4 of the plaint in plaintiffs stated as to how the plaint in question belonged to one Mostt Jashoda Kuar as the absolute owner, which, was donated to the plaintiffs-deities by said Mostt. Jashoda Kuar under registered instrument dated 30.3.50, appointment of Ramji Prasad Singh and Lakshman Prasad Singh as mutwallis, as the said Ramji Prasad Singh is managing the property as mutwalli and collecting from defendant who has been, in occupation of the said premises described in Schedule II of the plaint, on payment of rent Rs. 50/- per month. In paragraph 5 of the written statement, the defendant admitted the aforesaid statements made in paragraphs 1 to 4 of the plaint.3. By the impugned amendment, however, he proposes to delete the said p...
Tag this Judgment!Refractory Specialities (India) Ltd. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-18-1997
A. Alam, J.1. Two individual workmen dismissed from service by the management of Refractory Specialities (India) Limited (the petitioner in these two writ petitions) raised industrial disputes which were sent for adjudication before the Labour Court, Deoghar in two separate references made under Section 10(1)(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The two references were registered before the Labour Court as I. D. Cases Nos. 1 and 3 of 1984. Initially the management sought to be represented in those two cases before the Labour Court through B. Lal and D.K. Verma, advocates, who filed the authority given by the management in terms of rule 34 of the Industrial Disputes (Bihar) Rules. The workmen who were not being represented by any legal practitioner objected to the management's representation through practising advocates whereupon the Labour Court declined to grant leave to the two advocates to represent the management.2. B. Lal, not one to acc...
Tag this Judgment!Ganga Singh College Vs. Bharati Bidya Mandir and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-18-1997
Sachidanand Jha, J. 1. This civil revision by the defendant is directed against an order exempting the plaintiff-opposite party from the necessity of substituting the legal representative of defendant No. 1 Smt. Suchitra Dutta in terms of Rule 4(4) of Order 22 of the Code of Civil. Procedure. 2. The plaintiffs filed suit for specific performance of contract for sale of the property, described in Schedule I of the plaint in favour of plaintiff No. 1-Bharti Bidya Mandir, Chapra. There cases, shortly stated, is that plaintiff No. I was the tenant of late Hem Chandra Mitra. After his death, his wife Smt. Suchitra Dutta (defendant No. 1) started realising rent. In the year 1966 the petitioner was allowed to run its Law faculty during evening hours with the consent of the plaintiffs, but the petitioner was never recognised as tenant nor any rent was paid by the petitioner to the plaintiffs or to the landlord. Plaintiff No. 1 had entered into oral agreement for the sale of the property wi...
Tag this Judgment!Nagendra Singh Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-17-1997
Aftab Alam, J.1. This writ petition arises from a dispute regarding right of way claimed by respondents 2 to 4 over portions of certain plots of land owned and possessed by the petitioner According to the petitioner plot Nos. 735 and 733 (old plot Nos. 370 and 371) under Khata No. 295 situate in village Ankhora, P.S. Daudnagar in the. district of Aurangabad are his Khatians land and he is in peaceful possession over these plots. He makes a grievance that respondents are indulging in acts causing disturbance to his possession over the land and are threatening to forcibly construct a road passing through the two plots.2. Respondent No. 2 is the District Magistrate, Aurangabad, Respondent No. 4 is the Executive Magistrate, Aurangabad College, Aurangabad. They claim the right of way over portions of the two disputed plots, along with a number of other plots with which we are not concerned in this case, for going to the Daudnagar College from Daudnagar-Patna road which runs at some distanc...
Tag this Judgment!Rajendra Sao and ors. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-17-1997
Loknath Prasad, J.1. This revision is directed against the order dated 23.11.1992 passed by 2nd Addl. Sessions Judge. Giridih in Criminal Appeal No. 126/86 thereby and thereunder the appeal was dismissed for default.2. The fact, in short for the purpose of this revision is that these petitioners were facing trial in the Court of Sri R.N. Singh, Judicial Magistrate. 2nd class Giridih. in G.R. Case No. 1435/82 (T.R. No. 159/86) and by judgment dated 25.7.1986, the learned Judicial Magistrate found these petitioners guilty under Section 379 IPC and they were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six' months and a further fine of Rs. 200/- each was imposed for the offence under Section 144 of the Indian Penal Code and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a month. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with this order of conviction, the petitioners preferred a Criminal Appeal No. 126/86. But. the learned 2nd Addl. Sessions Judge by order dated 23.1.1992 dismissed the appeal as ...
Tag this Judgment!Prafulla Pradhan Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-11-1997
Loknath Prasad, J.1. This revision is directed against the order of conviction dated 3.9.92 passed by Sri Syed Mohammed Mahrooz Alam Special Judge, E.C. Act, Chaibassa, in G.R. Case No. 1/91 thereby and thereunder the petitioner was found guilty under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act (in short to be stated as the said Act) and he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month only.2. The fact, in short, for the purpose of this revision is that the petitioner, Prafulla Pradhan got a fair price shop at village Ramchandrapur within Jagannathpur police station and got licence No. 11/85. It has been alleged that on 27.12.90 P.W. 1 Md. Wasim Ansari District Supply Officer inspected the fair price shop and it was found that the petitioner had not maintained Sale Register of wheat and sugar properly and it was suspected that he might have sold some quantities of wheat and kerosene oil at higher rate. The District Supply Office submitted a written report on 30.12.90 to ...
Tag this Judgment!Sukhdeo Mandal Vs. Kailu Ram
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-11-1997
S.N. Jha, J.1. These two civil revisions are directed against the same order dated 3.7.97 passed by the 6th Subordinate. Judge, Bhagalpur, in Title Suit No. 329 as 1984 allowing amendment in the plaint.2. Plaintiffs, 26 in number, have filed the aforementioned suit for declaration that they have got full right, title and interest in the suit property in which the defendants have no right, title or interest by virtue of the entries in the survey record of rights. The plaintiffs are the descendants of Muni Ram, Pirthi Ram, and Gaibi Nath Mandal. According to them their said ancestors were Raiyats of 4 bighas 13 kathas of Bhit land and 2 bighas 1 katha of homestead land under Babu Suraj Mohan Thakur and Suresh Mohan Thakur, ex-landlords. At the time of veeting of the estate, the said landlords filed returns with respect to the lands in question in their names. Accordingly Jamabandi was created in their names. The plaintiffs claim to be in possession of the lands and to have paid up to da...
Tag this Judgment!Premium Coke Manufacturing Co. (Pvt.) Ltd. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-11-1997
Prasun Kumar Deb, J.1. Heard Mr. Biron Poddar, learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Government. Advocate for the respondents.2. By this writ application, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ of mandamus commanding upon the respondents to provide capital Investment Subsidy (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Subsidy') as provided under the Bihar Industrial Policy, 1986 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Policy') to the tune of 3,8,50,799/-.3. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that in view of the Policy, the petitioner was entitled to get subsidy as it was a promise made by the State of Bihar. Learned Counsel further submitted that this being an ineontive, it would have been given to the petitioners Unit for its development and survival.4. Now a counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents wherein it has been stated that the policy as such as enumerated in the year 1986 is no more available to the petitioner...
Tag this Judgment!Krishna Prasad Patwa and ors. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-10-1997
Loknath Prasad, J.1. This revision is directed against the judgment dated 6.2.93 passed by Sri R.N. Pd. Singh, 2nd Addl. Sessions Judge Giridih, in Criminal Appeal No. 34/90 thereby and thereunder the judgment dt. 24.4.90 passed by Sri Binod Kumar Lai, judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Giridih, in Complaint case No. 39/87 was confirmed and maintained and all these petitioners were found guilty under Section 498, IPC and they were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years each.2. The prosecution case, in short, is that the complainant Basanti Devi was married to accused Krishna Pd. Patwa according to Hindu Custom on 11.4.85 and at the time of marriage cash amount and some articles were given to the accused persons by the father of the complainant. After the marriagethe complainant had gone to her Sasural, but, after 7-8 months Sasural people began to demand Rs. 1000/- in cash, golden ring and other articles by way of dowry and due to non-fulfilment of the same she was abus...
Tag this Judgment!Rajan Kumar Jha Vs. State of Bihar and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Nov-05-1997
S.N. Jha, J.1. This civil revision arises from an order by which the Court below has directed the petitioner to pay maintenance pendente lite under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act to opposite party No. 2 Punam Kumari in a matrimonial case instituted by her for restitution of conjugal rites.2. The petitioner has denied the factum of marriage. It is stated that he was kidnapped on the fateful day on which the marriage is alleged to have been solemnised, for which a criminal case was instituted. The Police after investigation submitted charge-sheet against the father of opposite party No. 2 and other members of the family. The case is pending trial. Opposite party No. 2 has denied the allegations.3. Counsel for the parties made submissions at length. I however do not want to go into the facts of the case nor do I want to examine correctness of the order. If venture to do so, I will have to accept the case of one or the other party. This would obviously prejudice the other side. Whet...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »