Patna Court March 1998 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.
Central Tasar Research and Training Institute and ors. Vs. State of Bi ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-10-1998
S.K. Chattopadhyaya, J.1. All the three petitioners have been arrayed as accused along with one M.A. Rahman in Complaint Case No. C (iii) 132/88 pending before the Judicial Magistrate, 1st class, Ranchi. Out of aforesaid four accused persons, three of them have moved this Court invoking the jurisdiction of this under Article 226 of the Constitution for quashing the entire prosecution against them on the ground of inordinate delay and also that the allegations alleged do not constitute may offence.2. It appears that on 28.3.1988, the Employment Officer, Enforcement Machinery, filed a complaint against the said four accused persons alleging, inter alia, that during the course of inspection it was found that the accused persons had failed to furnish quarterly returns ending December, 1996, March, 1987 and June, 1987 and September, 1987 which was in contravention of Section 5(1) of the Employment Exchange (Compulsory Notification of Vacancies) Act 1959. It is alleged that these persons (n...
Surya Kumar Das and ors. Vs. Ajit Kumar Das and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-09-1998
M.Y. Eqbal, J. 1. This appeal has been listed under the heading 'Orders'. 2. It appears that the instant appeal has been preferred against the order dated 18-12-1996 passed by th'e Subordinate Judge III, Ranchi, in Partition Suit No. 134 of 1988(hereinafter referredto as 'the impugned order') whereby and whereunder the learned Court below in a final decree proceeding confirmed the report of the Pleader Commissioner and ordered for preparation of final decree. 3. When the appeal was placed before the Bench on 12-8-1997 it was contended on behalf of the appellants that since the final decree was not prepared, the appeal could be filed under Order XX, Rule 6A of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') against the operative part of the said order by which the learned Court below directed for preparation of final decree. In view of the submission the objection raised by the office for filing of certified copy of the decree was ignored. Thereafter the impugned ...
S.B. Ganguly Alias Satya Brata Ganguly Vs. State of Bihar and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-06-1998
S.K. Chattopadhyaya, J.1. In this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the petitioner has prayed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding including the order taking cognizance dated 9.4.90 for an offence under Section 27 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940.2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass : One Dr. S.K. Ghosh, a Medical Practioner, purchased Wymox (Ammoxycillin) mixture from one Sinha Pharmacy and sold the same to one of his patients. The said patient returned the phial on the ground that bottle of the mixture contained one insect. On 30.10.89 Dr. Ghosh informed the matter to the Managing Director of the Company and on receipt of the same the representative of the Company met the doctor from time to time to enquire into the matter and to get the bottle examined but Dr. Ghosh did not oblige him by handing over the bottle. After some correspondences, it appears, when Dr. Ghosh could not gently relief at the Company send, the complained to t...
National Insurance Company Vs. Mossamat Das Choudhary and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-06-1998
Prasun Kumar Deb, J.1. Both these appeals have been heard analogously as they arise out of the same accident and the appellant-Insurance Company are the same in both the cases, although the claimants-respondents are different.2. M.A. No. 473 of 1991 (R) has arisen out of Compensation Case No. 35 of . 1988, award of which had been passed by the 1st Additional District Judge-cum-MACT, Chaibasa, granting compensation to the tune of Rs. 50,000/- against the appellant-Insurance Company. Similarly M.A. No. 472 of 1991 (R) has arisen out of Compensation Case No. 36 of 1988 by the same Tribunal granting compensation to the tune of Rs. 50,000/- as lump-sum. It may be mentioned here that another claim case had also arisen out of the same accident being M.A. No. 471 of 1991 (R). The said compensation case was referred to Lok Adalat and on compromise being arrived at between the appellant and the respondents, the miscellaneous appeal was disposed of on grant of compensation to a total lump sum am...
Krishna Oraon and ors. Vs. Sukhi Chamar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-06-1998
P.K. Deb, J.1. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree dated 10.1.1981 passed by the then 2nd Additional District Judge, Palamau in Title Appeal No. 32 of 1977 reversing the judgment and decree dated 11.8.1977 passed by the then Munsif, Jamshedpur in Title Suit No. 47 of 1963.2. The plaintiffs in the original suit are the appellants in this Second Appeal. The suit property related to plot No. 1743 appertaining to Khewat Nos. 4/1 to 4/4 which were held by several khewatdars wherein Khewat No. 4/5 was the Samillat Khewat of the abovementioned Khewatdars of 4/1 to 4/4. The Khewatdars in those Khewats have been recorded as Dwarni Thikedars and Khewats were situated in village Chiyaki under Chainpur Estate. The suit plot No. 1743 was recorded as Gair Mazurwa land. According to the plaintiffs by amicable arrangement among the Khewetdars the suit land appertaining to part of plot No. 1743 number' being 1743-A came in possession of the plaintiffs. As per the plaintiffs'...
Raj Kumar and Brothers Vs. Damodar Valley Corporation and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-05-1998
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This appeal by the plaintiff appellant is directed against the judgment and order dated 15.5.1996 passed by the Sub--Judge II. Bermo at Tenughat in arbitration case No. 16 of 1995 whereby an application filed by the plaintiff under Section 22 of the Arbitration Act seeking relief for direction to the defendant respondents to file arbitration agreement and for referring the disputes for arbitration has been rejected.2. It is not necessary to go into the detailed facts of the case and suffice it to say that the plaintiff was allotted work by the respondents for renovation and modification of A.S.H. Bundh at City P.S. Under the agreement, the time for completion of the work was stipulated. It appears that the work could not be completed in the schedule time and the time was extended, but even then, the work could not be completed. However, according to the plaintiff, a good value of the work was completed apart from extra work, but payments were not made, although bills ...
Deep Chand JaIn and ors. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-04-1998
Aftab Alam, J.1. Govind Prasad Agrawal the sole petitioner in Criminal Revision No. 398/91 is a wholesale dealer of common salt. Deep Chand Jain the sole petitioner in Criminal Revision No. 342 of 1991 is the Munshi of the firm M/s. Bharat Enterprises of which Govind Prasad Agrawal is the Proprietor.2. On 27.6.1990 the Food Inspector Purnea took samples of salt from the premises of the firm and sent them for chemical analysis. On receipt of the analysis report he filed a complaint before the Chief Judicial Magistrate. Kishanganj on 21.7.1990. In the complaint it was alleged that the salt being sold by the petitioners to retail shop keepers (who would sell it to the general public) was found to be adulterated as it did not have the adequate percentage of iodine for human consumption. A prayer was made in the complaint to initiate a proceeding against the petitioners under Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. The allegation in the complaint was sought to be su...
Anandi Prasad Sao @ Anand Sao and anr. Vs. Satya Narayan Prasad and or ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-03-1998
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This civil revision application is directed against the order dated 25.09.1997 passed by the Sub-Judge-I, at Chaibasa in Title (Partition) Suit No. 16 of 1988 whereby and whereunder the learned Court below allowed the petition filed by the plaintiff opposite party seeking amendment of the plaint.2. The plaintiff opposite party filed the aforesaid suit claiming partition of the properties mentioned in the plaint. In the said partition suit, these petitioners and opposite party No. 2 were made contesting defendants and opposite parties Nos. 3 and 4 were made proforma defendants. Defendant petitioner No. 1 filed his written statement and contested the suit stating, inter alia, that item No. 1 of the suit property i.e. land and house bearing plot No. 174 situated in ward No. 1 in Chakradharpur was sold by Ram Jeevan Sao for a valuable consideration by virtue of registered deed of sale dated 27.4.1997 to the petitioner No. 2 and a specific plea was taken that the suit prop...
State of Bihar Vs. Viptu Ram and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-03-1998
P.K. Sarin, J.1. All the Criminal Appeals and Death Reference arise out of the judgment and order dated 11/16.10.1996 passed in Sessions trial No. 81/38 of 1991/1993 by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Rohtas at Sasaram, as such all the five appeals have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. Accused Vipatu Ram, Sankatha Ram and Ram Gahan Ram have been sentenced to death under Section 396 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the Code). Hence, death reference No. 6 of 1996 has been made by the learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge. These accused have preferred Criminal Appeal No. 552 of 1996 and also Jail Appeal No. 572 of 1996. Accused Sri Ram, Babulal Ram Mangaru Ram, Shyam Narayan Ram @ Ram Narayan Ram, Banarsi Ram, Ram Dahin Ram, Kamala Ram, Sheogahan Ram, Nagina Ram, Ram Shanker Ram, and Ram Pyare Ram (Appellants in Criminal Appeal No. 592 of 1996) and accused Shiv Badan Ram and Shanker Ram (Appellants in Criminal Appeal No. 56...
Sarraf Enterprises Vs. Canara Bank and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Mar-03-1998
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This appeal by the plaintiff appellant is directed against the order dated 28.4.1987 passed by the Sub Judge-VI, Patna in Title Suit No. 41 of 1990 whereby and whereunder the learned Court below allowed the petition filed by the defendant respondents holding that the Court at Patna has no jurisdiction to try the suit and accordingly, ordered for return of the plaint for presenting the same before the appropriate Court. The plaintiff had filed the aforementioned suit against the defendant respondents for a declaration that the defendant-respondent No. 2 M/s. Hindustan Antibiotics Limited is not entitled to forfeit the bank guarantee issued by the defendant No. 1. A further prayer has been made for restraining the defendant respondent No. 1 from making payment of the guarantee amount to the defendant No. 2 till the disposal of the suit.2. The plaintiff's case, inter alia, is that the defendant No 2 appointed the plaintiff as 'clearing and selling agent' on certain terms...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »