Patna Court April 1998 Judgments
Suresh Prasad Gupta @ Suresh Prasad and ors. Vs. Ashok Kumar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-16-1998
Gurusharan Sharma, J.1. The plaintiffs-appellants filed Title Suit No. 42 of 1982 in the Court of Subordinate Judge, Earth for partition wherein one Ram Chandra Prasad, son of Nathni Sao, who was defendant No. 2 died on 6.3.1990. The plaintiffs filed a petition under Order XXII, Rule 4 read with Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure and Section 5 of the Limitation Act on 26.6.1990 for substitution of the heirs of deceased to hold that the suit abated as a whole and the same was disposed of accordingly.2. On 13.12.1990 a petition under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure was filed on behalf of the plaintiffs to set aside/recall the said order dated 7.12.1990. It was registered as Miscellaneous Case No. 23 of 1990. In the meantime on 29.4.1991 the plaintiffs moved this Court of Civil Procedure against the said order dated 7.12.1990 was registered. This appeal was admitted on 26.2.1993 and lower Court records were called for.3. The trial Court records recalls that 7.12.1990 contin...
Tag this Judgment!Nand Kishore Singh and ors. Etc. Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-16-1998
S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.1. Alt these cases relates to consolidation proceedings initiated in two village, 'Dighi Kalan' and 'Dighi Khurd' within Hajipur Sadar P.S. in the district of Vaishali. In C.W.J.C. No. 995/87, this Court while admitting the writ petition on 3-4-87 stayed the operation of consolidation proceeding in the area in question. In view of the aforesaid interim order, certain orders were passed in different consolidation cases which were already pending before the authorities, giving rise to the filing of the other writ petitions. For the said reason all cases were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.C.W.J.C. No. 995/87.2. The petitioners, who are resident of village Dighi Kalan and Dighi Khurd within the district of Vaishali challenged the order dated 3-3-87 passed by Joint Director of Consolidation (Muzaffarpur) Patna in Revision case No. 3137/86 whereby and where under the stay earlier granted relating to operation of consolidation proceedi...
Tag this Judgment!Radha Rajak Alias Radhika Raja and ors. Vs. Balmiki Devi and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-15-1998
M.Y. Eqbal, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This revision application is directed against the order dated 19-7-1996 passed by the Munsif. Banks, in Execution Case No. 11 of 1993 whereby in purported exercise of jurisdiction under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the petitioner was directed to deliver possession of the suit land to the defendant-Decree Holder. 3. It appears that the plaintiffs-petitioners filed Title Suit No. 47 of 1971 against the defendants-Opposite parlies for declaration of title and confirmation/recovery of possession. Further relief for removal of encroachment was also claimed. The suit was dismissed by the learned Munsif holding that the plaintiffs-petitioners arc not in lawful possession of the suit property. The judgment and decree of the trial Court was confirmed by the first appellate Court and also by this Court in Second Appeal No. 354 of 1991. Since the suit was dismissed with costs, a decree was prepared for realisation of c...
Tag this Judgment!Madhusudan Choudhary Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-15-1998
R.A. Sharma, J. 1. The appellant filed a writ application seeking appropriate writ directing the respondents, namely, the Government of Bihar and its officials, to make payment of the dues for the work done by it under the contract. The appellant's case is that it has entered into a contract with the-respondents on 26-2-1987 for construction of a canal in Chakulia Division and although it has completed 90% work awarded to it under the said contract, but the respondents are not making the payment for the work done by it in spite of request made to that effect and the recommendation made by the Executive Engineer. The writ application having been dismissed by the learned single Judge, the appellant has filed this appeal.2. The contract between the Government and the appellant is a non-statutory contract, It is well settled that non-statutory contract can neither be enforced nor can any direction be issued to remedy its breach under Article 226 of the Constitution. In this connection in...
Tag this Judgment!Bachcha Singh ors. Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-15-1998
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. This application for initiation of a contempt proceeding against the opposite parties has been filed for the alleged disregard and disobeyance of the judgment and order dated 1.9,1995 passed by this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 8356 of 1993.2. The petitioners filed the aforementioned writ petition seeking appropriate direction to the respondents for regularisation of their services who are working on daily wages for the last several years and to pay the pay scale of the posts of which the petitioners are performing duties till the petitioners are regularised in the regular scale of pay against regular vacancy. The writ petition was disposed of in terms of the judgment and order dated 1.9.1998. This Court taking into consideration the facts that the project in which the petitioners have been working is not temporary, disposed of the writ petition by passing the following orders:(a) The respondent-authorities will prepare a scheme for regularisation of the employees and those ...
Tag this Judgment!D.V.C. Bukaru Co-operative Stores Ltd. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-15-1998
R.A. Sharma, J.1. The petitioner has filed this writ application challenging the assessment orders for the financial year 1995-96 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Tenughat Circle, Phusro, under the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. Prayer for quashing the demand notices issued pursuant to the said assessment orders, has also been made. It has also challenged the validity of Sub-section (3) of Section 45 of the Act whereby admission of appeal filed against an assessment order has been barred, unless 20 per cent of the tax assessed or the admitted tax whichever is greater is paid.2. The learned S.C. I., at the threshold, has raised preliminary objection about the maintainability of this application on the ground of alternative remedy of appeal. In reply, the learned counsel for the petitioner has made two submissions, namely, (i) the impugned assessment orders are arbitrary having shown inflated sale...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Ashok Kumar Sinha Vs. Patna University and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-10-1998
A.K. Ganguly, J.1. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is a confirmed teacher of Patna University (hereinafter called the said University). The petitioner was initially appointed as temporary Lecturer in English in the said University on 25.11.1966. Then on the recommendation of the Bihar Public Service Commission, the petitioner was issued an order of appointment to the said post which was approved by the Syndicate vide notification dated 16.7.1968. Such appointment letter of the petitioner was issued under the signature of the Registrar of the said University. Thereafter the services of the petitioner as Lecturer of the said University was confirmed and he was promoted to the post of Reader in English with effect from 14.11.1980 vide notification dated 29.9.1981. The petitioner was further promoted to the post of University Professor of English in the said University with effect from 5.8.1988 vide order dated 20.8.1988. Then the order of promotion of the petitioner was revised ...
Tag this Judgment!Janki Poddar and ors. Vs. Sitaram Poddar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-10-1998
Gurusharan Sharma, J.1. In Title Appeal No. 61 of 1983, pending before the IVth Additional District Judge, Bhagalpur, at the instance of the appellants herein, respondents 1 and 8 died. On 27.3.1985, a petition on behalf of the respondents was filed stating therein that Santokhi Mandal, respondent No. 8 died on 11.11.1984 and thereafter on 3.5.1985 another petition was filed stating therein that respondent No. 1 died on 15.1.1985 and steps for substitution having not been taken in time, the appeal stood abated.2. However, on 9.5.1985, the appellants filed a petition for substitution. It was claimed therein that the respondent No. 1 died on 10.2.1985. The date of death of respondent No. 8 as given by the respondents was also challenged, but no specific date was given.3. In this regard, the parties adduced oral evidence and a number of documents were exhibited. The Court below accepted the respondents1 version that Hari Poddar, respondent No. 1 died on 15.1.1985. No petition for condoni...
Tag this Judgment!Rameshwar Jute Mills Ltd. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-09-1998
1. In these two writ petitions identical question is involved and, therefore, they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. In C.W.J.C. No. 1196 of 1986 the year in question is 1978-79 while in C.W.J.C. No. 1075 of 1986 the year in question is 1977-78. In both the years the respondent-Market Committee has imposed market fee on the sale of the item 'Mesta' treating it to be the same as 'Jute.' 2. The submission urged on behalf of the petitioner is that 'Jute' and 'Mesta' are two different items and Mesta is neither a derivative nor processed form of jute. These two items are botanically different and so known in the commercial world by persons dealing with these items. On the other hand, the contention of the respondents is that in the Jute (Licensing and Control Order) 1961 issued under the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, 'raw jute' has been defined as fibre of jute as also known as pal, kosta, nalita, bimli or mesta and, therefore, jute must includ...
Tag this Judgment!The Bihar State Mineral Development Corporation Vs. the State of Bihar ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-09-1998
S.N. Mishra, J.1. In this writ application the petitioner has challenged the legality of the order dated 11.12.1996 issued by respondent principal Chief Conservator of Forest by which the petitioner Bihar State Mineral Development Corporation has been directed to stop mining operation with effect from 26.12.1996 and further for a declaration that lands measuring 86 acres appertaining to village Chandula and 86.80 acres of land appertaining to village Simalgoda, are not the forest land within the meaning of Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980. Further prayer has been made for a direction to the respondents to consider and grant permission to the petitioner-Corporation for carrying on mining operation over the land, in question.2. Briefly stated the case of the petitioner is that the petitioner Bihar State Mineral Development Corporation was established in the year, 1972 with the sole aim of promoting mineral development in the State after obtaining mining lease in the Sta...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »