Patna Court May 1998 Judgments
Patliputra Prestressed (Pvt.) Ltd. Vs. Steel Authority of India Ltd. a ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-25-1998
S.K. Katriar, J.1. Heard Mr. A.K. Sinha, learned Counsel for the petitioner, and Cr. R.K. Marathia, learned Counsel for respondent Nos. 1 to 3.2. The writ petition has been preferred with the prayer for issuance of an appropriate writ, directing the respondents especially respondent No. 2 to place the work order for manufacture and supply of PSC mono block sleepers to the petitioner for use by respondent No. 2 in view of the petitioner unit being ancillary/dependent unit of respondent No, 2, and for issuance of further directors restraining the respondents from awarding the work orders for manufacture and supply of PSC mono block sleepers to any other party in exclusion of the petitioner unit.3. According to the averments made in the writ petition, the petitioner was issued a permanent registration certificate for manufacture of pre-stressed poles and beams by the Bokaro Industrial Area Development Authority (in short the 'BIADAI), by order dated 2-12-98. In view of shortage of order...
Tag this Judgment!Amir Pasi Vs. State of Bihar and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-22-1998
S.K. Chattopadhyaya, J.1. The petitioner-husband has impugned the order dated 25.9.1997 passed by the Family Court, Dhanbad, by reason of which, being approached by the wife-opposite party, the Court has enhanced the monthly maintenance allowance from Rs. 150/- to Rs. 500/- per month exercising its power under Section 127 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.2. The facts, which are not in dispute, are that the opposite party is the lawfully wedded wife of the petitioner and she some time in 1978, filed a petition before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad under Section 125, Cr.P.C. claiming mainte- nance. The petitioner contested the claim but by order dated 31.1.1978 the Chief Judicial Magistrate directed the petitioner to pay Rs. 150/- per month as monthly maintenance allowance for her as well as her three minor children considering the earning of the petitioner as Rs. 600/- by way of monthly salary. Subsequently, in the year 1997 an application under Section 127 of the Code was fil...
Tag this Judgment!Mahabir Prasad Bajaj Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-22-1998
S.K. Chattopadhyaya, J. 1. This case has been referred to the Division Bench by an order of reference dated 13-12-90 for deciding the question as to whether in view of section 6-C (2) of the Essential Commodities (Bihar Amendment) Act, 1977 (Bihar Act 9 of 1978), a person is entitled to interest even in a case where, in fact, the essential commodity was sold and like a case of deemed sale. 2. For deciding the said question the factual backgrounds, in short, may be stated : On 5-2-87 3,214 tins of edible oil were seized from the premises of the petitioner and acase under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (E.G. Act in short) was instituted. Simultaneously confiscation proceeding under Section 6A of the E.C. Act was also initiated and after confiscation order was passed, 1504 tins of edible oil were sold in an auction at Rs. 4,31,000/- and the balance tins were given in zimanama to another person. The petitioner, impugning the orders taking cognizance and refusing to dis...
Tag this Judgment!Jitendra Prasad Singh and ors. Vs. Tata Engineering and Locomotive Co. ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-22-1998
A.K. Ganguly, J.1. These two Letters Patent Appeals are directed against a judgment dated April 28, 1995 passed by a learned single Judge of this : Court in C.W.J.C. No. 911 of 1990 (R) whereby the Award dated January 29, 1990 passed by the Labour Court, Jamshedpur was quashed.2. L.P.A. No. 244 of 1995 (R) was filed by the Workman in whose favour the Award was passed. L.P.A. No. 246 of 1995 (R) was filed by M/s. Tata Engineering & Locomotive Company (hereinafter called the said Company) in respect of certain directions of the learned Single Judge in the impugned judgment about payment of salary to the appellant/workman from the date of dismissal till the date of judgment and an additional sum of Rs. 50,000. Both the appeals were heard together as both were directed against the same judgment of the learned Single Judge noted above.3. The genesis of the factual aspects of this case is noted below:On April 14, 1985, which was a Sunday, a General Body meeting of TELCO Co-operative Society...
Tag this Judgment!incab Industries Ltd. Vs. Asstt. Collector of C. Ex.
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-21-1998
R.A. Sharma, J.1. The petitioner has filed this writ application seeking writ of mandamus directing the Assistant Collector, Central Excise, Jamshedpur, (hereinafter referred to as the Assistant Collector), to refund the amount of Rs. 13,09,598.43 which was collected as Excise Duty from it. A prayer for quashing the order of the Assistant Collector dated 5-9-1986 rejecting its claim for refund has also been made.2. Mr. Pawan Kumar, learned Sr. Counsel for the petitioner, has made two submissions in support of this petition, namely, (1) as the petitioner deposited the excise duty under protest, the period of limitation of six months fixed by Section 11B will not be applicable; and (2) if the excise duty is paid under mistake of law, the claim for its refund can be made within three years of the discovery of such a mistake. As the petitioner discovered the mistake from the Supreme Court decision in Union of India and Ors. v. Bombay Tyre International Ltd. -1983 (14) E.L.T. 1896 (S.C.), ...
Tag this Judgment!Rajeev Kumar Vs. Dr. U.K. Biswas and Others
Court: Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Patna
Decided on: May-21-1998
V.N. Mishra, Member: 1. The present complaint has been filed by Rajeev Kumar against Dr. U.K. Biswas, Dr. Hari Ram Yadav and Dr. Dilip Choudhary of Darbhanga to have wrongly treated him for gastriculcer for a long time when he was actually suffering from appendicitis as later on detected at Patna. He had unnecessarily to spend a large sum in pursuing a wrong treatment. He would have lost his life had he not been shifted to Patna for treatment. He has prayed for compensation of Rs. 6.00 lakhs for expenditure incurred by him during the treatment including professional loss and also for mental agony. 2. The fact of the complaint case in short is that the complainant consulted Dr. U.K. Biswas, opposite party No. 1 on 17.11.1994 for severe pain in abdomen who referred him to Dr. Hari Ram Yadav, opposite party No. 2, for barium meal X-ray and to Dr. Dilip Choudhary, opposite party No. 3 for ultrasound scanning besides advising him for T.C. and D.C. of WBC, routine test of urine and stool. Th...
Tag this Judgment!Ramdeo Singh Alias Lakho Singh and ors. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-20-1998
Sachchidanand Jha, J.1. 33 persons were put on trial for committing offences under Sections 302, 436, 302/149, 436/149, 324 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code in sessions case Nos. 237/78, 237-A/78, 136/80 and 218/80 arising out of the same occurrence. Four sessions cases aforesaid were registered because some of the accused persons had absconded for sometime resulting in bifurcation of the cases of the rest and separate commitment orders passed with respect to them, 28 out of them were acquitted by the trial Court. The rest 5, appellants herein, have been convicted. All of the have been convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life under Section 302/149 of the Penal Code. They have also been convicted and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 5 years under Section 436/149, 1 year under Section 324 and 1 year under Section 379 of the Penal Code. Appellant Nos. 3, 4 and 5 have further been convicted for the substantive offence under Section 302 of the Penal Code and separately senten...
Tag this Judgment!Sri Durga Cement Company Ltd. and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and an ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-20-1998
R.A. Sharma and A.K. Prasad, JJ.1. The appellants filed writ petition (CWJC No. 2370 of 1997/R) challenging the orders dated 9.6.1997 and 30.6.1997 (Annexure 7 and 9 respectively) passed by the Divisional Forest Officer, Hazaribagh, and East Division. By the 1st order the appellants have been directed to stop transportation of minerals through the forest area. By the 2nd order, they have been directed to stop forthwith the mining and ancillary activities in all sort of forest area. The 2nd order is re-produced herein below:Please refer to the aforesaid references. The judgment/order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India to already communicated to you. Out of 88.00 acres of your lease hold area, the lease comprises 13.60 acre of forest land for which there is no prior approval of the Central Government under Section 2 of the Forest Conservation Act, 1980. At the same time, you are trampling forest flora and land of village Kurkutta and Religara for playing of vehicles loaded with miner...
Tag this Judgment!Bihar State Electricity Board and ors. Vs. Sri Bir Ispat
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-19-1998
R.A. Sharma, J.1. Being aggrieved by the electricity bills for the months of February, 1996 to November, 1996, raised on the basis of 42 H.P, bad under category LTIS-II, instead of raising the same at 10 H.P. under category LT1S-1, the sole respondent herein, namely, M/s. Sri Bir Ispat (hereinafter to be referred to as the consumer) filed C.W.J.C. No. 148 of 1997 (K) before this Court. The said writ petition having been allowed, the appellant Bihar State Electricity Board and its officials (hereinafter referred to as the Board) have filed this appeal.2. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties.3. The consumer, a partnership firm, is running a small scale industrial unit situated at Mohanpur, Tundi Road, Giridih, for processing of iron scrap. It applied for 10 H.P. electrical energy under Low Tension Tariff before the Board, which was sanctioned vide letter dated 17.8.1995. An agreement in connection therewith was also executed between the Board and the consumer.4. The consumer re...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Gomia Devi Vs. Kishun Rai and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: May-19-1998
Loknath Prasad, J.1. This Second Appeal is directed against the judgment dated 6.10.1986 and the decree dated 19.11.1986 passed by Shri Ranjit Prasad Sinha, 3rd Addl. Subordinate Judge, Giridih in Title Appeal No. 41/85 thereby and thereunder the appeal was allowed and the judgment dated 3.5.1985 and the decree dated 13.5.1985 passed by Shri B.K. Prasad, Munsif, Giridih in Title Suit No. 124 of 1974 was set aside.2. The fact in short for the purpose of this appeal is that the original plaintiff Barhani, widow of Barhan Hazam who died during the pendency of the suit and her daughter Gomia was substituted, instituted a suit as against the defendants Kishun Rai, Bhagi Rai and Shyamlal Rai who are the sons and grand sons of one Chatur Rai for declaration of her title and also for recovery of possession in respect of some lands of Khata Nos. 32 and 39 of village Kripalpur, P.S. Dhanwar as described in Schedule A and B of the plaint. It has been alleged by the plaintiff that lands of Khata...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »