Patna Court August 1998 Judgments

Manoj Kumar Pandey Vs. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. and ors.

Court: Patna

R.A. Sharma, J.1. The petitioner, who was a workman of M/s. Bharat Coking Coal Limited (hereinafter referred to as the management) has filed this writ petition challenging the order of termination of his service by the management after holding domestic enquiry.2. A Full Bench of this Court in Dinesh Prasad and Ors. v. State of Bihar and Ors., (1985-I-LLJ-343) has held that the statutory reference of an industrial dispute under the Industrial Disputes Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) is an adequate and efficacious legal remedy for the enforcement of the rights/obligation created under the Act and the person aggrieved must exhaust the remedies available under the Act before seeking relief in the writ jurisdiction unless there are exceptional circumstances warranting interference by this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India at the threshold.3. The Supreme Court in the Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation and Anr. etc. v. Krishna Kant etc., (1995-II-LLJ-728) ...

Parikh Engg. and Body Bldg. Co. Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Inc ...

Court: Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Patna

Reported in: (1999)69ITD207(Pat.)

1. All these appeals and the COs are relating to the same assessee and are inter-connected as they involve common issues. For the sake of convenience they are considered together and decided by a consolidated order.2. The assessee in this case, is a public limited company. It derives income from dealership business of Maruti range of vehicles, manufacture and sale of cold drink, leasing vehicles, rental income of Devi Cinema at Bokaro, etc.There is a common ground in both the appeals by the assessee. This relates to the addition on account of estimate of the market value of the assets sold forming part of the block assets of leasing business.The AO after detailed discussions at pp. 5 to 8 of the impugned assessment order held that the lease was found to be regular and valid.Thus, there was no dispute regarding the validity of the leasing business of the assessee. However, the AO was not satisfied about the sale prices of the leased assets at the termination of the lease period. He fou...

Bijay Kumar Tandon and anr. Vs. State of Bihar

Court: Patna

M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In the application filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioners have challenged the order dated 21.4.1998 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Patna. in G.R. No. 3282 of 1993 by which their application for dropping the case against them under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code has been rejected. The grounds taken by the petitioners in the application is that the cognizance of the offence against the petitioners itself was barred by limitation under Sections 468 and 469 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.2. The prosecution story, in brief is that the informant Santosh Kumar lodged a First Information Report on 23.7.1993 with the Officer-in-Charge of Pirbahore Police Station alleging therein that his brother was assaulted by the petitioners due to which he got bleeding injuries. On the basis of the First Information Report, Pi (sic) ore P.S. Case No. 196 of 1993 was registered under Sections 341, 323/34 of the Indian Penal Code. On 24.7.1996...

Ch. Veeraraghavaiah Vs. State of Bihar and anr.

Court: Patna

M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In this application filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 28.3.98 passed by Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Muzaffarpur in Complaint Case No. 1559/97 by which the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance of offence against the petitioner under Sections 323, 504 and 384 of the Indian Penal Code.2. The complainant opposite party No. 2 is the Manger of M/s Manish Travels. He, in the capacity of Manager, filed a complaint case in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate against the petitioner who is the Regional Manager and one Managing Director of United India Insurance Company Ltd.3. The prosecution story, inter alia, is that the complainant is the Manager of M/s. Manish Travels and Shri Sudhakar Prasad is the proprietor of the said firm who carries on transport business. The two vehicles of the company were insured with the United India Insurance Company Ltd. and both the vehicles met with an a...

Dhirendra Prasad Singh Vs. State of Bihar and ors.

Court: Patna

M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In this writ application, the petitioner seeks issuance of an appropriate writ directing the respondents to return forthwith the revolver bearing No. 127712-V-made-in U.S.A. which was seized by the police and in the alternative a prayer has been made for a direction to the respondents for payment of adequate price or compensation in case respondents are unable to return the revolver to the petitioner.2. Undisputed facts of the case are that a First Information Report was lodged against the petitioner and others on 14.7.1980 on the basis of which a criminal case was instituted under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act bearing Darbhanga Sadar P.S. Case No. 28 of 1980. In connection with that case all the arms including aforementioned revolver were seized from his house in village Sinsura by the officer-in-charge of Darbhanga Sadar Police Station. The aforesaid case was ultimately committed to the Court of Sessions being S.T. No. 7 of 1...

Arun Kumar Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and anr.

Court: Patna

Narayan Roy, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and also learned counsel for the Central Revenue.2. By this application, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the entire criminal prosecution launched against him in Complaint Case No. 382(c) of 1992, pertaining to Trial No. 605 of 1992 whereby and whereunder the learned Special Judge, Economic Offences, Patna, has taken cognizance of the offence under Sections 276C and 277 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, inter alia, submitted that the appeal filed by him for deletion of all additions has been allowed and direction imposing penalty for additions has been set aside. In this connection, my attention has been drawn to an order dated August 30, 1996, passed by the Appellate Authority as contained in annexure-9 to the supplementary affidavit. Since all the additions made have been deleted and imposition of penalty under Section 271(1)(c) has been set aside by the Appellate Aut...

Abdul Manan Vs. Md. Murad Ali and ors.

Court: Patna

R.A. Sharma, J.1. Md. Murad Ali (hereinafter called as plaintiff] filed Partition Suit No. 35/74 in the Court of 1st Addl. Sub-Judge, Hazaribagh, seeking a decree for partition of his 1/4th share in the property of Hazi Munshi Naziruddin described in Schedule 'A' at the foot of the plaint and for carving out a separate Takhata of his 1/4th share. The suit was decreed on 29.7.1977 by the trail Court and the preliminary decree was accordingly prepared. Being aggrieved thereby, the defendant, Abdul Manan (hereinafter called as defendant-appellant) filed a First Appeal No. 223/77R before this Court. During the pendency of the said appeal, final decree was also prepared against which another First Appeal No. 35/87R was filed by the defendant-appellant. Vide judgment dated 22.5.1989, the learned Single Judge dismissed the F.A. No. 223/1977 filed against the preliminary decree. However, F.A. No. 35/87 (R) filed against the final decree was allowed and the trial Court was directed to prepare ...

Mahabir Prasad Bagrodia and Naresh Chandra Prasad Sinha Alias S.P. Sin ...

Court: Patna

Narayan Roy, J. 1. Both these applications arise out of a common complaint and that is why, both the applications have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. By these applications, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the entire criminal prosecution including the order dated September 8, 1992, taking cognizance of the offence under Sections 120B, 406, 420, 467 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code, read with Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (in short, 'the Act'), in Complaint Case No. 643 of 1992. 3. It appears that the petitioner, Naresh Chandra Prasad Sinha, the General Manager of Rameshwar Jute Mill, issued a cheque for Rs. 2,50,000 on March 31, 1992, in favour of the complainant--market secretary towards market fee payable by the mill aforesaid. On April 4, 1992, the general manager wrote a letter to the bank concerned for stopping the payment having come to know the fact that the agricultural produce in question has been delete...

Nutan Jha Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.

Court: Patna

R.A. Sharma, J.1. The appellant filed C.W.J.C. No. 3011 of 1996 (R) seeking writ of mandamus directing the respondents to appoint her on the post of matric trained teacher in any primary school in the district of Dhanbad and not to disqualify her on the ground of her residence being outside the district of Dhanbad, This writ petition has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge on 7.10.1996 following the earlier decision of this Court dated 30.9.1996 passed in the case of Dinesh Prasad v. The State of Bihar and Ors. C.W.J.C. No. 1086/96 (R). Being aggrieved thereby she filed this appeal under Clauses 10 of the Letters Patent.2. In the State of Bihar district-wise panels were prepared for appointment of Assistant Teachers in the primary schools on the basis of the residence of the candidates in the particular district. A candidate, who did not belong to the district for which the panel was prepared, was excluded from consideration. A Division Bench of this Court in Anil Kumar v. Sta...

Indian Union Muslim League and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Patna

B.M. Lal, C.J. 1. In the shape of public interest litigation, this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is filed by a political wing of the Indian Union Muslim League through its Bihar State, President, Md. Kamran and its other four members, against the Union of India, State of Bihar, State of West Bengal and others, also arraying His Exeellency (H.E.) the Governor of Bihar as respondents Nos. 9 and 10 by names, Seeking quashing of the Presidential notification of transfer and appointment' of the Governor of Bihar H.E. Dr. A. R. Kidwai to the State of West Bengal and appointment of H.R., Sri Sunder Singh Bhandari as Governor of Bihar in place of H.E., Dr. A. R. Kidwai, contending that both the notifications are unconstitutional. 2. Before discussing the point in issue involved in this petition, we feel it necessary to mention that neither it was expedient nor legally permissible in view of the immunity clause under Article 361 of the Constitution to implcad H.E. the Gover...