Patna Court April 1999 Judgments

Ram Bali Rai Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.

Court: Patna

N.N. Singh, J.1. This criminal revision application is directed against the order, dated 10th May, 1985 passed by Shri S.K. Bhartiya, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Arrah, in Case No. 1129 (C)/83, by which the complaint petition filed by the petitioner against the opposite parties, second parties was dismissed.2. The brief history of the case giving rise to this criminal revision application is that the petitioner as a complainant filed a complaint petition on 29.11.83, in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Arrah, against opposite parties--second parties alleging that in the night of 28.11.83, the petitioner woke up on the sound of breaking of door and in the flash of the torch light he identified the members of the opposite parties-second parties, who entered into his house and committed dacoity and that when on alarm raised by the petitioner and members of his family, the villagers assembled there whereupon the dacoits started fleeing away with looted articles and one of t...

Kamal Oil and Dal Mills Vs. Managing Director, Bihar State Marketing B ...

Court: Patna

Reported in: AIR1999Pat142

1. Heard Mr. A.K. Jain, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, and Mr. S.K. Saraf, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents.2. By this writ application the petitioner has prayed for quashing order dated 25-1-1995 passed by respondent No. 4, the Sub-divisional Officer, Nawadah, whereby and whereunder he has made the assessment for levy of market fee by virtue of the Notification issued under Sub-section (5) of Section 9 of Bihar Agricultural Produce Market Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that respondent No. 4 was notified to act as Special Officer by Notification dated 3-5-1995 and even if he was notified under Sub-section (5) of Section 9 of the Act he was not competent to do so with retrospective effect and, therefore, the order of assessment made by respondent No. 4 is wholly without jurisdiction.4. Counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents wherein these fac...

Raj Nath Rai and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar

Court: Patna

N.N. Singh, J.1. All these three appeals, arising out of judgment of conviction and order of sentence by 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Arrah on 30th April, 1986, in Seasons Trial No. 116 of 1984, are being disposed of together by this judgment. Appellant Raj Nath Rai of Criminal Appeal No. 262 of 1986 and appellants Kamla Rai and Ram Bali Rai of Criminal Appeal No. 265 of 1986 and appellants Ram Ashan Rai and Chandrika Rai of Criminal Appeal No. 276 of 1986 were convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and appellant Hira Lal Rai of Criminal Appeal No. 276 of 1986 was convicted under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and each of them were sentenced to undergo life imprisonment. All six appellants were further convicted under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code and were convicted to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years each and appellant Hira Lal was further convicted under Section 27 of the Arms Act and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for thr...

Mukesh Kumar Singh and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.

Court: Patna

A.K. Prasad, J.1. In view of the facts and circumstances of this case and with consent of the parties, this appeal is being disposed of at the admission stage itself.2. This L.P.A. by the writ-petitioners arises out of an order dated 13-3-1997 in C.W.J.C. No. 2380 of 1995(R) passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition.3. The essential facts giving rise to this appeal are these:The appellants pursuant to the notification issued by the State Govt. applied for their admission in Industrial Training Institute (General), Ranchi (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Institute' for short) for the trades of their choice for the Sessions 1992-93 and 1992-94. It is also the case of the appellants that for the purpose of admission in the Institute no written examination is held and the merit is adjudged on the basis of the marks obtained in the matriculation examination. This fact has been admitted in the counter-affidavit in the instant appeal filed on behalf of respondent...

Samir Kumar Mukherjee and ors. Vs. State of Bihar

Court: Patna

Ravi Nandan Sahay, J.1. This is an appeal against decree dated 3.1.1984 of the 3rd Additional District Judge, Saharsa in Title Appeal No. 5/82 reversing the decree of the Munsif, Supaul in Title Suit No. 131 of 1965, who had decreed the suit which was instituted by Dr. Sudhir Kumar Mukherjee, father of appellant Nos. 1 to 3 and husband of appellant No. 4 for a declaration that the land described in Schedule I of the plaint was not a public land and/or part and parcel of the land which had been transferred by registered deed dated 29.8.1878 by the erstwhile proprietors of Baruari Estate in the district of Saharsa to the Government for construction of Court of S.D.O., Supaul.2. The suit was instituted because the Sub-Divisional officer, Supaul had declared the suit land as public land in a land encroachment proceeding. The plaintiff was served with notice by the Deputy Collector Land Reforms to vacate the land.3. There is no dispute that the plaintiffs were in possession of the suit lan...

Gautam Sil Vs. Smt. Mita Sil

Court: Patna

Reported in: 1999(3)BLJR1841

1. The petitioner has field this civil revision under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984, challenging the order dated 23-12-98 passed under-section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) directing payment of alimony pendente lite. As Section 19 does not provide for any revision against the order impugned in this case, this Court, directed the Registry to submit a report regarding the maintainability of the revision. The Registry has submitted the report stating therein that the revision will be maintainable under Section 19 of the Act as amended by the Family Courts (Amendment) Act, 1991 (hereinafter referred to as the Amendment Act).2. We have perused Section 19 as amended by the Amendment Act and we find that it does not contain any provision providing for filing of revision against an order like the one impugned in this writ petition. By the said Amendment Act, Sub-sections (4) and (5) of Section 19 have been re.-numbered as Sub-sections (5) and ...

Ram Kishun Sao Vs. State of Bihar and ors.

Court: Patna

P.K. Deb, J.1. In the present writ application, the petitioner prays for the issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing the order contained in Resolution dated 21.4.1993 passed by Respondent No. 3 in Case No. 378 of 1990 (Annexure-6), whereby the respondent No. 2 has allowed the revision after setting aside the order dated 2.4.1990 passed by the respondent No. 3 in Land Ceiling Appeal No. XV/8/89-90.2. The admitted position remains that the petitioner purchased the land in question out of khata No. 8 of village Matpuri, P.O. Tarhasi, P.S. Manatu, District-Palamau by virtue of a registered deed of sale No. 1883 dated 15.2.1988 for a consideration from respondent No 8 who acquired the said land in an amicable family partition. According to the petitioner, he had purchased the aforesaid land for construction of his dwelling house and he took over the possession of land immediately after the execution of the sale-deed and started construction and collected materials for the said purpos...

Ferro Alloys Corporation Ltd. Vs. Rajhans Steel Ltd.

Court: Patna

G.S. Chaube, J. 1. This company-petition under Sections 433(e), 434(1)(a) and 439(1)(b) of the Companies Act, 1956 ('the Act') has been presentedfor winding up of Rajhans Steel Ltd., a public limited company incorporated under the Act, having its registered office at Joraphatak Road in the district and town of Dhanbad and factory or worksite at Mihijam in the district of Santhal Parganas of this State, which has been arrayed in this petition as opposite party No. 1 and shall hereinafter be referred to as such. The petitioner is Ferro Alloys Corporation Ltd. a company incorporated under the said Act having its registered office at Sriram Bhawan Tumsar in Maharashtra and regional office at Everest House, Jawaharlal Nehru Road in Calcutta, and shall be referred to hereinafter as the petitioner-company. 2. The case of the petitioner-company is that pursuant to two separate orders, one dated March 22, 1984, and another dated April 6, 1984, placed with it by opposite party No. 1 for supplyi...