Patna Court July 1999 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.
Sahdeo Prasad Sao and ors. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-21-1999
M.L. Visa, J. 1. This appeal by the two appellants is preferred against the judgment and order dated 15-1-1987 passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge, VI, Munger convicting and sentencing the appellants to undergo imprisonment for life under Sections 304 of the Indian Penal Code.2. The prosecution case in short is that on 4-10-81 at 9 p.m. Madan Prasad, who was also one of the accused persons and faced trial along with appellants but has been acquitted, came to the house of informant Shiv Shankar Prasad (P.W. 5), situate at Mohalla Dalmati Naya Bazar, Lakhisarai, P. S. Lakhisarai, District Munger, caught hold of the collar of the shirt of the informant and started dragging him out of his house. When the informant inquired from Madan Prasad the reason of his dragging Madan Prasad told him that he would tell it outside the house. The informant was brought by dragging to the 'darwaja' of his house where his father was sitting and in the meantime, the two appellants also came ther...
Rajan Rai Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-21-1999
R.N. Prasad, J.1. The trial of the appellant was split up from the other accused-persons as he was absconding. The appellant has been convicted for the offence under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. He has further been convicted for the offence under Sections 3 8s 5 of Explosive Substances Act and has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for 10 years under each count. The sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.2. The prosecution case, as has been mentioned in the fardbeyan, is that one Jogendra Singh gave his fardbeyan before the Sub-Inspector of Police of Parsa Police Station on 10-6-1983 at about 8.25 p.m. that at about 7.45 p.m. he came from Bheldi at Parsa Bazar Chowk. His elder brother namely Bhola Singh was sitting in front of sahan of his Baithka facing west on chauki and was talking with one Shobha Rai. He reached at his Baithka to take his motor cycle to go to his house but there was some mechanical defect i...
Kishore Kumar and ors. Vs. Ritu Kumari
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-21-1999
S.K. Katriar, J.1. This is an application for and on behalf of the petitioners under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to quash the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 136 of 1991, wherein cognizance has been taken against the seven accused-petitioners .above-named under Sections 498A and 323, I.P.C., by order dated 5-10-93, passed by Mr. Y. J. Mallick, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Nawadah, in Complaint Case No. 136 of 1991/1356 of 1993, Ritu Kumari v. Ashok Kumar.2. According to the complaint petition (Annexure 1), filed in the Court of learned CJM, Nawadah, on 8-4-91, the opposite party was married to Kishore Kumar (Petitioner No. 1), according to Hindu rites on 12-12-1988. According to the allegations, the opposite party went to sasural after her marriage. It had become regular feature with her sasural people to demand dowry of about 1 lac. In course of time, it assumed serious proportions, and she was subjected to cruelty at the hands of different sasura...
Aman Finance Corporation Vs. Nitesh Kumar Sinha and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-20-1999
Sudhir Kumar Katriar, J.1. The petitioner is defendant in the suit. This civil revision application is directed against the order dated 19-12-97, passed by Shri Ram Vyas Rani, 2nd Additional District Judge, Rohtas, at Sasaram, in Misc. Appeal No. 4 of 1995 (Aman Finance Corporation v. Nitesh Kumar Sinha), confirming the order dated 12-12-94, passed by Munsif 1st, Sasaram, in Title Suit No. 132 of 1993. Both the Courts below have rejected the application of the defendant (the petitioner herein), under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), and have refused to stay the proceeding of the title suit.2. Opposite patty No. 1 herein (the plaintiff), instituted T. S. No. 132 of 1993, in the Court of Munsif 1 st, Sasaram, stating that the defendant is a registered finance company and is selling heavy motor vehicles under hire purchase in the District of Rohtas (Bihar), and other places. The plaintiff intended to have a truck on hire purchase from the de...
Chhabila Choudhary and ors. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-20-1999
M.L. Visa, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment arid order dated 15-12-1986 passed by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Siwan in Sessions Trial No. 52 of 1986 convicting and sentencing all the appellants to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence under Sections 302/34, I.P.C. and R.I. for 7 years each for the offence under Section 307, I.P.C. Appellants Chhabila Choudhary and Jawahar Choudhary have been further convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I. for one month each under Section 323, I.P.C. All the sentences have, however, been ordered to run concurrently.2. The facts of the case, in short, are that Subedar Choudhary (P.W. 1), the informant, got his fardbeyan recorded by S.I. Sachchidanand Bajpayee (P.W. 4) on 31-5-85 at Sadar Hospital Siwan stating therein that on the same day i.e. on 31-5-85 in the morning he had gone to see bullock in village market along with his 'Samdhi' Mahabir Choudhary who had come to him for purchasing bullock and they both at 11.30 a...
Damodar Prasad Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-20-1999
M.Y. Eqbal, J.1. In this writ application, the petitioner prays for issuance of an appropriate writ commanding upon the respondents to restore the promotion order and to pay back the difference of amount of enhanced pay due to the promotion for the period with effect from 31-10-1988 to 12-8-1996.2. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass: The petitioner was appointed as Lower Division Clerk (shortly LDC) on 1-7-1960 and was working as such in the lower Court, Gumla since then. The petitioner was promoted with effect from 31-10-1988 as Upper Division Clerk (shortly UDC) on completion of 50 years of age as per order dated 8-3-1989 by the District Establishment Deputy Collector, Gumla. When the petitioner was to retire with effect from 31-10-1996, the respondent No. 2, the Deputy Commissioner, Gumla referred the case of the petitioner to the Commissioner, South Chotanagpur Circle, Ranchi vide letter dated 18-10-1996 for exemption from passing first paper as the petitioner could no...
Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Sanicharwa Lakra and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-19-1999
R.A. Sharma, J.1. Whether appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent, from the decision of the learned Single Judge rendered in an appeal filed under Section 11 of the Requisitioning & Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952, (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against an award of an arbitrator is maintainable, is the question which is required to be decided at the threshold in these appeals2. In L.P.A. Nos. 330 & 331 of 1998 (R), which have been filed against the decision of the learned Single Judge in appeals filed under Section 11 of the Act against the award, the Registry has raised the preliminary objection about their maintainability under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent. We, therefore, heard the learned Counsel for the parties on the preliminary objection, and reserved the judgment.3. During the course of argument on the preliminary question, the learned Counsel for the appellants have stated that there are two other L.P.A. Nos. 157/98 (R) and 311/98 (R) which have also...
Larsen and Toubro Ltd. and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-19-1999
Sachchida Nand Jha, J. 1. The vires of Section 25-A of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 and the related rules and notification regarding deduction of sales tax at source from the contractors' bills has again been called in question in these writ petitions.2. Entry 54 of the State List of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution of India authorizes the State Legislatures to make law with respect to imposition of taxes on the sale and purchase of goods other than newspapers, subject to the provisions of entry 92 A of the Union List. In State of Madras v. Gannon Dunkerley & Co. (Madras) Ltd. [1958] 9 STC 353, the Supreme Court held that the expression 'sale of goods' in entry 54 has the same meaning as in the Sale of Goods Act, 1930. The essential ingredients of sale being an agreement to sell movables for a price and transfer of property pursuant thereto, in works contract there is no sale of goods because such a contract is indivisible in which there is neither agreement to sell the materi...
Union of India (Uoi), Through General Manager, N.F. Railway Vs. Ruby I ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-16-1999
Gurusharan Sharma, J.1. M/s. Rubi International, Birat Nagar (Nepal) claiming to be owner of the goods filed Application Nos. OR 9800001 to OR 9800006 and OR 9800008 to. OR 9800014 before Railway Claims Tribunal, Patna Bench under Section 106 of the Railways Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for refund of freight over-charged.2. The Associated Cement Companies Ltd. booked cement consignment from Jhinkpani Railway Station to Katihar Railway Station on 4/5-8-1996, vide RR Nos. n899999997681 to 897687 and on 15/16-8-1996 from Katihar to Jogbani, vide RR Nos. 843540 to 843547. Booking station was broad-gauge station, whereas destination was metre gauge station and as such movement of goods were subjected to transhipment at Katihar Railway Station. The Railway charged separately for broad-gauge and metre gauge movement on normal rate of freight, which was available at that time fixed by the Railway administration for booking of consignment of cement.3. According to the clai...
Bhola Sah and ors. Etc. Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-16-1999
Aftab Alam, J. 1.The petitioners in each of these three cases have come to this Court making the grievance that the revenue and/or the administrative authorities forcibly demolished their house, either completely or partially, on the alleged grounds that the petitioners' buildings/structures encroached upon some public land. It is averred by the petitioners in all the three cases that demolitions were forcibly carried out without giving any notice or prior information, without holding any proceeding under any law and even without taking any measurements in presence of the petitioners to show any encroachment over any public land.2. It may be noted here that these three cases are not in isolation but of late similar cases are coming to this Court in a constant stream. A large number of cases are filed under the heading 'demolition' or 'removal of encroachment' making similar grievances that the houses, buildings, structures or shops constructed by and belonging to the respective petit...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »