Patna Court September 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.
Rajeev Ranjan Verma Vs. Smt. Manju Srivastava and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-16-1999
P.K. Deb, J.1. This revision petition has been preferred against the order dated 21-3-1998 passed by the learned Munsif, Bettiah, in Title Suit No. 131 of 1992 by which the prayer made from the side of the plaintiff-petitioner under Order VI, Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure for amendment of the plaint has been rejected.2. The plaintiff-petitioner filed the above-mentioned suit against the opposite parties for declaration that the sale-deed dated 25-6-1991 executed by Phulbati Kuer in favour of Manju Srivastava defendant No. 1 in respect of 8 khatas land as detailed in Schedule-II of the plaint is illegal, impropriety and not binding on the petitioner and that the defendants have no right to interfere with the possession of the land. Further prayer was made for issuance of permanent injunction against the defendants regarding restraint for not interfering with the possession of the plaintiff. The fact of the case was that one Dukhi Prasad had three sons, namely, Ganesh Prasad, ...
General Manager, North Eastern Railway and Others Vs. Bajranglal Jhunj ...
Court: Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Patna
Decided on: Sep-16-1999
A.N. Chaturvedi, President: 1. This appeal is directed against an order dated 15.11.1994 passed by District Forum, Samastipur in Complaint Case No. 8/92. By the impugned order the District Forum held that the complainant was entitled to get Rs. 1,313/- by way of refund of the railway fare. 2. One Bajranglal Jhunjhunwala in the capacity of the District Secretary of Akhil Bhartiya Grahak Panchayat filed a complaint before the District Forum; Samastipur on behalf of Sri P.K. Modi and 12 others against the officers of North Eastern Railway, Gorakhpur. The case of the complainant (respondent in this appeal) was that Sri P.K. Modi and 12 others had got reservation in 2548 DN train for going to Hawarah from Samastipur in connection with their business. They boarded the said train on 7.10.1990 at Samastipur at 4.30 p.m. The train reached Barauni Junction Railway Station at about 7 p.m. and remained detained there. At Barauni it was announced by the Railway Authorities that the said train may d...
Bihar State Housing Board Vs. Ranjit Lal Bhagat
Court: Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Patna
Decided on: Sep-16-1999
Aditya Narayan Chaturvedi, President: 1. This appeal by Bihar State Housing Board is directed an order dated 28.10.1994 passed by the District Forum, Ranchi in Complaint Case No. 44 of 1994. By the impugned order, the District Forum directed the appellant Housing Board to refund the earnest money amounting to Rs. 15,000/- to the complainant (respondent in this appeal) with simple interest @ 10% per annum from date of deposit of the earnest money with the Housing Board till payment. The District Forum further directed the appellant Housing Board to pay Rs. 5,000/- as compensation to the complainant for the harassment and suffering caused to him due to deficiency in service on the part of Housing Board in the matter of allotment of house to the complainant. 2. The case of the complainant (respondent in this appeal) was that on or about 15th February, 1985 Bihar State Housing Board (opposite party - appellant) published an advertisement in the local newspapers inviting applications for al...
Shanker Saran Prasad and anr. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-15-1999
Aftab Alam, J.1. In this case, the boundary wall and portions of the residential house of the petitioner were forcibly demolished by the respondent-authorities. According to the State Counsel, the respondents were acting in compliance with the directions given by this Court in order passed from time to time in C.W.J.C. No. 2290/ 1990 : Arun Kumar Mukherjee v. State of Bihar.2. In a recent decision in Bhola Sah and Ors. v. State of Bihar 1999 (2) PLJR 851, the orders passed in the case of Arun Kumar Mukherjee were examined in detail and this Court came to find and hold that even while acting in compliance of the directions given in that case, it was imperative that certain steps were taken before the executive authorities could forcibly demolish the structure(s) on the grounds that it encroached upon road, road flanks and was causing obstruction in free flow of traffic. See para 51 of the decision in the case of Bhola Sah (supra).3. From the records of this case, it is manifest that t...
Patna Guinea House and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-15-1999
Sudihr Kumar Katriar, J. 1. This is an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for and on behalf of the four partners of a partnership business known as Patna Guinea House, challenging the order dated January 4, 1991, passed by Shri S.R. Hussain, Presiding Officer, Special Court, Economic Offences, Muzaffarpur, in Complaint Case No. 3 of 1991 (TR No. 2188 of 1991), whereby cognizance was taken of the alleged offences under Section 276C of the Income-tax Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act.'), and the petitioners were summoned to stand their trial. 2. According to the petition of complaint lodged by one Lekha Shrivastava, Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Patna, the petitioners herein had, inter alia, disclosed a sum of Rs. 52,000 in their returns, but had refused to disclose the source of income. Therefore, penalty proceedings were initiated against them under Section 271(1)(c) of the Act and a penalty of Rs. 14,367 was imposed on them. The sa...
Most. Tilya Devi and ors. Vs. Chandrama Singh and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-15-1999
P.K. Deb, J.1. This revision petition has been preferred against the order dated 21-6-96 passed by the Sub-Judge-I, Siwan, in Misc. Case No. 16/92 by which the Court below has corrected the decree passed earlier on compromise between the parties.2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:Opposite Party No. 6, Bashist Singh, as plaintiff filed partition suit No. 1 of 1989 in the Court of Sub-Judge, Siwan, claiming 1/3 share in the suit property and it was also averred that other 1/3 belongs to defendant Nos. 1 to 6 who were opposite party Nos. 1 to 5 in this revision petition and the balance of 1/3 to defendant Nos. 7 to 11 who were petitioners in this revision petition. While the suit was pending then at the instance of village elderly persons as Panchas a compromise was arrived at between the parties and a joint compromise petition was filed on 2-1-1990. In the compromise petition, three schedules of properties were annexed. Schedule-I was allotted to opposite parry No. 6 i.e. pl...
Birendra Mishra Vs. Manoj Kumar Singh and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-15-1999
S.K. Katriar, J.1. This is an application under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code'), at the instance of the informant, for setting aside the order dated 12-1-94, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Samastipur, in Sarairanjan P.S. Case No. 102/93 (GR No. 1384 of 1993) State v. Manoj Kumar Singh, whereby bail was granted to Opposite Party Nos. 1 to 3 herein. In other words, it is a case for cancellation of bail granted to opposite party Nos. 1 to 3, who are accused-persons in the aforesaid police case, wherein allegations have been levelled against them along with others under Sections 498A, 304B and 201/34, I.P.C.2. According to the allegations in the FIR lodged by the petitioner herein, who is uncle of the deceased girl, the latter was married to opposite party No. 1 herein (Manoj Kumar Singh) about eight years ago. She was not allowed peace in her 'sasural', and there was persistent demand for dowry. This result...
Abhai Mahton and ors. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-14-1999
R.N. Sahay, J.1. There are four appellants, who have been convicted under Section 323, I.P.C. and sentenced to imprisonment for one year. Appellant No. 1 Abhai Mahto was also charged under Section 307, I.P.C. and 324, I.P.C. has been acquitted.2. The case of the prosecution is that Ramraj Mahton (P.W. 6) gave his statement to Shri R.P. Singh, Officer-in-charge on Nawadah police station on 9-10-1984 at 9.45 p.m. in the night at Sadar Hospital, Arrah indicating therein that on 9-10-1984 at about 6 p.m., he along with his cousin Makshudan Mahto was irrigating his field. It was further alleged that boring of Sudama Mahto was adjacent to his boring and the channel of water of both the boring is common. It has further been alleged that informant (P.W. 6), on the relevant date was using the same Channel for irrigation the land and it was then all on a sudden Sudama Mahto, Bikram Mahton, Lakhi Chand Mahton, Abhai Mahto, Acchi Choudhary and Bhanu Mahto all came variously armed with lathi, bha...
Sachchidanand Singh Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-14-1999
Radha Mohan Prasad, J.1. The petitioner in this writ petition is aggrieved by the order, contained in Memo No. 3426 dated 20th December, 1997 (Annexure-7) issued by the Under-Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar (respondent No. 5) and the order contained in letter No. 1226 dated 16th May, 1998 (Annexure-8) issued by the Joint Secretary, Water Resources Department, Government of Bihar (respondent No. 4). The order dated 20th December, 1997 (Annexure-7) has been issued in the purported exercise of the power under Rule 43 (b) of the Bihar Pension Rules, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules') imposing punishment for recovery of Rs. 2.55 lakh in one time from the dues and pensionary benefits payable to the petitioner and, further, withholding 25% of his pension for all times. By the order, contained in Annexure-8, the petitioner has been given notice purporting to be under Rule 139(a) and (b) of the Rules asking him to file his show cause within a fortnight as...
Kali Charan Rai and ors. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-14-1999
1. The record of this case has been placed before us for passing final judgment after the decision of the learned Single Judge to whom the case was referred on difference of opinion between us.2. On earlier occasion, we had taken the view that the learned Single Judge to whom case was referred has to deliver final opinion and the matter need not be placed before the Division Bench which heard the matter earlier. This view of ours was supported by the decision of the Calcutta High Court in Jugal Kishore v. C.P. Magistrate, Calcutta : AIR1968Cal220 , in which B. Mukherjee, J. interpreting Section 429, Cr. P.C. 1898 held that the third Judge where the matter is referred is competent to deliver final judgment. Justice Mukherjee held as follows:A. The plain language of the enactment says with the case being laid before a third Judge with the divided opinion of two of his colleagues, he shall deliver an opinion of his own. More, the judgment shall follow such opinion.B. What, therefore, ser...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »