Patna Court July 2000 Judgments
Jireshwar Mahto and anr. Vs. Mathura Singh and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-20-2000
Deoki Nandan Prasad, J.1. This Criminal Revision has been filed under Section 397 and 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code against the order dated 27.7.1998 passed by the 6th Additional District and Sessions Judge, Palamau at Daltonganj in Criminal Revision No. 42 of 1991 whereby and where under the learned Judge set aside the order for issuance of notice/show cause.2. Short facts as alleged that the lands appertaining to plot No. 366 of Khata No. 110, area 19 decimals and plot No. 370, Khata No. 110 area 5 decimals of village Karar belonged to the recorded tenant of Hardutt Pathak and Ramdutt Pathak. The predecessors in interest of the petitioners purchased the said land by registered deed of sale dated 29.9.1931 from the successor of interest of Hardutt Pathak. This dispute also arose between Chandu Mahto and members of the opposite parties on the question of possession of the said land whereupon a proceeding under Section 145, Cr.P.C. was initiated and possession in favour of Chandu ...
Tag this Judgment!Murali Mahto Vs. Premia Devi @ Premia Mehtaine
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-19-2000
Deokinandan Prasad, J.1. This Criminal Revision has been filed under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act against the order dated 27.9.1997 passed by Principal Judge, Dhanbad in Cr. Misc. No. 2/95 whereby and whereunder the learned Principal Judge had enhanced the maintenance payable to the opposite party from Rs. 200/- to Rs. 500/- per month under Section 127 of the Cr.P.C.2. The opposite party, namely, Pramila Devi filed an application under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. for maintenance from the petitioner/husband at the rate of Rs. 500/- per month. The petitioner also appeared in the said case and after hearing both the parties, the Court below granted maintenance of Rs. 200/- per month in favour of the opposite parry by an order dated 17.3.1994.3. The opposite party again filed a petition under Section 127, Cr.P.C. on 29.8.1995 for enhancement of the maintenance amount from Rs. 200/- to Rs. 500/- per month. It was stated that the petitioner has married second time with Niriya Devi,...
Tag this Judgment!Tarini Sen Das and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-19-2000
Deoki Nandan Prasad, J.1. This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the petitioners/accused-persons for quashing of the Order dated 9.11.1998, whereby and whereunder the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate took cognizance for the offence under Sections 302/34 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code in connection with G.R. Case No. 1523 of 1997 corresponding to Potka PS Case No. 56 of 1997.2. The prosecution case in brief as alleged that one Ratanlal Das lodged an F.I.R. alleging therein that one Susan Kewat informed him that his brother Gangadhar Das died in the night due to fall of the wall and his dead body is lying at Jadogoda hospital. On this information, he went to Jamshedpur and after postmortem, he came back to the village. Thereafter, the dead body was cremated. It is further alleged that after completion of funeral ceremony, one Dhan Singh Dutta disclosed that his brother actually was killed by the petitioners and his death did not occur d...
Tag this Judgment!Anant Pandey Vs. Bihar State Electricity Board and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-19-2000
A.K. Ganguly, J.1. While the petitioner was working as Junior Electrical Engineer, Electric Supply Section, Triveniganj District Supaul under Koshi Area Electricity Board, Saharsa, in contemplation of a disciplinary proceeding, he was put under suspension on 8.6.1998 by an order of the same date and thereafter, the petitioner was served with a charge memo vide memo No. 284 dated 24.3.1999. The petitioner challenged the said suspension order by filing a writ petition being C.W.J.C. No. 2443 of 1999. The said writ petition was disposed of by an order dated 26.3.1999 by a learned Judge of this Court with a direction upon the respondents to complete the departmental inquiry within a particular time. Thereafter, the suspension order issued against the petitioner was revoked by an order dated 22.7.1999 and was made effective from 21.7.1999 instead of 22.7.1999. In the said enquiry, the Inquiry Officer submitted his report dated 5.7.1999. In the said report the Inquiry Officer after going th...
Tag this Judgment!Gopal Sah Vs. CaptaIn Braj Kishore Chaudhary and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-19-2000
P.K. Deb, J.1. All these four appeals have arisen out of the common judgment passed by both the Courts below. The appellate Court has reversed the dismissal of the suits as recorded by the Munsif, Motihari and decree has been granted in favour of the plaintiff-respondent.2. The facts in all the four appeals are similar in nature which can be briefly stated as follows. The plaintiff in all the suits is the same. Only the defendants were separate individuals. According to the plaintiff, the suit property was owned by his grand-father Lalita Prasad Choudhary who had three sons, namely, Satya Prasad Choudhary-defendant No. 3, Ganga Prasad Choudhary-defendant No. 2 from one wife while Rajendra Prasad Choudhary from another wife. Defendant No. 2 Ganga Prasad Choudhary has three sons, namely, Birendra Prasad Choudhary, Surendra Prasad Choudhary and Braj Kishore Prasad Choudhary-plaintiff. The holding in dispute, the description of which has been given in the schedules of the plaint, was said...
Tag this Judgment!Most. Rukmini Devi and ors. Vs. Ashok Kumar Keshari and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-19-2000
Gurusharan Sharma, J.1. Defendants are appellants. Title (Eviction) Suit No. 106 of 1983 was filed by plaintiffs for eviction of defendants from the suit shop, detailed in Schedule to the plaint, both on the grounds of personal necessity and default in payment of rent. Further relief for recovery of arrears of rent was also sought.2. According to plaintiffs, plaintiff No. 2 was working as private servant, plaintiffs 3 and 5 were selling betal in rented wooden gumti, and plaintiff No. 4 was doing small contract works. The suit shop was situated in market and was most suitable place for doing business of grocery and other articles. Plaintiffs' residential house was also too small to accommodate the growing number of family members, so the suit shop was required by plaintiffs for their personal use and occupation.3. Plaintiffs' further case was that defendants defaulted in payment of rent@ Rs. 14/- per month from October 1978 onward and thereby were also liable to be evicted from the sui...
Tag this Judgment!Abdul Mazid and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-19-2000
Deoki Nandan Prasad, J.1. This application under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for quashing the order dated 9.9.1997 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Ramgarh in Misc. Case No. 4 of 1997 whereby and whereunder the proceeding initiated under Section 145, Cr.P.C. has been dropped. It is stated that the impugned order is vitiated in law, inasmuch as the land in question is wholly different as in the suit the plot No. 217 under Khata No. 47 whereas in the present proceeding, plot No. 216 under Khata No. 2 is involved and as such the judgment and decree passed in Title Suit No. 61 of 1986 are not applicable in the instant proceeding. It is also stated that there still exists apprehension of breach of peace between the parties with regard to the possession over the land in question and the proceeding should have been continued.2. On the other hand, the show cause reply on behalf of the opposite parties filed in which it has been stated ...
Tag this Judgment!Krishna Prasad Vs. Gopal Prasad and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-19-2000
Sudhir Kumar Katriar, J. 1. This Second Appeal arises out of judgment dated 21-8-93, and the consequent decree, passed by Smt. Vidyut Prabha Singh, 5th Addl. Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi, in Title Appeal No. 89 of 1990 (Smt. Lalin Devi and Anr. v. Krishna Prasad), whereby she has set aside the judgment dated 10-8-90, passed by Sri Kiran Shankar, Munsif, Ranchi, in T.S. No. 47 of 1989 (Smt. Lalin and Ors. v. Krishna Prasad). The defendant is the appellant against a judgment of reversal. The suit had been dismissed by the trial Court, and the plaintiffs appeal was allowed. For the purpose of disposal of the present appeal we shall go by the description of the parties in the suit. 2. This is an unfortunate litigation amongst first decree relations. Plaintiff No. 1 is the mother, plaintiff No. 2 is her son, the sole defendant is the grand-son of plaintiff No. 1, and the son of plaintiff No. 2 from his first wife. The mother of the defendant (i.e. the first wife of plaintiff No. 2) died w...
Tag this Judgment!Sidheshwar Dubey Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-18-2000
B.N. Singh 'Neelam', J.1. This criminal appeal is so preferred by Sidheshwar Dubey against the Judgment of conviction and sentence so passed by the Special Judge, Vigilance, Patna, in Special Case No. 1/1975/12/1983 dated 17th of June. 1989 by virtue of which the sole accused-appellant stands convicted under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 5(1)(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months on each count. The sentences are directed to run concurrently.2. The prosecution case, in short, is that Barahampur Mela for the year 1972-73 was so settled by the Block Development Officer, Barahampur, for Rs. 10,500/- to one Vishwanath Singh and, in consequence thereof, on 30.3.1972 a sum of Rs. 6,000/- was so deposited by the settlement-holder for which the money receipt was so granted by the present accused-appellant being the Karamchari of that Halka. The second and the last instalment of the balance amount, i.e., Rs...
Tag this Judgment!Mohan Pandey Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-18-2000
B.N. Singh 'Neelam', J.1. This criminal appeal is so preferred under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the sole accused-appellant, namely, Mohan Pandey, against the judgment of conviction and sentence so passed by the 7th Addl. Sessions Judge, Arrah, dated 19th of July, 1989 in Section Tr. No. 377 of 1988 by virtue of which the sole accused-appellant is convicted under Sections 307 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years under Section 355 of the I.P.C and R.I. for seven years under Section 307, I.P.C. The sentences so imposed are directed to run concurrently.2. The prosecution case, in short, is that on 1.5.1988 when the first informant, namely, Smt. Anita Kumari was sleeping in her parent's house at about 4 a.m. in the morning her mother had left the house for performing Puja at Brahmpur and had locked the house from outside throwing the key on the roof of the house. When on the first floor, as per the prosecution story...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »