Patna Court July 2003 Judgments
The Bihar State Housing Board and anr. Vs. Bhoodev Ojha
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-04-2003
Ravi S. Dhayan C.J. and R.N. Prasad, J. 1. The Bihar State of Housing Board (in short, the Board) appears to be arguing the case against its own interest. This appeal virtually is against the State of Bihar. No part of the situation is of making of the respondent No. 1 who applied for an allotment and could not receive a plot for public housing. The plan was, made more than 30 years ago.2. The fact is that land is not available for allotment and it is being explained that it may have been occupied illegally in the face of the Board and the State of Bihar. Watching the situation is a situation which is involuntary to the contesting respondent. 3. In the circumstances, this Court upon having heard learned Counsel for the Board as also the contesting respondent does not find any error in the order of the learned Judge passed on the writ petition permitting refund and deposit along with the interest stipulated in the order itself. 4. Dismissed....
Tag this Judgment!Md. Mustaque Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-04-2003
Ravi S. Dhavan, C.J. and R.N. Prasad, J. 1. This matter was to be listed upon orders of 29-4-2003. The respondents so arrayed were put under notice by giving them time to file a return or reply before 23rd May, 2003. As of today the formalities have not been completed. Whereas respondent No. 4 filed a reply on record on 23rd May, 2003, a copy of the reply was not served on counsel for the petitioner until today in Court. This proceeding now gets delayed. This respondent, thus, shall pay a cost of Rs. 500/- to be deposited with the Registrar General in the account of Bihar State Legal Services Authority. Only on depositing of the cost the reply filed on behalf of this respondent will be considered.2. Respondent No. 3 filed a reply on 23rd May, 2003 and served its copy on counsel for the petitioner within time.3. Respondents 1 and 2, in effect State of Bihar, has not filed a counter-affidavit and learned A.A.G. 2 Mr. S.K. Ghose, Senior Counsel) seeks further two week's time to file a c...
Tag this Judgment!Ashok Kumar Sinha and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-04-2003
Ravi S. Dhavan, C.J. 1. At the out set it needs to be recorded that in this case the Court had brought this matter to the notice of the Additional Advocate General, II, Mr. Swaraj Kumar Ghose, Senior Advocate because the circumstances which emerged from this case were necessary that the issue be made aware to the learned AAG II.2. Five writ petitioners namely Messrs Ashok Kumar Sigha, Vinod Kumar, Ajay Shanker Sahay, Bejayendra Prasad Yadav and Dhirendra Kumar Singh filed the present petition with a grievance that having been recruited in 1981, 1982 and 1983 as Junior Engineers though on daily wages, but they were being denied regularisation and consequential officiating promotion on the post of Assistant Engineers and subsequently confirmation on the position of Assistant Engineers.3. There is no issue on record that at the time when the petitioners were recruited and 12 others with them, 19 posts of Junior Engineers were vacant. This is accepted between the petitioners, the Housing...
Tag this Judgment!Om Prakash Singh Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-02-2003
S.N. Jha and A.K. Verma, JJ. 1. This writ petition arises from a proceeding Under the Bihar Privileged Persons Homestead Tenancy Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The petitioner is landlord of the lands in question with respect to which purcha has been granted in favour of respondent No. 3 Indrasan Bhar (in short, the respondent'). The petitioner seeks quashing of the order by which purcha was granted to the respondent.2. The dispute relates to 0.07 Acre out of 5 Katha 19 Dhurs land of Plot No. 200, Khata No. 104 situate a Village Nawada Mathia within Jalalpur PS of Saran district. The case of the petitioner is that the land in question originally belonged to one Guljari Singh and Shiv Shanker Bharti. On 9-4-1971 they sold the land to Manki Devi. The husband of Manki Devi was running wholesale shop business in which respondent No. 3 was an employee. He was permitted to construct a room and live therein. On 27-8-1978 Manki Devi sold the land to Laxmina Devi and her son...
Tag this Judgment!Deep Narayan Gupta Vs. Central Board of Direct Taxes and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-02-2003
1. Both the matters are connected ones and as such they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. By order dated January 30, 2003, the Central Board of Direct Taxes has rejected the prayer of the petitioner for condonation of the delay in filing the application under Section 119(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for refund. 3. The matter relates to the assessment years 1993-94 and 1994-95. Admittedly, the petitioner had not filed the returns within the statutory period and filed the same on October 9, 1998. Under Section 237, read with Section 239(2)(c) of the Act, the period for filing an application for refund is one year from the last day of such assessment year. Admittedly, the application for refund has not been filed within time. Section 119(2)(b) of the Act empowers the Board to extend the period for filing an application for refund in case of genuine hardship. The Board has issued circulars from time to t...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. Uday Shankar Bhagat Vs. Santosh Kumar Sah
Court: Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Patna
Decided on: Jul-02-2003
D.P.S. Choudhary, President: 1. Appellant is O.P. who has preferred this appeal against the order dated 18.12.2002 passed by District Forum, Banka in Complaint Case No. 42/2001 directing the appellant to pay a sum of Rs. 1,16,000/- by way of compensation within two months from the date of order besides the interest @ 12% per annum. 2. The brief fact of the case is that complainant filed the case before the District Forum alleging therein that he had a fracture on the right thigh in the year 1993. He was treated at Bhagalpur by Dr. Pradeep Kumar who fixed plate on his broken thigh. After four months he was in a position to move. He was advised to get the plate removed by an expert doctor. The complainant alongwith his father approached the appellant-O.P. on 7.2.2001. The appellant got his right thigh X-rayed and advised the complainant that his bone have been completely joined and it will be safe to remove the plate and screw from his right thigh. The complainant consented for the same ...
Tag this Judgment!Madani Musafir Khana Welfare Society Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax an ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-01-2003
1. The present application has been filed for quashing the communication dated October 27, 1999 (annexure 7), made to the petitioner by the Commissioner of Income-tax, Patna, that the application filed by the petitioner for renewal of exemption under section 80G of the Income-tax Act, 1961, has been rejected. The reason for passing the aforesaid order was not communicated to the petitioner and, accordingly, we directed counsel for the Income-tax Department to supply the reason for not granting the renewal of approval. The same has been mentioned in paragraph 7 of the counter affidavit, which runs as follows : 'The notes on activities for last three years as submitted by the 'a' trust, clearly suggests that apart from constructing a shopping complex, no charitable activities as mentioned in Clause 4(i) to (ix) of the MOA, has been carried out by the institution. In reply to the show cause dated September 10, 1999, the 'a' trust has submitted that the charitable activity will be taken...
Tag this Judgment!Hira Kumar Verma @ Amrendra Kumar Sinha Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-01-2003
P.K. Sinha, J.1. The Sole appellant, convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code ('the Code' in short) and under Section 498A of the Code, having been sentenced to imprisonment for life and rigorous imprisonment for one year, respectively, had faced trial with three other lady-accused who, however, were acquitted by the learned Trial Court, prosecution having failed to prove its case against them beyond reasonable doubts though all the four were charged, together, under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Code as well as under Section 498A of the Code. The case of prosecution, as coming out of the F.I.R. (Exhibit 1) lodged by Ram Chandra Prasad, father of the deceased Shobha Devi, is that Shobha Devi was married with the appellate in June, 1988 and after living in 'sasural' for 10 to 15 days came back to his house. After 'rukhsadi' she lived in 'sasural' for three years but in 1991 the appellant demanded Rs. 15,000/- for doing business which demand could not be satisfied,...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›