Patna Court December 2004 Judgments
Rohtas Industries Ltd. Vs. Official Liquidator
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-16-2004
R.S. Garg, J.1. Flag-439 filed by M/s. Indequip Leasing and Finance Ltd. was taken up for consideration yesterday only. It was recorded in yesterday's proceedings that although the counsel had been saying that M/s. Indequip Leasing and Finance Ltd., is the tenant of the property and as such they cannot be evicted by the Official Liquidator. This Court had made it clear that in accordance with the powers vested in the Company Court under Section 456, read with Section 457, the Company Court is entitled to evict each and every person, who is in possession of the property of the company and if the Court wants to exercise such powers what right a tenant would have, the learned counsel for M/s. Indequip Leasing and Finance Ltd. did not make any submission on that aspect of the matter. Instead of passing the orders on Flag-439, I directed that the matter be taken up today so that the tenant in possession may make an offer for alienating the property under tenancy in his favour. The matter i...
Tag this Judgment!Kaushal Kishore Verma Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-16-2004
R.S. Garg, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner Kaushal Kishor Verma, an elected Mukhiya of Gram Panchayat Khairkhan, Block Forbesganj, Araria, being aggrieved by memo No. 272 dated 19.7.2004, issued by the Collector (annexure-11) restraining the petitioner from exercising his authority as Mukhiya of the Panchayat and requiring Up-Mukhia, the respondent No. 5 in the public interest and the interest of the State so also looking to the administrative exigencies to work as Mukhiya is, before this Court.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that under the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, an elected Mukhiya can be removed in a particular manner. The State Government is authorised to remove a Mukhiya from the post for misconduct in discharge of his duty only after giving an opportunity of hearing to him. According to him, the order of restrain could not be passed by the Collector under any provision of law.4. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, submitte...
Tag this Judgment!N.E. Railway and Others Vs. Mukti Nath Gupta
Court: Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Patna
Decided on: Dec-16-2004
D.P.S. Choudhary, President: 1. Petitioner, who is the O.P. in the Complaint Case No. 264/2002, pending before the District Consumer Forum, Saran (Chapra) has preferred this revision against the order dated 3.2.2004, passed by the District Consumer Forum, Saran in the above complaint case, by which the District Consumer Forum has been pleased to reject the plea of the petitioner regarding non-maintainability of the complaint case. 2. The brief facts of the case is that the complainant filed a complaint before the District Consumer Forum, Saran stating therein that he booked his articles along with one Godrej Fridge etc. on 28.10.1999 from Jam Nagar Railway Station (Gujarat) to Chapra (Saran) after paying proper freight and fare. His booked Fridge could not be delivered at Chapra for which he made several inquiries and at last filed complaint before the Consumer Forum claiming Rs. 28,801/- as cost of the Fridge, other expense and compensation for harassment. 3. The O.P. appeared and fil...
Tag this Judgment!Anita Kumari and anr. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-15-2004
R.S. Garg, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. This order shall finally dispose of CWJC No. 4986 and CWJC No. 10727 of 2003.3. It appears from the records of CWJC No. 4986 of 2003 that Anita Kumari was elected as a Pramukh of Panchayat Samiti, Patory, Samastipur. It also appears from the records that after her election a requisition was made by some dissatisfied persons to convene a meeting to consider the no-confidence motion against Anita Kumari. It also appears that Up-pramukh took cognizance in the matter and directed the Block Development Officer-cum-Chief Executive Officer, Patori to convene a meeting. A notice for convening the meeting to consider the no-confidence motion was issued on 10.1.2003 (annexure-4). It was clearly mentioned that the meeting would be convened on 17.1.2003. The meeting was accordingly convened on 17.1.2003 and the petitioner was voted out.4. Being aggrieved by the said resolution Smt. Anita Kumari has filed CWJC No. 4986 of 2003. After her rem...
Tag this Judgment!Dr. (Capt) Dev Nandan Pd. Sinha Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-14-2004
R.S. Garg, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner had filed the present writ application submitting, inter alia, that all his retiral benefits, which have yet not been paid to him, be directed to be paid.3. This writ application was filed on 12.8.2004. It appears that a copy of the writ application was served on the counsel for the State on 11.8.2004. It appears that after the service of the advance copy on the counsel for the State, the State authorities came out of their slumber. It is to be noted that by resolution No. 1155 (18) dated 16.7.1997 departmental proceedings were initiated against the petitioner. He was placed under suspension vide notification No. 1134(3) dated 9.9.2002. Despite submission of the final report by the Inquiring Officer and second show cause notice to the petitioner and its reply by the petitioner, no action was taken by the State Government and the petitioner was allowed to retire on 31.8.2003.4. The petitioner was thereafter relie...
Tag this Judgment!Suresh Chandra Singh Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-14-2004
Narayan Roy, J.1. Heard counsel for the parties.2. Prayer of the petitioner pertains to payment of arrears of salary and admissible allowances with effect from 20th October, 1995 to 11.3.1998.3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner reported his joining on 20th October, 1995 and while he was functioning under the respondents, a communication was made to the Superintendent of Police by the Inspector of General of Police, as contained in Annexure-3, to the effect that the services of the petitioner would be deemed to have been terminated in view of Rule 74 of the Bihar Service Code, but till date no such order has been passed by the o Superintendent of Police. However, the petitioner challenged the communication aforesaid before this Court in CWJC No. 7081 of 1997 and this Court directed the disciplinary authority to take decision in the matter within a period of three months and pursuant to direction of this Court the petitioner reported his joining ...
Tag this Judgment!Madan Gopal Rai Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-14-2004
Mridula Mishra, J.1. Appellants Madan Gopal Rai and Akshay Lal have been convicted by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Gaya in Sessions Case No. 127/84/48 of 1984 for the offences under Section 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code by the judgment and order dated 21.12.1987 and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. Appellant No. 2 Akshay Lal has further been convicted under Section 27 of the Arms Act, and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for five years.2. The prosecution case in brief is that one Suresh Kumar Tirthani (PW 6) lodged fardbeyan (Ext. 3) on 31.7.1983 at 11 a.m. at Pilgrim Hospital, Gaya alleging therein that he is the brother-in-law of Sadhu Ram Tirthani (PW 4) and also worked as his employee. On 31.7.1983 at 7.45 a.m. he was playing with his nephew in front of his house when Rama Shankar Rai (since dead) and his Munshi Akshay Lal passed through that side on a scooter and after ten minutes Akshay Lal along with Rama Shankar Rai and Madan Gopal Rai a...
Tag this Judgment!Teaching Employees Lalit NaraIn Janta College Union and ors. Vs. State ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-14-2004
Narayan Roy, J.1. Heard counsel for the parties.2. Pursuant to order dated 11.11.2004 passed by this Court, the respondent Secretary, Department of Higher and Secondary Education, Government of Bihar, has appeared in person and informed this Court that the matter was discussed with the Registrar, L.N. Mithila University, Darbhanga, and on discussion it surfaced that the funds already allocated to the respondent University were not properly utilised in making necessary payment to the members of petitioner No. 1, rather part of the funds was diverted for other purpose. However, the Registrar of the respondent University agreed to pay to the members of the petitioners out of the funds already allocated to it. It is further informed that the Registrar was directed to make a fresh requisition in case there would be requirement of further allocation for necessary payment to others.3. Mr. Ambar Nath Banerjee, learned counsel for the petitioners, however, submits that part payment has been ma...
Tag this Judgment!Dinanath Thakur Vs. Dinanath Sao
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-14-2004
S.N. Hussain, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner is defendant-appellant who is aggrieved by order dated 5.8.2003 by which the learned 7th Additional District Judge, Rohtas at Sasaram, dismissed Misc. Appeal No. 37 of 1999 and affirmed order dated 29.7.1999 by which the learned Sub-Judge-IV, Sasaram, rejected the petitioner's petition under Order IX, Rule 13, CPC bearing Misc. Case No, 1/1993 which was filed by the petitioner for setting aside the ex parte decree dated 21.8,1990 as amended subsequently by order dated 13.3.1992.3. The short fact of the case is that the plaintiff-respondent-opposite party had filed Title Suit No. 25/1986 for declaration of his title and recovery of possession and for declaration that the two sale deeds relied upon by the defendant-petitioner were void and not binding upon him. The said suit was decreed ex parte on 21.8.1990 which was subsequently amended on 13.3.1992.4. However, later the defendant filed Misc. Case No. 1/1993 un...
Tag this Judgment!Sushila Devi Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Dec-13-2004
Aftab Alam, J.1. One Hare Ram Sah was a constable in Bihar Police. He was allotted brass No. 385. At the material time, he was attached as bodyguard to the Dy. Supdt. of Police (Town), Bhagalpur. On 20.8.1993, while with the Dy. Supdt. of Police, he was killed in an encounter with criminals. On that date, the slain police constable, like all other police personnel in the State, was covered by an insurance policy taken out by the Director General and Inspector General of Police, Bihar. Under the policy, a constable was insured against accidental death for Rs. 1,00,000. Therefore, on Hare Ram San getting killed by criminals his nominee should have got the insured amount. But the information with regard to his killing was not given to the Insurance Company within the time stipulated in the conditions to the policy; the information was given to the Insurance Company several months after the policy had lapsed and on that ground the insurer rejected the claim. Petitioner, who claims to be t...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- Next ›
- Last »