Patna Court April 2004 Judgments
Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Md. Ehtesam and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-13-2004
Nagendra Rai, J.1. The point involved in all the cases under reference being the same, they have been heard together and are being disposed of accordingly.2. This is reference under Section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) made by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna to answer the following question of the law :--'Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in confirming the order passed by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner holding that as the penalty was imposed on the firm for delay in filing the return, no penalty was leviable on the assessee, who was a partner of the firm under Section 271(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.'3. In all the ten cases, the same question has been referred and in five reference cases, namely, Tax Case Nos. 27, 28, 29, 30 and 33 of 1989, the opposite party is Md. Ehtesam and in other five Tax Cases No. 31, 32, 34, 35 and 36, the opposite party is Md. Ezaz...
Tag this Judgment!Rakesh Ray @ Kallu Rai @ Rakesh Kumar Rai Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-12-2004
Navin Sinha, J. 1. This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 5.4.2002 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Second Class. Buxar in Buxar PS Case No. 371/93. By the said order the Magistrate has rejected the application for discharge preferred by the petitioner on the ground that no case was made out under Section 323, IPC.2. The present prosecution in Buxar PS Case No. 371/93 was lodged on 17.12.1993 under Sections 323 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code. The final report was submitted on 3.1.1994 under Section 323, IPC only. The allegations as mentioned in the FIR relate to slapping and fisticuffs. The Magistrate accordingly then took cognizance on 12.8.1994 under Section 323, IPC only.3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the prosecution was instituted on 17.12.1993. The final report was submitted on 3.1.1994. The Court then took cognizance on 12.8.1994. The prosecution has therefore remained pending since 1993 till the year 2004 and the trial is yet ...
Tag this Judgment!Aprajita Srivastava and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-12-2004
R.S. Garg, J.1. The respondent officer is present in Court.2. This Court earlier recorded its displeasure about the conduct of the respondent officer and clearly directed that the mode of payment is not to make deposit in the provident fund account but the mode of payment should be that in how many instalments and in what particular manner the amount would be paid in cash. The copy of this order was received by the officer on 5th April, 2004. He submits that he sought certain instructions from different corners and thereafter filed the affidavit dated 7th April, 2004.3. Surprisingly, in the affidavit dated 7th April, 2004 the said officer has reiterated his stand and has submitted that the amount is to be deposited in the provident fund account and the earlier orders passed by the Court be recalled.4. Finding that the order passed by this Court in C.W.J.C. and the direction issued in these very proceedings were not complied with and the concerned officer who were bent upon committing ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Rambha Sinha Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-12-2004
Chandramauli Kr. Prasad, J.1. This application has been filed for quashing the notice (Annexure-4) issued by the Executive Officer of Panchayat Samiti, Katra intimating that the special meeting of the Panchayat Samiti shall be held on. 7.1.2002 to consider the motion of no confidence brought against the Pramukh. By way of amendment prayer of the petitioner is to quash another notice (Annexure-9) issued by the Executive Officer dated 4.2.2002 conveying that the special meeting of the Panchayat Samiti shall be held on 11.2.2002 to consider the motion of no confidence against the Pramukh. Petitioner has also prayed for quashing of the resolution dated 11.2.2002 whereby the motion of no confidence has been carried out against her.2. Shorn of unnecessary details facts giving rise to the present application are that the petitioner was elected as the Pramukh of the Panchayat Samiti, Katra and a requisition (Annexure-1) to convene a special meeting of the Panchayat Samiti was given to her to ...
Tag this Judgment!Smt. Shyam Sundari Devi Vs. Punjab National Bank Through Its Managing ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-12-2004
R.S. Garg, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. The petitioners, Smt. Shyam Sundari Devi and Ganesh Prasad, widow and son of Late Chnni Lal Ram, have come to this Court in this writ application, inter alia, submitting that the order contained in Annexure-1, letter dated 14.8.2003, under which appointment on compassionate ground has been refused by the Bank is bad and deserves to be quashed with a direction against the Bank to issue an order of appointment in favour of the petitioner No. 2.3. On notice the respondents appeared in the Court and submitted that the order contained in Annexure-1 is valid and justified. In paragraph 6 they have submitted that the family received a sum of Rs. 2,05,218/- as terminal benefits and they are getting family pension of Rs. 3014/- per month. It is submitted by them that the petitioners are well to do, they can maintain themselves and the Bank is absolutely justified in refusing appointment on compassionate ground.4. Learned counsel for the ...
Tag this Judgment!Kaimur Kissan Vikash Sammittee Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-09-2004
1. This matter is purely about putting the statutory obligation of consolidation of holdings under the Bihar Consolidation of Holdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956 as workable plan, the Legislature has ordained it so.2. Thus, this Court is not permitting any other side issues to complicate the working of the plan under the Act as it is, twice the State Government has failed to execute its statutory intention, twice it has failed at the High Court and twice at the Supreme Court. Executive fiat cannot destroy an intention of the law of the legislature. This is unusual in a parliamentary democracy. The Act can be abrogated, a power permitted to a Government if can muster a majority. But not to follow and implement the law and an agrarian reform plan, certifies the Government as anti planning, anti poor, anti constitution and a Government with no dedication to governance and planning. It will be a moot question who is responsible for this politician, bureaucracy or both.3. In...
Tag this Judgment!New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Sunaina Gupta and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-09-2004
S.N. Pathak, J.1. These five appeals are directed against the common judgment and award dated 16th November, 1995 passed by the District Judge-cum-Motor Vehicles Accident Claims Tribunal, Katihar in different claim cases, mentioned in the impugned judgments and so they were heard analogous and are being disposed of by this common judgment. The Insurance Company of the aforesaid five cases are the appellants before this Court.2. Both the sides were heard in all these appeals.3. The compensation amounts were granted to the claimants of the relevant cases on account of death of their kith and kin in a motor accident that occurred on 15th April, 1990. The deceased were occupants of a car which was dashed by a speeding truck. It was submitted by the appellants' lawyer that there was head-on-collision as a result of which some occupants of the car died and so there was contributory negligence on the part of car driver as well. Hence, the Insurance Company of the car was also liable to share...
Tag this Judgment!Ashok Kumar Singh Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-09-2004
R.M. Prasad, J. 1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has sought for direction to the respondents concerned to take necessary steps for making payment of admitted dues of Rs. 1,29,727/- in connection with Agreement No. 4 of 1992-93 and, further of Rs. 74,435/- in connection with Agreement No. 5 of 1992-93.2. In paragraphs 11 and 12 of the writ petition it is stated that the petitioner completed the work within time with respect to Agreement Nos. 4 and 5 of 1992-93 and necessary entries were made in the M.S. No. 216, 164 and 236 respectively. In paragraph 13 of the writ petition it is stated that against Agreement No. 4, payment of Rs. 5,13,706/- and against Agreement No. 5, payment of Rs. 5,88,647/-were made in different instalments. Since thereafter the petitioner personally approached the concerned authorities, but no appropriate action has yet been taken.3. Notice of this writ petition was served on the learned Advocate General appearing for the respondents, including the Secre...
Tag this Judgment!Tata Finance Limited Vs. Panchanand Ojha
Court: Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Patna
Decided on: Apr-09-2004
D.P.S. Choudhary, President: 1. This appeal has been preferred by the O.P. against the order dated 29.7.2003 passed by District Forum, Bhojpur in Complaint Case No. 39/2003 whereby and whereunder the District Forum has directed the appellant to pay alleged excess money realized amount to Rs. 58,649/- to the complainant-respondent and also awarded a sum of Rs. 5,000/- by way of compensation and litigation cost. 2. The brief fact of the case is that complainant alleged that he had purchased chassis of mini bus on hire purchase basis from the O.P.-appellant and paid certain initial amount as per agreement. He was to pay Rs. 11,800/- in 36 months as hire purchase charge ending on 14.3.2003. The mini bus was purchased for self-employment as the complainant is an educated unemployed. The bus was plying in between Karnampur to Ara. It is further case that due to transport strike between July and September, 2002 he defaulted in payment of the monthly instalment and the vehicle was repossessed ...
Tag this Judgment!Kameshwar Mahto and ors. and Ram Surat Singh and anr. Vs. State of Bih ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-08-2004
Radha Mohan Prasad, J.1. In the M.J.C. application, prayer is to initiate contempt proceeding against the Opposite parties, namely, Managing Director of Bihar State Agriculture Marketing Board (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board') for alleged wilful violation of the order dated 24.10.2000 passed in the connected CWJC No. 317 of 2000, contained in Annexure-1.2. Two of the petitioners of the said M.J.C. application, namely, Ram Surat Singh (Petitioner No. 4) and . Sudama Sharma (Petitioner No. 5) have filed aforementioned writ petition seeking direction to the Respondents to consider their case for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer in the Board and grant the same with effect from the due date (1994) as directed by this Court in the aforesaid CWJC No. 317 of 2000, against the available quota of 50% required to be filled up by promotion from amongst Junior Engineers. In view of the fact that writ case referred to above was pending for interpretation of the regulation relating...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »