Patna Court July 2004 Judgments
Naresh Prasad Vs. Union of India
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-23-2004
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing on behalf of Union of India.2. This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 14-9-2001, passed by the Special Judge, Economic Offences, Patna in Complaint case No. 184(C) of 2001 by which cognizance has been taken against the petitioner under sections 276C and 276CC of the Income Tax Act, 1961.3. It has been submitted that the petitioner had preferred an appeal against the order of assessment which is pending before the statutory appellate authority. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted tiiat in view of direction of this court in certain matters during the pendency of the statutory appeal filing of complaint case is not justified.4. In such matters this court has consistently taken the view that soon after passing of the assessment order the prosecution should not be launched if the matter is pending in appeal. Further action may be taken only if the appeal is dismissed in whole or in part. I...
Tag this Judgment!Telecommunication Department, Govt. of India and Others Vs. Dr. Vijay ...
Court: Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Patna
Decided on: Jul-23-2004
D.P.S. Choudhary, President: 1. This appeal has been heard ex parte as the respondent did not appear in spite of the notice. O.P. (Telephone Department, Bettiah) is the appellant who has preferred the appeal against the order dated 25.3.1998 passed in Complaint Case No. 86/97 by District Forum, Bettiah, East Champaran whereby and whereunder the appellant has been directed to charge only a sum of Rs. 1,246/- for the bill dated 11.4.1997 and to pay a sum of Rs. 500/- as cost of litigation and to refund back Rs. 106/- which was charged by the Telephone Department for supply of printout. 2. The brief fact of the case is that he is a subscriber of Telephone Department vide telephone No. 32162. He was regularly paying the bills but he received inflated bill dated 11.4.1997 for the period 26.1.1997 to 25.3.1997 for Rs. 4,433/- only. The complainant made a written protest against this bill and asked for printout of the period of the bill and also deposited Rs. 106/- as per demand of the Teleph...
Tag this Judgment!Ganesh Prasad Vs. Lakshman Dusadh and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-22-2004
S.N. Hussain, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This civil revision has been filed by the plaintiff of Title Suit No. 7/1983 which was filed for declaration of his title and for order of injunction and for other ancillary reliefs. 3. The short matrix of the case is that the aforesaid suit was dismissed for default on 26.11.1987 by the learned Subordinate Judge, Aurangabad, when the plaintiff did not appear in the suit for several days. The plaintiff thereafter filed Misc. Case No. 2/1988 for recalling the said order of dismissal and for restoration of the suit. The said misc. Case No. 2/1988 was also dismissed by order dated 26.4.1997 against which the plaintiff filed Misc. Appeal No, 6/1997 which was dismissed by the learned District Judge, Aurangabad, by the impugned order dated 5.2.2002 on the ground that the plaintiff was continuously negligent. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner challenged the aforesaid orders on the ground that the learned Court below did n...
Tag this Judgment!Ozair Ahmmad and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-22-2004
Narayan Roy, J.1. Heard counsel for the parties.2. This writ application is directed against the orders as contained in Annexures 2 and 2/A whereby and whereunder the petitioners have been reverted from promotional post to their substantive pQst as Class IV employees.3. Precisely, it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners initially were appointed on Class IV posts under the respondents and by virtue of the order as contained in Annexure 1 dated 30th June, 1992 they along with others were promoted to Class III posts as per the decision taken by Divisional Establishment Committee and thereafter the petitioners continued on the promotional post and in the meantime all of a sudden, the orders impugned were issued reverting back the petitioners to their substantive posts without giving them any opportunity of hearing. Learned counsel further submits that no reason whatsoever has been assigned in the orders impugned for reversion of the petitioners.4. A cou...
Tag this Judgment!Shri Sri Niwas Tiwari Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-22-2004
Narayan Roy, J. 1. Heard counsel for the parties.2. Initially, this writ application was filed against order dated 8.2.1999, issued vide letter No. 88, as contained in Annexure 9, whereby and whereunder the petitioner was declared surplus and he was transferred to Siwan Division. Other ancillary prayer has been also made in the writ application against non-payment of difference of salary etc.3. Learned counsel for the petitioner now submits that the order of transfer, however, has not been given effect to, and, thus, the petitioner does not have any grievance against the order of transfer. At the same time, it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that difference of salary of the petitioner has not been paid since 1982 to 1998.4. It appears from the materials on records that the petitioner has continued in services and is getting his regular salary.5. According to the plea taken in the counter affidavit, general direction was issued for payment of salary to the petitione...
Tag this Judgment!Shibantu Kumar Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-22-2004
Narayan Roy, J. 1. This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 31.12.1999 (Annexure-1) whereby the petitioner's appointment as dealer under the Public Distribution System has been cancelled.2. Petitioner holds licence under the Bihar Trade Articles (Licences Unification) Order, 1984, hereinafter referred to as the Unification Order. He was also appointed as a dealer under the Public Distribution System, for short 'PDS'. By order dated 14th of December, 1989, the Sub-divisional Officer directed for attachment of the consumers of the petitioner's shop to any other shop on the allegation that during the course of inquiry it was found that the petitioner did not disburse foodgrains to many of the consumers and the foodgrains supplied was less in Weight and further petitioner charged higher price from the consumers. It was also alleged that the petitioner had obtained the shop under the PDS by concealing his age. On these allegations, the petitioner's appointment as deale...
Tag this Judgment!Sanjay Singh and ors. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-22-2004
B.K. Jha, J.1. Both the appeals are directed against the judgment and order passed on 28/29th September, 2000 by the then learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Katihar in Sessions Trial No. 144 of 1997, so they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. The appellants-Ramchandra Singh, Birendra Singh, Harendra Singh and Jitendra Singh-in Criminal Appeal No. 588 of 2000 (DB) have been convicted under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to R.I. for life. The appellants-Sanjay Singh, Suresh Singh, Parwati Devi @ Panwati Devi and Shila Devi @ Shabnam Devi-in Criminal Appeal No. 567 of 2000 (DB) have been convicted under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to R.I. for seven years. All the eight appellants have further been convicted under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to R.I. for two years. The sentences awarded to them, however, have been ordered to run concurrently.3. Briefly, the facts of the case are tha...
Tag this Judgment!Dainik Baitan Bhogi Karmachari Sangh Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-21-2004
Narayan Roy, J. 1. Learned counsel for the petitioner is directed to add the Chief Conservator of Forest, Begusarai Division, as respondent No. 6 in this application. 2. Heard Counsel for the parties. 3. The petitioner by this writ application has prayed for issuance of direction upon the respondents to make payment of salary/wages of its members, numbering 94, who are working under the respondents since long. 4. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that 94 persons, who are members of the petitioner, were engaged to work on daily wages since 1980 and this fact would be manifest from annexure 1 and necessary salaries/wages were paid to them for some time and after 1.994 they have not been paid their salaries/ wages, and they are continuing to work on daily wages under the respondents till date. In this connection, learned counsel has also referred to annexure 9 and it is stated that it is manifest from annexure 9 that a panel of daily rated workers including the membe...
Tag this Judgment!Prasad Construction and anr. Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-21-2004
S.N. Hussain, J. 1. The petitioners were the plaintiff-Decree-holders in the Court below and are aggrieved by order dated 31.8.2002 by which the learned Subordinate Judge-Ill, Patna, dismissed Execution Case No. 8/99 assuming that the decree award had been fully satisfied by the payments made by the judgment-debtors. 2. The short facts of this case is that the petitioners had filed Title Suit No. 262/1990 (19 of 1990) under the provisions of Sections 8 and 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for payment of the dues of bills with interest for the complete construction works of 5th to 7th storeys of Technical Secretariat of Patna. 3. On 24.8.1991 the defendants-Opposite parties filed their show-cause praying that the matter may be referred to Arbitration under the provisions of Clause 23 of agreement whereupon the matter was referred to arbitration by the learned trial.Court on 5.3.1992. But, subsequently due to the death of that Arbitrator Anr. Arbit...
Tag this Judgment!Md. Hashmatullah @ Mufti Md. Hashmatullah and ors. Vs. State of Bihar ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-21-2004
Navin Sinha, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned Counsel for opposite party No. 2 as also the learned Counsel for the State.2. The present application has been filed for quashing the entire proceeding in Complaint Case No. 864 of 2002 instituted under Sections 323, 302, 379, 304B, 307, 354, 504 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The daughter of opposite party No. 2 was married on 11.5.1999 with one Maulvi Md. Amanatullah (not a petitioner in the present application) of village Dariyapur in the District of Sitamarhi. She was residing at Bombay with her husband when she died on 23rd March, 2002 in the hospital there. In pursuance of her death an FIR was lodged at Mumbai by the landlady where the deceased resided with her husband, registered under Sections 498A and 302 of the I.P.C. bearing C.R. No. 293 of 2002 at the Bandra Police Station.3. It is not in dispute between the parties that this prosecution insti...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Next ›
- Last »