Patna Court September 2005 Judgments
Ashok Kumar Choudhary Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-09-2005
S.K. Katriar, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. According to the writ petition, the petitioner had entered into three contracts with the respondent corporation on 04.07.1998 which are on record as part of Annexure B to the Counter Affidavit. The petitioner complains before this Court that the work was completed as per the specifications but the full payment is not being made to him nor the security amount is refunded. The respondents have placed on record their counter affidavit and have opposed the writ petition.2. Mr. Prasoon Sinha, learned Counsel for the respondent corporation, is. right in his submission that in view of the presence of the arbitration clause in the agreement, the petitioner would be well advised to resort to the same. The relevant clause is setout hereinbelow for the facility of quick reference:Clause 23--In case any dispute or difference shall arise between the parties or either of them upon any question relating to the meaning of the specifications, d...
Tag this Judgment!Bodhi Sahani Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-09-2005
Rekha Kumari, J. 1. The appellant faced trial for committing the offence punishable under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned trial Court, found him guilty under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life.2. The prosecution version which led to the trial of the appellant is as follows :3. On 18.11.1997 at about 8.30 a.m. the informant Sajjan Sahani and his father Mahendra Sahani (deceased) went to their field situated at village Chakbazo, P.S. Saraiya, District Muzaffarpur for ploughing. They had taken the field on Batai from one Baiju Sahani. They saw Bodhi Sahani (appellant), whose field was situated by the side of their field cutting the ridge of their field. This was protested by Mahendra Sahani (deceased) upon which on the call of Bodhi Sahani, his brothers Jndhan Sahani and Bhukhalu Sahani and his nephews Ramayan Sahani and Chulhai Sahani (all four since acquitted) who were also working in the nearby field came there ...
Tag this Judgment!Baidyanath Singh and ors. Vs. Ram Binay Singh and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-07-2005
J.N. Bhatt, C. J. 1. The question which is directly placed in focus for consideration and adjudication in this Revision Application against the order of the trial Court rejecting an application, in exercise of its jurisdiction, seeking permission to file Written Statement at the instance of the original defendants in Title Suit No. 94 of 2003 after successfully obtaining extension of time for filing Written Statement on various earlier dates is as to whether 'the jurisdiction or the power of the Court to grant permission to file Written Statement beyond the period of 30 days from the date of summons as also beyond the period of 90 days from the date of summons if the Court has found sufficient cause between the period from 30 days to 90 days is impeded or qualified or circumscribed by the amended provision of Order VIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short the C.P.C.) which came to be amended by Act No. 22 of 2002 of the Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act 2002 wi...
Tag this Judgment!Tileshwari Devi and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-06-2005
Chandramauli Kumar Prasad, J.1. This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 3.8.2002 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarpur in Mithanpura PS Case No. 119 of 2001 (Trial No, 938 of 2002) whereby he had taken cognizance of the offence under Sections 376, 342, 323, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code.2. Short facts giving rise to the present application are that on the basis of the report given by opposite party No. 2, Mithanpura PS Case No. 119 of 2001 was registered under the aforesaid sections. The police, after investigation, submitted final form and forwarded only one accused person for trial. When the said final form along with case diary was placed for consideration before the learned Magistrate, he found sufficient material, prima facie, showing complicity of the petitioners also in the crime. Accordingly, he differed with the same, took cognizance of the offence and directed for issuance of process against the petitioners also.3. Learned counsel for t...
Tag this Judgment!Deva Nand Upadhayay Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) Through Director, Cbi ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-06-2005
V.N. Sinha, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the C. B. I.2. Petitioner has challenged the validity and correctness of the order dated 28-7-2005 where under his petition under Section 205 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') has been rejected on the ground that warrant of arrest for securing his attendance has already been issued.3. Petitioner was a Junior Engineer in the Public Works Department and retired on 31-12-1998 and at the relevant time was posted at Siwan and is said to be involved in the Bitumen Scam and has been made accused in both the charge sheets dated 19-1-2005, Annexures-A and A/1 submitted in R. C. 21(A)/97, appertaining to Special Case No. 8/97 for the offences under Sections 420 and 406 and other allied Section of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act as Accused Nos. 6, 5 and his status has been indicated in the two charge-sheets as one who has ret...
Tag this Judgment!Bipat Das, Chela of Late Mahanth Raghunath Das Vs. State of Bihar and ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-01-2005
Barin Ghosh, J. 1. The application for contempt now survives only against the respondent No. 8, who is a private respondent. The application as against the respondent No. 9 stands dismissed for non-service in terms of an earlier order of this Court. The respondents No. 3 to 7 have been deleted from the array of respondents in this application. There is no allegation of disobedience against the respondents No. 1 and 2.2. It appears that on 14th March, 2002, a document was signed by the petitioner as well as the respondent No. 8 whereby and whereunder it was indicated the petitioner will vacate the Math in question within 24 hours from 15th March, 2002. The petitioner filed a representation before the Trust Board in terms of an order passed by this Court in CWJC No. 10864 of 2001. This representation was made inasmuch as by a letter dated 13th June, 2001. A direction was given to hand over possession of the Math to respondent No. 6. While this representation was pending, the document da...
Tag this Judgment!Surendra Singh @ Doctor Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-01-2005
V.N. Sinha, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.2. Petitioner, who on the relevant date i.e. 13/15.1.2005 was lodged in Adarsh Central Jail, Beur, Patna, has filed this writ application questioning the correctness and validity of the order No. 16 dated 13.1.2005, Annexure-1 to this application,.passed by the District Magistrate, Begusarai, whereunder he has been detained in terms of the provisions contained in Sub-section (2) of Section 12 of the Bihar Control of Crimes Act, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). He has further questioned the correctness and validity of the order dated 22.1.2005, as contained in Memo No. 143 dated 22.1.2005, Annexure-4 to this application, whereunder his detention has been approved by the State Government in terms of the power conferred under Sub-section (3) of Section 12 of the Act.3. The ground of challenge raised against the aforesaid two orders in the writ application as also during the submission made before this Co...
Tag this Judgment!Md. Safique Alam Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-01-2005
Narayan Roy, J.1. Heard counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order impugned, as contained in annexure 12 dated 7.3.2002, whereby and whereunder Primary School, Sabanpur, Kadwa-2 has been directed to be shifted to Sabanpur, Kadwa-2.3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the school in question is a Government school and the order, issued at the behest of the Minister, who is not incharge of the Primary Education, is wholly without jurisdiction. It is also submitted that the Primary School, Sabanpur, Kadwa-2 is a well established school and a large number of students are partaking education and, therefore, there could have been no occasion to shift the school in question from one place to another. It is further submitted that the District Superintendent of Education, Katihar, has no jurisdiction to issue an order, as contained in annexure 12, and had there been occasion to shift a school, appropriate decision could have been taken by a dul...
Tag this Judgment!NasimuddIn Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-01-2005
Barin Ghosh, J. 1. A voters list was prepared and on the basis of that voters list, the private respondent tried his luck at the election and lost. Subsequently he turned around and in the election petition contended that the voters list was wrong and the learned Munsif has accepted such contention and rejected the votes obtained by the petitioner, who was declared elected. It is surprising that the Munsif even did not try to ascertain who were those persons whose names were wrongly entered in the voters list. It is even more surprising that before curtaining the voters from the list, the Munsif did not try to ascertain who were those and accordingly rejected the genuine votes. The Munsif, it seems by reading of the judgment wanted to declare the private respondent as winner and has passed a judgment which cannot stand the test of law even for one second. It did not dawn on to the Munsif that a person, who had participated in the election on the basis of the voters list and has tried ...
Tag this Judgment!Dinesh Pandey and ors. Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Sep-01-2005
V.N. Sinha, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the State.2. The three petitioners, along with one Sheo Balak Pandey were named in the First Information Report of Harnaut P.S. Case No. 101 of 2003 dated 30.5.2003 registered for the offences under Sections 341, 323, 379/34 of the Indian Penal Code in which Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code was later added and the police after investigation submitted charge-sheet only against the Sheo Balak Pandey, are aggrieved by the order dated 17.1.2004, Annexure-3 to this application, whereunder the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nalanda has taken cognizance of the aforesaid offences and issued processes not only against the said Sheo Balak Pandey, who was charge-sheeted and sent up for trial, but also against the petitioners, who were not sent up for trial. Petitioners are further aggrieved by the order dated 30.6.2004, Annexure-4 to this application, passed by the 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Nalanda in Cr.. Revision No. 45 of 200...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›