Patna Court January 2006 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Bharat Agriculture and Mechanical Engineering Company Vs. State of Bih ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-13-2006
Aftab Alam, J.1. The two appeals are directed against a common judgment passed by a learned single Judge of this Court dismissing two writ petitions filed by the appellant and upholding the reassessment orders passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes in exercise of powers under Section 19(1) of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 ('the Act', hereinafter).2. L. P. A. No. 1100 of 1996 arising out of C. W. J. C. No. 847 of 1986 relates to assessment period 1982-83. L. P. A. No. 1101 of 1996 arising out of C. W. J. C. No. 846 of 1986 relates to assessment period 1983-84. Apart from the difference in the periods of assessment, the two cases are identical on all issues of facts and law. These appeals were accordingly heard together and are being disposed of by this order.3. The relevant facts are brief and simple and can be stated thus : The appellant is the manufacturer and seller of implements which are used in agricultural operations for spraying insecticides and pesticides, etc. Th...
Manik Chandra Vs. State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-13-2006
Radha Mohan Prasad, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the office order dated 25.3.2003, contained in Annexure 5, whereby and whereunder the date of first time bound promotion granted earlier with effect from 10.10.1983 has been sought to be modified and 11.1.1992 has been fixed as the date of first time bound promotion and, further, as a consequence thereof, the second time bound promotion granted to him with effect from 15.1.1991 has been cancelled and order for recovery has been passed, vide Annexure 6, the validity of which has been challenged in LA. No. 4045 of 2005.2. The reason for modification of the date of grant of first time bound promotion as mentioned in the impugned order is on account of adjustment of the petitioner on the post of Treasury Guard from the post of Khalasi with effect from 11.9.1982. According to the State, the said adjustment was in the higher pay and as such, the petitioner was entitled for promotion on completion of te...
M.K. Jha Vs. Income-tax Appellate Tribunal and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-10-2006
1. All the three appeals are connected matter as such they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this order.2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna, allowing the appeal of the Department, being Appeal No. I.T.A. No. 79 (Patna) of 2001, and holding that as the wife of the assessee has no independent income, the acquisition made in her name will be treated as acquisition made by the assessee and accordingly, assessed him.3. In our view, the Tribunal has adopted a correct approach by observing that the tax paid by the wife in the facts of this case would be treated as the tax paid by the assessee. The finding arrived at by the Tribunal that the wife of the assessee has no income, was based on the materials on record. Learned Counsel for the appellant did not persuade us to take a different view by producing any convincing and reliable material on the record to rebut the aforesaid finding....
Tarak Nath Singh (D) Through Heirs and anr. Vs. Deena Nath Singh and o ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-10-2006
S.M.M. Alam, J. 1. This second appeal has been preferred against the judgment and decree dated 23.3.1990 passed by Sri Kailash Bihari Verma, 1st Additional District Judge, Saran at Chapra, in title appeal No. 49 of 1983 whereby he had affirmed the judgment and decree dated 7.3.1983 passed by Sri Surendra Kumar Sinha, 3rd Additional Sub-Ordinate Judge, Chapra, in partition suit No. 6 of 1976.2. The case of the plaintiff-respondent is that one Nakched Singh was the common ancestor. He had three sons; Ramdahin Singh, Padarath Singh and Mukhlal Singh, Ramdahin Singh died unmarried in the state of jointness before the revisional survey. In the year 1921, the two remaining brothers, namely, Pradarath Singh and Mukhlal Singh separated. Thereafter, Padarath Singh died in the year 1943 leaving behind his widow Hikayat Kuer and a daughter Simrekha Kuer. After the death of Padarath Singh, his widow Hikayat Kuer came in possession of the properties left by Padarath Singh. In the year 1945, Most....
Chandeshwar Gope and ors. Vs. Tejan Gope (Deemed by L.Rs.) and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-06-2006
Syed Md. Mahfooz Alam, J.1. This second appeal has been preferred against the judgement and decree dated 26-2-1990 passed by Sri Raja Ram Singh, Additional District Judge XIII, Patna in Title Appeal No. 101 of h 1984 whereby he has affirmed the judgment a: and decree dated 29-6-1984 passed by Sri Kali Dayal Mishra, Additional Munsif II, Patna in Title Suit No. 53 of 1980.2. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said judgment and decree, the defendants - appellants have preferred this appeal.3. The brief facts of the case are as follows:The plaintiffs - respondents brought a title suit for declaration of title and confirmation of possession or in the alternative, for recovery of possession in respect of the suit land being a portion of S.P. No. 258 fully described in Schedule I of the plaint and shown by the sketch map. The claim of the plaintiffs is that they are members of the joint family of which plaintiff No. 1 is the Karta. The defendants were also members of the joi...
Geeta Devi and ors. Vs. State of Bihar and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-05-2006
Rekha Kumari, J.1. This is an application filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the order dated 28.1.2002 passed by Mr. A.J. Shrivastava, J.M., 1st Class, Banka in Complaint Case No. 906/2001 by which he has taken cognizance and directed for issuance of summons against the petitioners for facing trial for the offences under Sections 323 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code.2. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the case is false. The complainant has brought this case against his wife and her relatives and that petitioner No. 1 (wife) had brought a Complaint Case No. 322/99 against the complainant and others for torture and dowry under Sections 498A, 379 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and one maintenance case under Section 125, Cr. P.C. and this case has been filed mala fide for harassing petitioner No. 1 and others. He further submitted that the allegation in the complaint petition is that the petition...
Leelawati Mishra and Suresh Prasad Vs. Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sansk ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-04-2006
Shiva Kirti Singh, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondent University as well as learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 6 and 7 who were subsequently added.2. Originally, this writ petition was preferred by two petitioners, both claiming to be non teaching employees of Seth Ram Niranjan Das Murarka Sanskrit College, Chowk, Patna city. However, this writ petition has not been pressed by learned counsel in respect of petitioner No. 1. Only the case of petitioner No. 2, Suresh Prasad who claims to have been appointed as Night Guard in the said College has been pressed for consideration. The original prayer in the writ petition was to direct the respondent University to grant approval to the appointment of the petitioner on the post in question. Petitioner No. 2 claims to have been appointed as Night Guard on 12.8.1997. Subsequently, when it was found that the University had allowed an appeal/representation of respondent No, 7 who was earlier t...
Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Amar Nath Ray and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-04-2006
1. The writ petition is directed against the order dated 4.12.2002, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench (for short 'the Tribunal')in Original Application No. 597 of 2000, whereby the Tribunal has directed the authorities to consider the case of private respondent No. 1 for appointment on compassionate ground and issue necessary orders regarding his appointment as per the law.2. The father of respondent No. 1, who was a railway employee in the Eastern Railway, died in the year 1977 i.e. 28 years back. Admittedly, at that time private respondent No. 1 was only two years old. His mother was also dead and as such his grandmother is looking after the family.3. In 1993, private respondent No. 1 attained majority and then he applied for appointment on compassionate ground on 9.2.1994. When the authorities did not give appointment, he approached the Tribunal after Six years in 2000 and the Tribunal, relying upon certain orders passed by the Benches of the Tribunal, has ...
i.B.P. Company Ltd. and ors. and Amarnath Singh Vs. Ramashish Prasad S ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-03-2006
Syed Md. Mahfooz Alam, J.1. Since second appeal No. 168 of 1990 and second appeal No. 141 of 1990 arise out of one and the same judgment and decree dated 17.3.1990 passed by Sri Madan Mohan Verma, 2nd Additional District Judge, Begusarai in Misc. Title Appeal No. 26/1985/32/1987, as such both these second appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment passed in second appeal No. 168 of 1990. The learned 2nd Additional District Judge, Begusarai by his judgment and decree dated 17,3.1990 has been pleased to set aside the judgment and decree dated 17.9.1985 passed by Sri S.B. Choudhary, Munsif 1st, Begusarai in title suit No. 65/1980 whereby he had dismissed the suit of the plaintiff-respondents. Against the said judgment of reversal, the defendant- appellants have preferred these second appeals.2, The plaintiff's case as per the plaint, is as follows :- Plaintiff No. 1 Ramashish Prasad Singh, who was an unemployed graduate, was in search of a job and for that purpose he knocked ...
Jai Kishun Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jan-03-2006
Chandramauli Kumar Prasad, J. 1. Freedom Fighters are persons who had suffered miseries to free this Country from the foreign-shackles. Many of them have lost their lives, many were injured and large number of such persons languished in jails for various periods. A grateful Nation, after Independence, decided to honour them and thus Freedom Fighters Pension Scheme, hereinafter referred to as the 'Scheme' was launched. Many came to be benefited under the scheme on misrepresentation and fraud. This had naturally pained such freedom fighters who had sacrificed everything, the family, the property and the freedom; for the freedom of the country. The only tribute which a greatful Nation can give to such freedom fighters is to weed out such persons who are bearing the chola of freedom fighters and getting benefits under the Scheme. Petitioner is one of such freedom fighters who has got the freedom fighter pension.Petitioner had filed the present writ application for quashing the communicat...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »