Patna Court February 2007 Judgments
Gopal Kumar Modi and anr. Vs. Lalan Prasad Keshri @ Sushil Prasad Kesh ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-28-2007
Ramesh Kumar Datta, J.1. Heard, Mr. Harshwardhan Sahay, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Mr. Ashok Kumar Keshari, learned Counsel for the opposite parties.2. The petitioners have filed the civil revision application against the order dated 19.7.2004 passed by the Subordinate Judge-I, Munger in Title Suit No. 67 of 2001, by which he has rejected the petition filed on 20.3.2004 under Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred as the 'Code') by the plaintiff-petitioners.3. The plaintiffs had originally filed the said Title suit praying for bifurcation of Schedule-II suit property from Schedule-I detailed in the plaint on the basis of sale deed dated 19.3.2001 executed by defendant-second party in favour of plaintiff No. 2 and to confirm the possession of plaintiff No. 2 over the said property. The case, as alleged in the plaint, was that there was a family arrangement in the family of the defendants and defendant second party was allotted the land of Sch...
Tag this Judgment!Rameshwar Pd. Choudhary Vs. Renuka Mitra and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-28-2007
Syed Md. Mahfooz Alam, J.1. This Miscellaneous Appeal is directed against the order dated 18.1.1996 passed by Subordinate Judge Ist, Siwan in Miscellaneous Case No. 16 of 1975 arising out of Execution Case No. 7 of 1970 whereby he has allowed the review petition filed by respondents Renuka Mitra and others for review of the order dated 9.2.78 dismissing Miscellaneous Case No. 16 of 1975 and set aside the auction sale and delivery of possession in Execution Case No. 7 of 1970 and ordered that half share of the applicants in the suit properties be restituted to them through the process of court.2. Appellant Rameshwar Prasad Choudhary and others, who were opposite parties in the said Miscellaneous Case has challenged the said order in this appeal.3. The brief facts of the case are as follows:One Shambhu Prasad filed Mortgage Suit bearing Title (Mortgage) Suit No. 1 of 1962 / 6 of 1964 for redemption of mortgage against Bishwanath Prasad and Bhagwat Prasad. On 31.7.1965 a preliminary decr...
Tag this Judgment!NavIn Joshi and anr. Vs. Sarju Rai and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-28-2007
Chandramauli Kr. Prasad, J.1. Defendant No. 2 and Defendant No. 3 are the Resident Editor and Publisher of the daily newspaper 'Hindustan'.2. A news item was published in the daily newspaper 'Hindustan', in its issue dated 21st of October, 2003 containing several allegations levelled by defendant No. 1 Gulshan Ajmani, a former Member of Legislative Assembly against the plaintiff. Plaintiff asserting that those allegations are false and motivated, filed T.S. No. 79 of 2004 for damage of a sum of Rs. 50 crore impleading Gulshan Ajmani as defendant No. 1 and the Resident Editor and Publisher of 'Hindustan Times, as defendant nos. 2 and 3.3. Summons were served on defendant No. 2 and 3 on 3.7.2004 and in pursuance of the summons, they appeared in the suit on 29.7.2004 and prayed for time to file the written statement. From time to time, the case was adjourned and they were granted time till 3.10.2004 for filing the written statement. On 8.10.2004, these defendants made prayer for a fortni...
Tag this Judgment!Central Board of Secondary Education Vs. Bharat Singh and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-28-2007
J.N. Bhatt, C.J.1. By this Letters Patent Appeal under Clause 1 of the Letters Patent, the appellant, Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) has brought into challenge the judgment of the learned single Judge rendered in C. W. J. C. No. 14636 of 2000 on 20-2-2007, whereby, the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India came to be allowed with a direction to the appellant to register the Class X/XII students of the School, known as S. T. Severin, High School, New Area, Kadamkuan, Patna (School) who have been promoted from Class IX and XI for their appearance in the Secondary/Senior Secondary School Examination, 2007, scheduled to be commenced in March, 2007, with a clarification that the direction shall not include those students who have been directly admitted in Class X/XII.3. We have been addressed at a marathon length by learned Counsel for the parties upon whose request we have taken up this matter for final hearing at the admission stage in view of an element ...
Tag this Judgment!Shree Krishna Sharma Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-27-2007
Barin Ghosh, J.1. According to the petitioner, while he was working as a Group IV employee of the State Government, many other Group IV employees of the State Government, junior to the petitioner as such Group IV employees of the State Government, were promoted to Group III posts of the State Government with effect from 19th November, 1970 and, while said promotions were accorded, the candidature of the petitioner had not been considered. The fact remains that the petitioner was promoted from Group IV to Group III on 23rd November, 1985. He filed several representations to shift his date of promotion from Group IV to Group III to 19th November, 1970. While no attention was paid to any of these representations, the petitioner filed a writ petition registered as CWJC No. 10288/2003.2. While the said writ petition was disposed of by a learned Single Judge by the order dated 30th June, 2004, His Lordship noticed that while it is the contention of the petitioner that his date of promotion...
Tag this Judgment!Kit Kat Restaurant and Bar and ors. Vs. Assistant Provident Fund Commi ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-27-2007
Navin Sinha, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Counsel for the Employees' Provident Fund Department.2. The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 8.6.2004 at Annexure-10 by which the Respondent-authorities have arrived at a determination under Section 7A of The Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') that the establishment of the petitioners styled as M/s Kit Kat Restaurant & Bar was a continuing establishment in terms of Section 17B to which the provisions of the Act were applicable. In consequence, a recovery certificate has been issued by order dated 12.1.2006 at Annexure-12.3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that the determination under Section 7A of the Act made by the Respondents was erroneous and raises a question of jurisdiction. If the provisions of the Act were not applicable to the establishment, the Respondent-authority would have no jurisdiction in the matter. The...
Tag this Judgment!Chhajuram Agarwal Vs. State of Bihar and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-27-2007
Seema Ali Khan, J.1. Heard learned Counsels for the parties.2. The petitioner has filed this application for quashing the order of cognizance passed in Complaint Case No. 1716(C) of 2005 by the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Patna, on 22-6-2005 by which he has taken cognizance of offences under Sections 420, 406 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.3. The complaint petition has been filed on 17-6-2005 for an occurrence which allegedly took place on 9-5-2003. In the complaint petition it is mentioned that petitioner No. 1 is the proprietor of Peeruka Textiles whereas Sulochana Devi, who is also accused, but not the petitioner, is proprietor of Peeruka Sales Corporation.4. The allegation is that in the year 2003 both the accused persons came to the office of the complainant at Rajendra Nagar and after giving their identity, they requested that they should be supplied cloth and after persuasion the complainant began to supply goods to the petitioner. The allegation is that the goods we...
Tag this Judgment!Shambhu Lal Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-27-2007
Navin Sinha, J.1. Heard the Counsels for the parties.2. This writ application raises a very short controversy for determination.3. Will the limitation period of 30 days provided under Rule 106 of the Bihar Panchayat Election Rules 2006 (hereinafter called 'the Election Rules') for institution of an election petition from the date of declaration of the result, be absolute or will it be amenable to condonation under the Limitation Act by excluding the time spent in obtaining the certified copy of the documents assailed. In paramateria is Section 81 of the Representation of People's Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the R.P. Act') providing a limitation period of 45 days.4. The results of the election of the Zila Parishad were declared on 12.6.2006. The petitioner applied for certified copy on 29.6.2006. The copy was prepared on 20.7.2006 and delivered to him on the same day. The election petition before the Civil Court was then filed on 31.7.2006.5. Learned Counsel for the petitioner sub...
Tag this Judgment!Mahendra Pandit Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-27-2007
Barin Ghosh, J.1. In the writ petition, the petitioner is seeking a direction for issuance of his last pay certificate. This last pay certificate has been issued on 31st January, 2007. In such view of the matter the grievances of the petitioner have been met.2. It has been contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that on the reverse of the last pay certificate it has been indicated that large sums of money are due from and owing by the petitioner to the State. The part of the last pay certificate where these endorsements have been made is the part of the printed column of the Vast pay certificate. The printed columns of the last pay certificate do not authorise making of an entry showing that any money is recoverable from the employee concerned in whose favour the last pay certificate is being issued.3. In those circumstances, it is declared that the reverse portion of the last pay certificate where it has been shown that large sums of money are due from and owing by the pe...
Tag this Judgment!Binod Kumar Jha and ors. Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-27-2007
Barin Ghosh, J.1. The writ petitioners in these two writ petitions are in the panel which was finally published on 12th June, 2004 after an advertisement was published in 2001. The petitioners in these writ petitions are seeking a mandamus directing the respondents to give appointment to them.2. In the year 1975, the State Government issued a circular to all its Officers directing them not to appoint anyone on daily wage basis without specific sanction from the Finance Department of the State. Since thereafter many persons were appointed on daily wage basis. Each of the petitioners in these writ petitions were appointed as such daily wage workers. The petitioners were made to work on daily wage basis every day-365 days to do perennial work. Inasmuch as it was never in dispute that the petitioners were appointed as daily wage workers, it must be deemed that the petitioners were appointed after obtaining appropriate sanction of the Finance Department of the State in terms of the 1975 di...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »