Patna Court July 2008 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.
Manoj Kumar Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-08-2008
Mridula Mishra, J.1. Both these writ applications arise out of order dated 16.3.2007 passed by the Chairman, State Transport tribunal in Transport Revision No. 37 of 2006 and 39 of 2006.2. Prayer of the petitioners in both the writ applications is for quashing the order dated 16.3.2007 passed by the Chairman, State Transport Tribunal rejecting the revision filed by them under s4ection 90 of the Motor Vehicle Act and against the order dated 11.19.2006/21.9.2006 passed by North Bihar Regional Transport Authority. The Regional Transport Authority had rejected the claim of the petitioners for operating Bus stand at Mahua in the district of Vaishali. Petitioner in Transport Revision No. 37 of 2006 is Shiv Kumar Singh (C.W.J.C. No. 6744 of 2007) and petitioner in Transport Revision No.39 of 2006 is Manoj Kumar (C.W.J.C. No. 6666 of 2007). The Chairman State Transport Tribunal has dismissed both the revision applications by a common order against which afore mentioned writ applications have ...
Om Prakash Sinha Vs. the State Bank of India and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-04-2008
V.N. Sinha, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the State Bank of India (hereinafter referred to as the Bank).2. Petitioner is an officer of the Bank. He has filed this writ application assailing the circular letter issued by the Patna Circle of the Bank, bearing No. 30 of 2006-07 dated 26/31.07.2006, as contained in Annexure-1 to this application, whereunder the Bank has standardized the medical charges, which is to be reimbursed to the three category of officer(s) serving the Bank within Patna Circle. The challenge is on the ground that categorization of the officers serving the Circle for reimbursement of the medical charges is violative of Sub-clause (2) of Rule 24 of the State Bank of India Officers Service Rules (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) and amounts to amending the service conditions which is beyond the competence of the authorities of the Circle.3. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the circular, Annexure-1 tantamount to amending the ser...
Shambhu Giri Vs. State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-04-2008
Syed Mohammad Mahfooz Alam, J.1. This Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 26.6.1993 passed by Sri Anil Kumar Verma, 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Sitamarhi in Sessions Trial No. 14/88/44/ 89 whereby he has convicted the sole appellant Shambhu Giri under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years.2. The prosecution case, as per the complaint petition filed by Jai Narain Giri before the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi which was later on converted into first information report, in brief, is that his daughter Sumitra Devi was married to accused Shambhu Giri (sole appellant) about seven years ago. On 19.1.1987 the appellant along with accused No. 2 came to the house of the informant Jai Narain Giri and took Sumitra Devi with them on the pretext of Bidagiri. On 9.2.1987 the informant went to the village Madheshra and visited the house of the appellant but he did not find his ...
Dr. Ramesh Chandra and ors. Vs. Smt. Premlata Sinha
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-04-2008
Syed Md. Mahfooz Alam, J.1. This Civil Revision is directed against the judgment and decree dated 17.01.2005 passed by Shri Subhash Chandra Chaurasia, Sub-ordinate Judge-VII, Patna in Eviction Suit No. 27 of 1995 whereby the learned Sub-ordinate Judge-VII, Patna has been pleased to pass decree in favour of plaintiff-opposite party for eviction of the defendants-petitioners from the suit house.2. The brief fact is that the plaintiff-opposite party Smt. Premlata Sinha filed Title Suit No. 27 of 1995 for a decree of eviction against petitioners-defendants from the suit premises described in Schedule-1 of the plaint. The sole ground on which the eviction suit was preferred was personal necessity of the plaintiff.3. The case of the plaintiff, as per the plaint, is that she is the owner and landlord of the suit house. The husband of the plaintiff was in government service, who retired in the year 1992, After retirement of her husband the suit house was required for the residence of the plai...
Ratan Kumar and anr. Vs. Naveen Kumar and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-03-2008
1. Despite service of notice, no one appears on behalf of the respondents.2. By reason of a motor vehicle accident, a death occurred. In order to obtain compensation under Section 140 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, the appellants approached the Tribunal. The Tribunal felt that a claim under Section 140 of the Act is an interim claim, subject to the final adjudication of the claim made under Section 166 of the Act and as the appellant made no independent claim under Section 166 of the Act, the interim claim, as put forward under Section 140 of the Act, is not maintainable. On that analogy, the claim of the appellants was rejected. The appeal preferred by the appellants having been rejected on identical grounds, the present appeal has been preferred. ' '2A. A look at the order under appeal would indicate that the learned Judge, who dealt with the appeal, did not take note of the provisions of Sections 140 and 166 of the Act and instead was persuaded by a short judgment rendered by a l...
Tenughat Vidyut Nigam Ltd. Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-02-2008
Shiva Kirti Singh and Kishore Kumar Mandal, JJ.1. This Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred by Tenughat Vidyut Nigam Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'TVNL') a company incorporated under Companies Act, 1956 having its registered office at Vidyut Bhawan Campus, Baily Road in the town of Patna, through its secretary against judgment of learned Single Judge dated 21.6.2004 whereby the writ petition preferred by the appellant bearing CWJC. No. 590 of 2003 was dismissed.2. As noticed by the writ court, the prayer of the writ petitioner in the writ petition were as follows:(1) To quash the order dated 27.2.2001 (Annexure-4) of the Government of Jharkhand in the Department of Water Resources and Energy whereby Tenughat Vidyut Nigam Ltd. has been declared to be an undertaking of the Government of Jharkhand in exercise of the power under Section 47 of the Bihar State Re-organisation Act, 2000. By this order it has been further declared that in the Memorandum and Article of Association o...
Bokan Singh, Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-01-2008
Sudhir Kumar Katriar and Samarendra Pratap Singh, JJ.1. All the four appellants have jointly come up in this appeal against the judgment dated 30.1.1988, passed by the learned 10th Additional Sessions Judge, Munger, in Sessions Trial No. 320 of 1985 (The State of Bihar v. Bokan Singh and three Ors.), whereby appellant No. 1 (Bokan Singh) has been convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, and has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. Furthermore, the four appellants have been convicted under Section 201 IPC and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years. Both the sentences are to run concurrently. It may at the outset, be indicated that appellant Nos. 1, 3 and 4 are full brothers and are the sons of Ramjee Singh, whereas appellant No. 2 is the own uncle of the other three appellants. The four appellants have been charged under Section 302 read with Section 34, I.P.C. for the murder of Smt. Krishna Devi, wife of appellant No. 1, ...
Ajit Talukdar Vs. State of Bihar and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Jul-01-2008
V.N. Sinha, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and counsel for opposite party No. 2.2. This criminal revision application is directed against the order dated January 20, 2007, passed by Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Barh at Patna in Complaint Case No. 350(C) of 1996, whereunder the prayer of the petitioner to close the proceedings in the complaint case in view of Section 446 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), on account of the winding up of M/s. A. Talukdar and Company (Fertilizer) Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'the company') was rejected. The petitioner herein is an accused in the said complaint case registered for the offence under Sections 406, 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code on the allegation that the complainant had supplied bone meal to the company and the petitioner at the relevant time was the director of the company. The price of the supplied fertilizer was never paid and a complaint was filed alleging cheat...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›