Patna Court September 2009 Judgments

Harkesh Thakur Son of Late Jagannath Prasad Thakur Vs. Smt. Lalita Dev ...

Court: Patna

Reported in: 2010(58)BLJR74

S.K. Katriar, J.1. The objector of Testamentary Suit No. 2 of 1987 (Smt. Lalita Devi and Anr. v. Sri Harkesh Thakur), has preferred this appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of the High Court of Judicature at Patna, and is aggrieved by the judgment dated 3.8.2001, whereby a learned Single Judge of this Court has rejected the objection raised by the objector (the appellant herein) to the will propounded by the two daughters-in-law of the testator. We shall go by the description of the parties occurring before the learned Single Judge.2. A brief statement of facts essential for the disposal of the appeal may be indicated. One Jagannath Prasad Thakur died on 17.8.1985, leaving behind his widow (Parwati Devi), three sons (Harkesh Thakur, Kalika Prasad Thakur, and Narbdeshwar Prasad Thakur), and three daughters (Kaushalya Devi, Sumitra Devi and Janki Devi). The three families are reproduced hereinbelow:Jagannath Prasad ThakurParwati Devi (wife)/ -------------------------------------...

Bihar State Co-operative Bank Ltd., a Co-operative Society Registered ...

Court: Patna

S.K. Katriar, J.1. The assessee has preferred this appeal under the provisions of Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'), whereby his claim for exemption from payment of income-tax on the interest earned on the two items in question has concurrently been rejected by the three authorities. It relates to the assessment year 1996-97.2. The basic facts essential for the disposal of the issues before us are not in dispute and may be briefly indicated. The appellant is a Co-operative Society registered under the provisions of the Bihar Co-operative Societies Act, 1935 (Act VI of 1935) (hereinafter referred to as the 'Bihar Act'), and is engaged in the banking business of lending. Certain provisions of the Bihar Act specifically govern banking companies and we shall have the occasion to refer to them in due course. Section 3 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 (10 of 1949) (hereinafter referred to as the 'Central Act'), applies to co-operative societie...

Lalo Mandal, Son of Sri Mangal Mandal and Manoj Sonar, Son of Sri Sobi ...

Court: Patna

Reported in: 2010(58)BLJR98,2010CriLJ941

S.A. Khan, J.1. There are three appellants namely Lalo Mandal and Manoj Sonar in Cr. Appeal No. 313 of 1993 and Mahesh Thakur in Cr. Appeal No. 346 of 1993 who have been convicted under Section 395 of the Indian Penal Code to undergo R.I. for 7 years.2. The prosecution case in brief is that the occurrence took place on 22.4.1990 at about 2 a.m. in the morning. The informant Suresh Prasad Mehta, PW 9 was sleeping in his house when he realized that several persons were present in his house. He saw that some unknown persons who had covered their faces had entered into the room of his wife and his son PWs. 7 and 8 variously armed and were committing dacoity. The informant claims to have identified Lalo Mandal and Manoj Sonar and alleges that Lalo Mandal and Manoj Sonar were in the room of his son PW 8 and there was a scuffle between them. He also claims to have identified Mahesh Thakur. It is said that two persons were injured in the said occurrence. One is Rajgir Yadav, PW 2 and the other...

Dr. Suresh Prasad Son of Late Baldeo Prasad Vs. the State of Bihar,

Court: Patna

V.N. Sinha, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the State.2. Petitioner at the relevant time was serving as Divisional Forest Officer. He became accused in a criminal case and was taken in custody and while he remained in custody he was placed under suspension in terms of the provisions contained in Sub-rule (2) of Rule 9 of the Bihar Government Servant (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules') under notification of the Government bearing Memo No. 655 dated 07.03.2007, Annexure-1 with effect from the date of his custody i.e. 30.12.2006. While the petitioner remained injudicial custody charge-sheet in the criminal case was submitted bearing No. 33/06 dated 26.02.2007 and after submission of the charge-sheet the authorities issued fresh notification bearing Memo No. 1134 dated 14.04.2007, Annexure-2 with reference to the provisions contained in Sub-rule (1)(c) of Rule 9 of the Rules which empowers the disciplinary authority to...

Santosh Kumar, Vs. Raj Kumari @ Smt. Raj Kumari Devi Wife of Late Nars ...

Court: Patna

Reported in: 2010(58)BLJR207

1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioners and learned Counsel for opposite party No. 1. Notices were sent to opposite parties No. 2 to 7, but inspite of valid service of notice, they have not appeared. This civil revision is finally heard at this stage with consent of the parties.2. This civil revision has been filed by plaintiffs petitioners challenging order dated 07.02.2008, by which learned 6th Additional District Judge, Patna rejected their petition to start the proceeding of Title Suit No. 04 of 2003 and Title Suit No. 36 of 2003, which were pending before the learned Additional District Judge-VI, Patna, afresh as having been clubbed together they have to be tried together.3. Letter of Administration Case No. 98 of 2002 was filed by the petitioners for grant of letter of administration on the basis of a Will dated 22.02.2001 said to have been executed by Narsingh Narain Singh, who had, admittedly, died on 29.03.2001. The said case was contested by opposite party No. 1 widow of...

Rama Ranjan Prasad Singh S/O Late Muneshwar Prasad Singh Vs. the Union ...

Court: Patna

Reported in: 2010(58)BLJR10

Samarendra Pratap Singh, J.1. Both the writ applications are taken up together as the issues involved are common to both.2. The petitioners have prayed for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to provide stalls to the petitioners in the light of Clause 3.2 under heading Infrastructure of the Railway Board's Revised Catering Policy 2005 No. 2005/TG/III/600/5 dated 21.12.2005. The petitioners have also prayed for quashing the tender issued by Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Corporation Ltd. (hereinafter to be referred to as 'IRCTC') dated 6.7.2009 contained in Annexurre-4.3. The first case, namely, C.W.J.C. No. 9404 of 2009 is taken as the lead case. The decision of this case will equally apply to the other case. The petitioners of 2nd case use their trolleys at Naugachia, Khagaria and Begusarai Railway Stations.4. The petitioner of Ist case runs 12 trolleys on platforms of Muzaffarpur Railway Station since July, 1996, under valid licences. Their licences have bee...

Md. Nijan Son of Late Md. Subhan Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.

Court: Patna

Reported in: 2010(58)BLJR211

1. Heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties.2. These two letters patent appeals have been filed against the order dated 18.3.2008 passed by the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C. No. 16333 of 2006. The State of Bihar is the appellant in L.P.A. No. 556 of 2008 whereas the writ petitioner, whose writ petition was allowed in part, is the appellant in L.P.A. No. 492 of 2008. The writ petitioner had projected two grievances before the learned Single Judge, the first one was relating to non fixation of the pay scale of the petitioner with effect from July, 2002 which was apparently on the basis of the audit objection contained in Annexures 3 & 4. The second prayer in the writ petition is to treat his age of superannuation as 60 years on the ground that as per decision of the Corporation in the year 1976, the service conditions applicable to the employees of the State Government was applicable to the employees of the Corporation and the age of retirement of the government employees havin...

Badri Paswan S/O Late Batahu Paswan Vs. the State of Bihar and ors.

Court: Patna

Reported in: 2010(58)BLJR89

Ravi Ranjan, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for the State.2. This writ application has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the order dated 23.02.1999, passed by the Dy. Collector Land Reforms, East, Muzaffarpur in Bataidari Case No. 10/98-99, as contained in Annexure-1, and also the order dated 28.04.2003, passed by the Collector, Muzaffarpur in Case No. 75 Misc/98-99, as contained in Annexure-2 to this writ application.3. The petitioner filed an application under Section 48E of the Bihar Tenancy Act, 1885 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') before the Dy. Collector Land Reforms, East, Muzaffarpur, Respondent No. 3, which was numbered as Bataidari Case No. 10/1998, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure-3 to this writ application. By filing the aforesaid petition, the petitioner claimed to be the Bataidar of one Anil Kumar Sharma for the lands appertaining to khata and plots, as described at the foot of the aforesaid petition (Annexure-...

Orchid Healthcare a Division of Orchid Chemicals and Pharmaceuticals L ...

Court: Patna

Reported in: AIR2010Pat46,2010(58)BLJR231,LC2010(1)14

Ramesh Kumar Datta, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the appellants and learned Counsel for the respondent- 1st set. Respondents 2nd set although have entered appearance but no one appears on their behalf in the matter.2. These two Miscellaneous Appeals have been filed against the orders dated 2.12.2004 and 29.4.2006 passed by the Additional District Judge XI, Patna in Title Suit No. 14 of 2001, by the earlier of which order he has granted ad-interim injunction in favour of the plaintiff-respondent 1st set restraining the defendants- appellants from using the trade mark AVASTIN till the disposal of the case under Order 39 Rule 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure; and by the subsequent order he has extended the order dated 2.12.2004 till the disposal of the suit.3. The title suit was filed by the plaintiff-respondent Ist set praying for declaration that the defendants are indulging in the act of passing off their product as of the plaintiff and further for seeking permanent injunction ...

Rama Sahni Son of Late Sunar Sahni and Dhorha Sahni Son of Late Sunar ...

Court: Patna

Sheema Ali Khan, J.1. The petitioners are aggrieved by the order dated 01.03.2006 passed by the Commissioner, Tirhut Division, Muzaffarpur in Revision Case No. 236-Misc./92-93 whereby the Court below has set aside the order of the Additional Collector dated 01.12.1992.2. The subject matter of dispute in this case is the land appertaining to C.S. Khata No. 1031, Plot Nos. 2871 and 2897 measuring area 12 kathas 13 dhurs and 06 kathas 13 dhurs respectively situated in village Puraina Tola Maheshara Malahi, Police Station Gopalpur, District West Champaran.3. The case of the petitioners is that Julum Mallah is the ancestor of the petitioners and the petitioners are, in continuous possession over the lands described above for the past 100 years. It is alleged by the petitioners that respondents 6 to 8 by committing fraud got jamabandi No. 940 and 679 created in their favour although they do not have title or possession over the lands in question. On learning this fact, the petitioners filed ...