Patna Court April 2011 Judgments
Manoj Kumar GuptA. Vs. State of Bihar, and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-25-2011
1. The petitioner was married to Ramawati Devi @ Gharbharan Devi sometime in the year 1995. The petitioner filed a divorce under Section 18 of the Hindu Marriage Act on the ground that his wife was involved with another man namely Dilshad Ahmad. The opposite party no. 2 also filed an application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for maintenance.2. The divorce case and the application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure were heard by the same Court i.e. the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bettiah, West Champaran. In both the cases, witnesses were examined on behalf of both sides. The case made out by the petitioner is that his wife was earlier married to one Shambhu Prasad Kanu. It is his claim that without divorcing Shambhu Prasad Kanu, she married Chhowalal Sah. He was blessed with one son and two daughters. After the death of Chhowalal Sah she started living with his brother Mohan Sah. In fact it has been alleged by the petitioner that Chhowalal Sah c...
Tag this Judgment!Suresh Singh, and ors. Vs. Smt. Bhagwati Devi, and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-25-2011
1. First Appeal No.597 of 1994 is directed against the Judgment and Preliminary Decree dated 14.06.1994 passed by learned Sub Judge IVth, Danapur in Title Partition Suit No.122 of 1983 whereby the plaintiff- respondents suit has been decreed to the extent of half share. The First Appeal No.133 of 2002 is against the final decree dated 05.02.2002 passed in the said suit.2. The original plaintiff, Janki Singh filed the aforesaid partition Suit No.122 of 1983 claiming half share in the suit property mentioned in detail in Schedule 'I' to 'III' to the plaint. During the pendency of the suit, the original plaintiff Janki Singh died. In his place his legal heirs have been substituted who are the respondents here in the Appeals. The plaintiffs claimed the aforesaid relief of half shares in the suit property on the facts that Ganauri Mahto and Nemdhari Mahto of village Chouragopalpur P.S. Bihta, District Patna was full brothers. Ganauri Mahto had two sons, namely, Jitu Mahto and Jitan Mahto wh...
Tag this Judgment!Shiv Nath Singh, and anr. Vs. State of Bihar, and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-25-2011
1. Heard Counsel for the parties.2. The petitioners have challenged the order of cognizance dated 05.01.2001 passed in Complaint Case No. 837 of 2000 by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Patna City, Patna.3. The allegations in the complaint petition are that after the death of the husband of the complainant, the in-laws are not giving any share of the father's property.4. On behalf of the petitioners, it has been argued that the lady is living in the family house and is enjoying all the facilities. It is further stated that she was being maintained by her in-laws and both the sons have been provided the best education, inasmuch as they have studied in public schools and are also in good jobs at present. In fact, one of the sons has specifically stated that the allegations are false. It is further submitted that on investigation, the case was found to be false and the present complaint petition is by way of a protest.5. These aspects of the matter should be examined by the Court below...
Tag this Judgment!Sabih Ahmad. Vs. State of Bihar, and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-25-2011
1. This quashing application has been filed for quashing of the order dated 08.01.2003 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, , Patna in Complaint Case No. 82 (C) of 2002 by which cognizance has been taken under Sections 420, 409, 120B, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code.2. The complainant has alleged that in the year 1992, certain arrears of salary etc. was deposited in his account at Hatia Branch of the State Bank of India. It is said that his pass-book was missing, and later, he found that pass book was lying in the children library. The complainant is said to have informed the Branch Manager of the State Bank of India, Hatia Branch, who got a case registered in the Hatia Police Station. In the mean time, the complainant got transferred out of Ranchi and when he came to Patna, he met with the Chief General Manager with his complaints. The Chief General Manager referred the matter to the Fraud Monitoring Cell, which looked into the matter and reported that there was no ...
Tag this Judgment!Ajay Prakash
Court: Bihar State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Patna
Decided on: Apr-25-2011
Subhash Chandra Jha, President: 1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant-Ajay Prakash, which is directed against the order dated 14.6.2006 passed by the learned District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Nalanda (hereinafter to be referred to as District Forum) in Consumer Complaint No. 01/2005 whereby and whereunder the complaint has been returned to the complainant holding that Forum was not competent to decide complicated and complex matter of the fact emerging in the complaint petition and thus, directed the complainant to take recourse in the appropriate authority. 2. Heard the learned Counsel of both sides. The complainant-appellant as per facts in the complaint petition has filed the complaint against the O.P.-respondent seeking compensation and claim on account of the loss sustained by him due to setting of fire in the shop in the mid night of 28.2.2004. 3. As per contention of the complainant he was running his business of wholesale cloth for his livelihood in the name ...
Tag this Judgment!General Manager. Vs. Badri Singh, and anr.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-22-2011
(1) This First Appeal has been filed by the appellant, N.T.P.C. against the judgment and award dated 24.05.2007 passed by Sri Ganga Sharan Ram Tripathi, the learned Land Acquisition Judge, Bhagalpur in L.A.R. Case No.161 of 1989 enhancing the compensation in favour of the applicant-respondent, Badri Singh.(2) The land comprised within plot no.1329 measuring 51 decimals of village Bholsar, P.S. Kahalgaon, District- Bhagalpur belonging to the respondent no.1 was acquired in L.A. Case No.33 of 1984-85 for the purpose of construction of Thermal Plant. The notification under Section 4(i) of the L.A. Act was published on 16.11.1985. The Land Acquisition Officer awarded a sum of Rs.7,126.73. The applicant- respondent no.1 received the said amount on protest and filed application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act claiming compensation at the rate of Rs.5,000 per decimal. According to the applicant-respondent, the acquired lands are very fertile and productive. The land was also near...
Tag this Judgment!Anwari Khatoon. Vs. the State of Bihar, and ors.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-22-2011
1. In Patna City there is a College known as Oriental College affiliated to Magadh University. It is a declared minority institution. Petitioner was appointed as Lecturer in Urdu on the 3rd post in 1971, which appointment was approved by the University and the Bihar State Constituent College Service Commission. After the College was declared minority institution, the State Government in the year 1980 took a decision that religious linguistic minority educational institution like Colleges would also be entitled to get the status of deficit grant College. This means that to the extent the College meets its financial obligations of payment, inter alia, towards salaries of teachers and non-teaching staff etc, it would be paid by the State through the affiliating University. The dispute in the present case is whether State is liable to pay the remuneration of petitioner or not.2. The stand of the State is that in 1985, pursuant to powers under Section-35 of the Bihar State Universities Act,...
Tag this Judgment!Smirti Singh. Vs. Anupam Ranjan.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-22-2011
1. Heard learned counsels for the petitioner and the opposite party.2. This is an application of the wife for transfer of Divorce Case vides Matrimonial Case No. 94 of 2009 filed by the opposite party-husband pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Patna to the Principal Judge, Family Court, Madhepura.3. The short relevant facts are that admittedly the marriage of the petitioner and the opposite party was solemnized on 5th December, 2005 from the Patna residence where the father of the petitioner was residing along with his other children. The further case of the petitioner is that although at the time of marriage the gift and dowry as per the financial capacity of her father was given to the opposite party, however after some time of the marriage, the husband-opposite party and his family members started pressurizing the petitioner for bringing more and more dowry which could not be fulfilled on account of the poor financial condition of the father of the petitioner who was ...
Tag this Judgment!Mathura Prasad Singh, and ors. Vs. State of Bihar.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-22-2011
1. Sheema Ali Khan, J. Heard Counsel for the parties.2. This application has been filed against the order dated 24.07.2006 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Chapra in Trial No. 4239 of 2006, arising out of Complaint Case No. 1362 of 1996 (Marhaura Police Station Case No. 3 of 1999) by which cognizance has been taken under Section 417 of the Indian Penal Code.3. The dispute is between the sons and grandsons of Basudeo Singh. The complainant is one of the sons whereas; three sons and grandsons are the accused in this case. A partition suit was filed, numbered as 137 of 1992 by the petitioner no. 2. The complainant was defendant in the suit. During the partition suit, the petitioners produced a deed of gift dated 05.05.1993, allegedly executed by Basudeo Singh in favour of the petitioners. It is stated here by the complainant that Basudeo Singh died on 07.08.1993 and just three months before his death, this deed of gift was produced before the Court below having the L.T.I. on ...
Tag this Judgment!Mahendra Mistry. Vs. State of Bihar.
Court: Patna
Decided on: Apr-21-2011
1. The appellant has been convicted for the offences under Section 395 IPC and sentenced to RI for ten years by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Saharsa in S.Tr. No. 111/81/77/88 by a judgment dated 14.06.1995.2. The case of the prosecution is that a bus was looted between Saharsa and Budhama by six accused persons in which the appellant was identified by one witness subsequently in the Test Identification Parade.3. The prosecution in all examined eight witnesses out of whom P.W. 1 is the informant but did not support the prosecution case in its entirety. P.W. 2 is the cleaner of the bus and he was declared hostile whereas P.W. 4 and P. W. 5 have also been declared hostile. P.W. 6 is the passenger of the bus who had identified the appellant in the Test Identification Parade whereas P.W. 3 is the Judicial Magistrate who has conducted the Test Identification Parade. P.W. 8 is formal witness.4. From the evidence of P.W. 3, it is evident that even though the occurrence has taken place on...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »