Patna Court February 2012 Judgments
M/S. Goenka Agencies, a Proprietorship Firm Vs. the State Bank of Indi ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-28-2012
1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for the following reliefs :- (i) For issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing of the letter dated 18.05.2010 issued under the signatures of the respondent-Assistant General Manager, Zonal Officer, State Bank of India, Bhagalpur whereby the petitioner has been denied the benefit of settlement under the SBI-OTS-SME-2010 Scheme on ground of misconceived interpretation of the clauses of the said scheme being violative of the guidelines of the Reserve Bank of India. (ii) For issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to admit the petitioner’s case to one-time settlement under the aforesaid SBI OTS SME Scheme, 2010 and, accordingly, receive the settlement amount from the petitioner without any baseless and misconceived objection as has been raised vide the impugned letter dated 18.05.2010 and by way of considering the proposal dated 29.06.2010 made by the petitioner well within time. ....
Tag this Judgment!Rudra Pratap Duttaa Vs. Satendra Nath Duttaa and Others
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-23-2012
1. Originally, Surendra Nath Dutta filed title suit No.385 of 1995 praying for declaration that the plaintiff has got right title interest over Schedule I property of the plaint and for declaration that the defendants have no title to the property. During the pendency of the suit, the original plaintiff died. The defendant No.5, Rudra Pratap Dutta was transposed as plaintiff in the suit and, therefore, relief was added to the effect that after the death of original plaintiff, the present plaintiff has got right title over the suit property on the basis of registered will executed by the original plaintiff dated 01.01.1996. By the impugned Judgment and Decree dated 22.02.2007, the suit was dismissed. Against the said Judgment and Decree passed by Sri Chandra Shekhar Pradhan, Sub Judge II, Patna in title suit No.385 of 1995 the transposed plaintiff has filed this appeal. 2. According to the case of the original plaintiff as pleaded in the plaint, he had got 6 brothers who had separated f...
Tag this Judgment!Kanti Devi Vs. the State of Bihar and Others
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-22-2012
Mungeshwar Sahoo, J. Oral: (1) I have already heard the learned counsel, Mr. Achhaibar Singh on behalf of the petitioner and the learned senior counsel, Mr. Kamal Nayan Choubey, on behalf of the respondent nos.3 to 6. (2) The petitioner has filed this writ application for setting aside the order dated 04.07.2011 passed in Misc. Case No.6 of 2009 by Permanent Lok Adalat, Kaimur at Bhabhua as contained in Annexure-4 whereby the Permanent Lok Adalat has set aside the compromise award of the Lok Adalat dated 14.09.2006. (3) It appears that Rajnath Singh had filed pre litigation case No.411 of 2006 before the Lok Adalat. All the parties to the said pre litigation case No.411 of 2006 compromised and a compromise application was filed before the Permanent Lok Adalat. The said compromise was accepted by the Permanent Lok Adalat on 14.09.2006 and an award was passed. Thereafter, the petitioner’s father, Rajnath Singh who had filed pre litigation case died in January, 2009. After death of ...
Tag this Judgment!Munni Kuwar Vs. the Union of India
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-09-2012
Oral: 1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 6th of February, 2009 in Claim Application No.OA 000122/04 passed by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Patna Bench (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”) rejecting the claim application of the appellant filed under the provisions of section 125 of the Railways Act, 1989, read with section 16 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, seeking compensation of Rs.4,05,000/- (Four lakh five thousand) for the death of her son Santosh Kumar alias Santosh Kumar Gupta on account of untoward incident due to his felling down from the train at Platform No.6 of Dehri-On-Sone Railway Station. 2. The aforesaid claim application was dismissed by the Tribunal by holding that the applicant failed to come up with any credible evidence in support of her claim inasmuch as the applicant failed even to mark the documents as exhibits in the case, although some documents were filed along with the claim application. 3. In opposition of the cla...
Tag this Judgment!Umesh Singh and Another Vs. the State of Bihar
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-08-2012
1. Criminal Appeal on behalf of Umesh Singh and Bhola Singh is against the judgment and order of sentence dated 28th of August, 1989 passed by the learned 9th Additional Sessions Judge, Munger in Sessions Case No. 473 of 1983 whereby both the appellants were held guilty under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and they were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life but they were acquitted for offence under Section 27 of the Arms Act. 2. The prosecution case as per the written report (Ext.1) submitted to officer-in-charge of Lakhisarai police station on 03.12.1982 at 09.30 p.m. was that while the informant together with Balmiki Prasad Singh P.W.3 and Ramdeo Singh (the deceased) were returning from fish depot (Machhali Arhat), Lakhisarai on foot, on the same date at about 08.45 p.m. then these appellants and Sanjay Singh along with three unknown masked persons surrounded Ramdeo Singh at Purani Bazar, Lakhisarai in the way back upon the road in front of Dharmshala and they started s...
Tag this Judgment!Union of India Vs. Mahindra Sah and Others
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-03-2012
Shailesh Kumar Sinha, J. Oral: 1. The above appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 21st of March, 1984 in Money Suit No.8 of 1981 passed by the Subordinate Judge, Vaishali at Hajipur. The suit having been decreed against the appellant-Union of India for a sum of Rs.14,325/- with proportionate cost, hence the above appeal on behalf of the Union of India (Railway). 2. The short facts for disposal of the appeal are that the plaintiff booked two consignments with total 269 bags of maize at Khanna RailwayStation by the defendant-2nd party as per R.R. nos. 259711 dated 11.1.1979 and 259712 dated 11.1.1979 to be delivered to the plaintiff at Hajipur Railway Station. Both the consignments were loaded in a single Railway wagon and after paying the amount mentioned in the aforesaid railway receipts and on obtaining the Bank endorsement of such payment, the plaintiff went to the Railway Station for receiving the aforesaid 269 bags of maize. The further case of the plaintiff is t...
Tag this Judgment!Ram Surti Devi and Another Vs. Rabindra Sharma and Others
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-02-2012
Shailesh Kumar Sinha, J. Oral: 1. The above appeal is directed against the order dated 26th of March, 2004 in Miscellaneous Appeal No.3/1994/7/1993 passed by the Ist AdditionalDistrict Judge, Gaya, whereby and whereunder the order dated 6.3.1993 passed by the Munsif 3rd, Gaya in Title Suit No.17/90, which was passed on a petition dated 27.11.1992 filed by the respondents herein for substituting their names in place of the sole plaintiff was rejected, has been set aside and the matter was remanded back to the trial court for reconsidering the matter afresh. 2. The appellants have assailed the impugned order and supported the order of the trial court rejecting the petition filed by the respondents for substitution of their names in place of the sole plaintiff and as such, assailed the order under the appeal, whereby the matter was remanded back to the trial court, besides the ground that the appeal filed before the lower appellate court itself was not maintainable. 3. The present appeal ...
Tag this Judgment!Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (Cca), Patna and Another Vs. the Stat ...
Court: Patna
Decided on: Feb-02-2012
Samarendra Pratap Singh, J. 1. The present writ petition has been filed against the order dated 28.4.2011 passed by the Chairperson, Human Rights Commission by which the learned Commission has held that there has been violation of human rights of respondent no.3 (Rajendra Singh) by the concerned officials of the Income Tax Department while continuing search and seizure operation, for which he would be entitled to monetary compensation and has further asked the department to submit its response as to why the monetary compensation be not awarded to the applicant recoverable from the salary of the concerned officials of the department. 2. One Rajendra Singh made a complaint before the Bihar State Human Rights Commission (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Commission’) that during the search and seizure operation the raiding party committed various acts of omission and commission including violation of his human rights. Some of the broad features of the complaint which is also sum...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›